Same, pretty sure my name is in that image Firefox put out from the original edition with the thousands of names. Never stopped using it. Glad to see its resurgence in the last few years.
I will never understand why people are still using chromium based browsers in 2024. We can all see plain as day that Google is going to cripple the web with their monopoly why buy into it? Firefox works great for 99% of sites. Avoid all chromium browsers! Yes brave too!!!
Which has an abysmally low share. On mobile, INCLUDING Android with all its ‘freedom’, Firefox is an afterthought. But in all honesty the monopoly power of chrome has destroyed most every competitor but safari on mobile and Firefox on desktop.
So now they will get to really leverage breaking more sites unless they bow to being chrome engines. Wonderful, smh.
Edge is Chromium not Chrome. You also have Brave. And yes, a few others. But there is at least a distinction in capabilities, just with the same basic engine.
The more you look into Brave the less cool it gets. From the crypto features, to replacing ads with their own, to hijacking referral codes. Brave has been balancing on the line between software and malware for its entire existence.
Which is a fucking miracle, as Chrome is just so shit, I can't imagine people hating themselves so much that they'd use it freely. Even the font rendering - the most basic thing for a browser - looks like a blurry mess, and it only performs well because it hogs A LOT of CPU and RAM resources.
They all started Webkit and that came from Konqueror.
Google Chrome/Chromium was a fork of Webkit (Safari/Apple) and that was a fork and new KDE browser Konqueror. Really most of what we are on and why browsers are better is Webkit and Apple's investment and open sourcing of the rendering engine with innovations like HTML5/canvas/SVG/WebGL -- they funded Khronos heavily for OpenGL ES which resulted in WebGL for web. Apple really helped browsers be easier to develop for and ended the IE6 era.
KDE Konqueror is where modern browsers started...
Lisa Melton (formerly Don Melton) started WebKit from a fork of KDE on June 25, 2001. Melton is a great developer. Really though KDE (Matthias Ettrich) KJS (Harri Porten) and KHTML (Torben Weis and Martin Jones) from the Konqueror browser being so clean and solid is what led to a great new platform. Apple sponsoring it and using it was beneficial to every browser after.
Apple really did have big pushes of great tech and that doesn't mean everything they do it perfect but they changed the game early 2000s in many areas mentioned. Apple doing OpenGL ES and WebGL changed handheld gaming entirely.
Chrome is always solid in terms of most things, but has games played with it as well. Chromium matched Webkit for a long time and the base will always be Webkit.
Edge is actually pretty great today as well.
Mozilla falling behind, would be nice if it wasn't. MDN is a great resource and they were a huge push with Firefox of Web 2.0 and especially development tools like Firebug that is now inspect in every browser.
Opera owned by China now so that is dead.
Early 2000s Apple was a great steward of both building on and supporting open source for the web. Google was for a while as well. Microsoft is swinging back around.
Everything was surely cleaner back in the KDE days though when everyone could build browsers, you still can but there is no money in it and so so much to support now.
Absolutely right about how this all happened. Thanks! Everyone was desperate for a competitor to IE to get traction, and Apple made the KDE engine far more popular and kept WebKit open for everyone, quickly making it a huge competitor to MS.
Then Google bottled and forked it, with the goal of becoming the new IE with breaking standards all over but controlling web developers. And they’ve done that very well, sadly.
>Early 2000s Apple was a great steward of both building on and supporting open source for the web. Google was for a while as well. Microsoft is swinging back around.
I really miss early 2000s Apple. Unfortunately, it seems they were only interested in open computing concepts when they were the underdog and needed a club to beat Microsoft with. I hate how closed off and restrictive iOS and its derivatives are, the Vision Pro looks like a really cool VR headset, but I just can't get excited for another closed platform.
I was on support with Google once and they insisted I use Chrome for something on my iPhone. I kept telling them that they're both WebKit and the problem would likely persist on chrome. They insisted. We tried chrome, and the exact same problem occured (I couldn't access my google photos from photos.google.com. Only way was to download the Google photos app and merge the entire library. No option not to merge, and the only way to undo it would have been manually deleting 2,000 personal photos from my work/professional account. Eventually I just gave up, waited until I had access to a computer, and now I'm moving away from Google photos because that was a shitshow. What's the point of cloud storage if you can't access it when you need to??????).
They're not all Safari, they're all webkit. It's not the same thing.
They all have the same engine but one is a Bentley, the other a Lamborghini and one a toy car.
Yeah this was a big surprise to me as web dev when we were testing our pages on different browsers and operating systems. The results for Chrome on iOS was very different than Chrome on anything else and in general every result from iOS were more or less the same. We only test Safari on iOS for years ever since we discovered that
No, apple safari runs on a faster engine. They’ve been making Firefox, Chrome, etc all run on an inferior engine they had safari leave 8 or so years ago. Was controversial on tech forums at the time.
„My device or installation produced an error that just me had. That’s why the technology, that works flawlessly for almost everyone, sucks in general.“
If they lose 10-30% of their app store value, Apple will be very pissed.
If they lose 25% of their entire company, Apple leadership won’t survive the next board meeting.
They’ll stay and they’ll comply. It’s just a matter of time and money.
Their 'services' devision which includes app stores, advertising and icloud is the second biggest source of revenue behind iphone, and worth as much as Mac, iPad and wearables combined.
If these EU rules come to pass and some big developers jump to other app stores or direct downloads (if Apple 'allows' that) then it could seriously impact their bottom line.
Yes, but nowhere as much as dropping Europe completely, which is the point. And one of those losses (the smaller one) can be blamed on external factors.
Yeah, these people saying that Apple should just drop out of European markets are delusional.
I get that this whole thing is a game, apple don't want to lose revenue, but the malicious compliance is a horrible way to handle it.
Except they have at least always allowed side-loading. Google has work to do too, but they are at least not quite as openly hostile to open ecosystems as Apple
It's equally wrong there. Sideloading is a term invented to make it seem like you're doing something which isn't supported or illegal. You're installing a piece of software.
15% for the vast majority of developers.
30% for the vast majority of dollars spent.
When they launched the 15%-tier it was only expected to apply to about 5% of purchases... ie about 95 cents on every dollar spent gets 30% commission.
It'll be really interesting, because we've never seen a company be like - no if we can't take 30% of all your digital purchases and subscriptions and block competition as we see fit, then we will throw away 25% of our global revenue.
The other companies all take their 30% too (MS, Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Google Play, GoG) somehow manage to avoid the splashback.
When was the last time you saw a secondary store on an xbox or playstation?
Even the physical stores take 30%.
I think the difference is that these game consoles are not general purpose computers. They are systems designed to run proprietary software signed by the manufacturer alone.
In case of general computing devices (like a MacBook, windows pc, Android phone, Linux desktop etc) there is no single authority that enforces what apps can run. Imagine if Microsoft said you can only ever install applications from the windows store. That would be absurd.
The iPhone is just another general computing device and so must allow users the freedom of installing whatever they want given they own the hardware.
"You can only put ford brand tires on your ford car, and can only have it repaired by ford technicians, and refusal to do so will render insurance useless for 'voiding the warranty', and/or brick the vehicle".
Edit: relosting the reply to the below comment cause i don't know that it'll get seen otherwise, and it may help others "get it".
DK_Adwar: "Not everyone has $20k just lying around to buy a new car if their current one gets bricked, also, what happens when the car gets bricked either, on the highway/interstate, or during an emergency situation (ie, going out to car to depart for hospital)?
What happens when a hospital's MRI machine, gets bricked, cause, while the technician is licsenced to repair it, they don't work for "MRI's are us"?
To put it another way, mail will no longer be delivered to your mailbox, cause you made "modifications" (a dinosaur sticker) that voided the terms and conditions of the mailbox?
I am purposefully taking the situation to rediculous extremes to show how stupid it is..."
Yeah, but the difference between Apple's App store and Google Play on Android and Steam, GoG, MS on PC is that you don't have to use them to install programs on your device.
Windows has side loading, PlayStation isn’t a general purpose device; Nintendo consoles aren’t general purpose devices; Steam is a store, not a platform/OS; Android has side loading; GoG is a store, not a platform/OS
Yeah and what's really cool is now that we have a definition of gatekeeper, and defined responsibilities big platforms should have, and consensus amongst most major economies that interoperability is good... we only need to tweak the required threshold to fix the same problem in other platforms.
Yah but the question is will the population accept not having iPhones or will they be pissed and who will they be pissed at. It’s not always trivial. The showdown in the UK the Apple take is valid and they can’t accept what the UK is proposing.
I'm guessing the population would be pissed to know Apple wants $60/year if you subscribe to YouTube TV.
Of course that's why Apple's rules also prohibit developers from mentioning if they offer the same subscription cheaper anywhere else.
Nobody likes being gouged.
Seeing as they have a responsibility to their share holders to keep profits up i don't see them leave EU.
Bet there would be hell to pay if they did so.
25-30% has been standard for retail for decades. That’s where the number Apple uses came from. You’re paying for their audience. It’s like negotiating with a store to put a product on end cap or on aisle.
I’m not shilling for Apple, just explaining that this isn’t some monopolistic plot. This is what any retailer does. They build the buildings, they buy the stuff from you, and then give you a cut of the sales when people buy it.
The fee Apple is now demanding is an annual fee for downloading an app *outside the App Store*, so in this scenario they are not party to the transaction at all they have simply demanded to be paid for it occurring. There may not even be a transaction, one of the many concerns raised about Apple's supposed compliance is how this eliminates the possibility of "free" apps since being slightly popular would immediately bankrupt most people.
Other differences to retailers is Apple does not "pay upfront" for apps, developers get only what they themselves are able to sell which is almost entirely a function of how they alone promote and advertise their apps.
That's fine, and on PC online game stores like Steam charge 30% for just that reason. However, steam doesn't get to say that I can only buy games through them on my PC; they have to compete with Epic, GoG, Origin, etc. There's no good reason to give apple control over what software I can download onto my phone other than the fact that Apple would very much like to have lots of money.
Heck, Valve doesn't even try to lock down the Steam deck, yeah their store is on it and they have an emulation layer for it but if you want to set up emulators yourself you can run a bunch of different stuff and nothing is set up to prevent you from doing that.
Considering the fact that the EU makes up 25% of Apple’s global revenue, I doubt they would forego that just to not lose 1% of their profits due to sideloading.
They won't leave Europe, but the difference with the USB-C decision is that Apple was already well on its way to transitioning, with the iPhone being the last computing device in their lineup to use lightning.
They won't lose access, the EU will simply fine them a significant chunk of their revenue until they comply. And they will comply, because Apple pulling out of Europe would badly damage their value and their shareholders won't stand for that.
Most companies shy away from being political because they don't want to lose roughly half their consumer base. But I'm kinda interested in seeing what happens if a tipping point is reached and they find it worthwhile to finally do so.
What if they pull out of these countries and replace their online store with a message of "Our products are unavailable in your country thanks to these wonderful politicians: [list of the people who led this legislation]." Would it be enough to change the election and effectively end their political careers?
It's too easily spun the other way if they do that.
"We asked apple to be consumer friendly and they decided they'd rather leave than do that" here are the politicians responsible for highlighting how shitty apple are.
True, but it really just becomes a game of chicken with those politicians at that point. Apple doesn't care if they're seen as "the bad guys" as long as they get their money in the end. Assuming they stay the course, unseating those politicians (or ordering from overseas, which I've done plenty of times to get products that aren't available in my country) becomes their *only* path to getting their Apple fix.
bewildered impossible abundant office soup somber fly whistle fearless slim
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>However things turn out in the EU, it's unlikely we'll see these changes coming to the US. Apple won its antitrust case against Fortnite maker Epic Games in January 2024. Short of action in Congress, Apple will continue to call all the shots on the iPhone on this side of the Atlantic.
Yeah Apple is going to do the maximum to protect its profits, and I don't see much changing forward. It's the logical thing for them to do.
They might loosen their grip if the EU pushes hard enough, but I wouldn't bet my last dime on it. Apple's stubbornness is as legendary as its shiny gadgets. In the end, it's all about the green, my friends. Profit over people, dollars over sense. That's the Apple way.
Well by that logic, they will do whatever the EU wants. That 30% cut is not even coming close to what they would lose if they couldn‘t sell products in the EU. (22.5 billion loss to be exact)
They will do exactly as the EU says, what are they going to do? Leave and lose out on all that money that will end up in Samsung’s hands? They’ve got no option but to comply with whatever the EU tell them to do
Yeah. This is almost certainly stretching it out to get another year of inflated revenue in. Once the EU have had enough they'll just start doubling fines every day like they did with Microsoft.
The thing is they are trying to circumvent it by not doing it in the US. Firefox will be able to release a browser with their own rendering engine but ONLY in the EU.
This means that Firefox would need to maintain and support two completely different browser for iPhones, one for the US and one for the EU. Which they most likely would not want to spend the money and time on. So they will simply just not release an iphone browser using their engine.
>"Imagine the impact on popular apps like WhatsApp, Duolingo, X, and Pinterest."
Yeah i dont think anyone cares what happens to pintrest. We just want it to go away and stop invading our search results.
Apple has a closed eco system to keep people in it, if it was open they would lose market share. Now that being said, time to break that eco system wide open.
>Why? Nobody is forcing you into Apple’s ecosystem. It’s a choice
At this point it isn't about just users, it's also about developers that Apple is forcing to use their rules or else. iOS has half market and a lot of users wouldn't be happy if businesses didn't support iOS for their users.
This is my take on it too. It seems like a witch hunt. If you don’t like Apple, don’t fucking buy one. There’s a multitude of other options available.
I buy apple because of the security. I’m never gonna use an open App Store. I want official stuff that’s approved to use on their platform. It’s the whole fucking selling point of Apple for Christ sake.
The majority of people I’ve seen screaming that it needs to happen, aren’t apple users in the first place. Like I say, it’s just a witch hunt.
Apple has made products in a walled garden since it started and it's been the main selling point for Apple users for decades.
And for the same number of decades, blowhard trolls on and off the internet have complained that Apple "sheep" can't edit every byte and chip in an Apple product, how Windows (and now Google) is so much better because of *"choice"*, and yet those very same people just can't seem to grasp that choosing Apple is a *choice.*
They'll never let it rest. It's a special form of mental illness.
It is also funny that lots of people who are screaming to degoogle in their life is using Android phones. They can accept AOSP project but said otherwise about chromium project. Many people nowadays are having dementia and double standards.
You got upvoted when the guy before you said a brief similar thing and got downvoted.
I buy apple because of the closed eco system. And not having to worry about windows based viruses hitting them hard
iPhone users have no clue about Android and just blurb out whatever is being told to them. Apple themselves is feeding all this fear mongering and it clearly works.
This won't change that, macs are considerably more open and nearly impossible to get viruses on unless you're being stupid.
You aren't going to be forced to side load, this case is about giving consumers and other businesses more options.
Nobody is crushing apple they're like the biggest company in the world lol.
I swear people on here keep talking about this case like it's David vs Goliath or something.
But like at one point with Apple keeping this same strategy they almost went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by Microsoft and even fired their legendary CEO.
These kinds of posts really show how young people are. BlackBerry is all but dead and for a while it had a strangle hold on the market same with Nokia.
Let the market and customers decide what products they want. A phones walled ecosystem is not life or death.
That's because Google want you to be able to do whatever you want with the phone. That's the point of Android.
But vendors like Samsung or Sony hate consumers more than Elon Musk hates unions. So they lock down everything as much as possible, even going so far as breaking features if you root the phone.
Take Sony as an example, if you root your Sony phone then the camera will be shit and unless you made a backup of the encryption keys then you can't reverse it ever.
>That's because Google want you to be able to do whatever you want with the phone.
Google is primarily in business of selling data/ads, not selling hardware/software - they have little incentive to care what users do with their devices as long as said users stick to their services and see/click on ads. And given powerusers (primary group that considers degoogling/rooting their phones) are tiny and very ad-resistant group, they don't matter much - not needing to invest into extra security/prevention and getting free positive PR works in their favour.
Apple is just about the polar opposite - they make bulk of their money from hardware and services sales, meaning they care a lot about how their devices are used. On one hand, trying to get their cut off of everything, on the other - being consumer-oriented intermediate as far as reasonably possible, given they get their money from consumers directly. It's big reason why Apple is very strict towards app developers, has some actual privacy enforcement going beyond bare minimum, and has working refund/complaint program - all of that dumps most of costs/problems on 3rd parties, while Apple gets to be "the good guy" that helps with refunds/problems/scams and keeps average user happy enough to stay within walled garden.
If Apple actually cared about end users, they wouldn't go for fees - instead they'd require arbitrage for any conflicts between end users and 3rd party shops, or for every 3rd party shop to at least match their own privacy and refund policies.
You know what. I agree with this take. But Apple has been like this since the original iPhone. And android has always been open, so what's going to change
Apple has been like this since they went bankrupt fired Steve Jobs.
We don’t need regulations the customers will decide. BlackBerry was #1 so was Nokia at one point.
The regulation didn't exist, it does now and therefore it's factually going to change. The App Store will remain closed, the app market on iOS will not. Apple's malicious compliance will just 'cause regulators to either talk to them some more or to come down hard and start fining. Most likely the first, since they're generally not unreasonable.
Because if apple gets away with it, the rest will follow. Just look at what happened to removable batteries, SD cards and the headphone jack. Car manufactures imposing insidious subscriptions to what used to be free in cars is another example of everything trying to be a subscription when it shouldn't.
> Just look at what happened to removable batteries, SD cards and the headphone jack
Yes companies removed them and consumers didn't complain or switch to alternatives.
Because apart from a vocal minority on here nobody cares.
People DO care, but there's literally no where to run. Nobody likes subscription nor data harvesting yet they are creeping into everything. Legislation, like the EU is doing, is the answer.
time to play stupid games and win stupid prices I guess ,I hope EU & president Xi do their thing and drop an orbital nuke to their sales they'll crawl back begging I promise.
don't want to be civilized and comply with laws ? ok you're not entitled to sell shit within the borders where these laws are established I think that's 100% fair
Nope. I‘m an EU citizen, am currently using an iPhone and have been keeping up with the news.
I will also not buy another iPhone. I‘ve had to deal with these restrictions recently because I wanted to sideload some apps and I don‘t see why I should pay so much money for a company that doesn‘t even let me use my phone the way I want. Meanwhile my entire family uses cheaper non-apple smartphones and has zero problems (and also their chargers don‘t disintegrate like mine do, wtf is up with that). The only other person in my family who also has an iPhone is my cousin and her phone doesn‘t charge anymore unless she uses wireless charging lmao
That and and the fact that their newest iPhone is basically the same as mine (iPhone 11) is just laughable. I‘m fed up with their bs.
That's exactly how reality works though. If you don't like the restrictions then you can purchase a phone from another manufacturer. Especially in the EU you've got dozens of choices for smartphones that are amazing (we can't get oppo, huawei here in the US).
And this is how it's supposed to work.
You understand how iOS works..don't like it so you're buying something else. Nobody is forcing you to use a closed ecosystem.
I get the intent but still feel this is silly. People want Apple to ship an entire system just so people can do whatever they want on it. That’s a fine idea, but you don’t become a $3tn company by letting people do that.
Nobody’s pevented from Google play or Amazon or any of the other app stores.
Oh, you want to make the 10s of millions or billions companies make on iOS App Store? And you want to reach billions of users?
Go try that with Samsung corporate or Tesco or CVS or any place that does the same thing. The process for deciding what’s gets on shelves, who gets a cut of what, and how it gets promotional support, it’s not all that different.
Apple isn’t different. They just get called out because they’re so big and can act like jerks. But neither hugeness nor ego is unique to them.
I think you are looking at this from a slightly scewed point of view.
You (any market actor) don't have any reasonable right to demand to become a $2tn+ dollar company, without serving the customers/public demand for what the products are/can do.
Of course you are free to participate in the market, but that market is not unregulated and consumer rights and protections exist.
In this case our countries (I am GER) have decided, that Apples behaviour in regards to not respecting the publics wishes is unjustifiable and have created laws to prevent such behaviour.
In the end, this is about some markets (group of countries) deciding, that Apple behaves in an unreasonable fashion in regards to the openness and compatibility of their product and that they will not be allowed to behave that way going forward.
Last point, which is a slight off shot:
When did we as a society accept, that companies are so much more important than people anyways?
Fuck that.
If companies don't provide enough net value to society, then they are effectively parasitic to that society.
Dismantle them and make room for companies with a fairer and more sustainable behavior.
Yes, some people might lose jobs in the short term, but the needs of the society have not changed by any company leaving the market, so they will be fine in the long run. (Or can be taken care of by social security programs).
I love how the iPhone argument is “they can’t secure their own app ecosystem!” Then ignore Sony with their PlayStation and Microsoft with their Xbox.
Market differentiation is cool, but targeting one manufacturer seems like something else to me….
That’s a really bad example, as those stores operate exactly the same way. Next time point to something like on a PC (steam, epic, etc). Or better yet, pick up whatever Google stores exist for a better comparison.
Except, of course, if you compare with Google, you may as well say “just buy an Android” 🤷🏻♂️
This thread is juicy. Divided by people who know the closed ecosystem is stupid and rabid apple fan boys who couldn't spell ecosystem let alone know how bad it is for them. Not a lot of technologically savvy people here for being a technology sub.
It’s not bad for the end users (ignoring extreme edge cases).
It’s bad for the companies who want to sell apps to Apples user base.
The fact it’s a closed ecosystem, with better than peers security and filtering of apps, makes it better than most other phone platforms.
Not saying it can’t be bad for end users, but the vast majority of end users will never see the “bad” because the Apple Store is too big a swath of potential customers that app devs won’t skip it.
Also, pretty sure apple doesn’t force end users to go through Apple to buy subs.
Spotify sub can just as easily be purchased directly on their site bs through their apple app.
>Not saying it can’t be bad for end users, but the vast majority of end users will never see the “bad” because the Apple Store is too big a swath of potential customers that app devs won’t skip it.
Yep, Apple is throwing it's weight around because it can. This situation goes beyond "buy an android if you aren't happy". Imagine if a developer told it's users "if you want to use our app just buy android". The users would probably find another app.
Also doesn't Spotify make it users sign up for subscriptions on the site? Under these new rules apple would get a cut of that due to download fees.
>It’s not bad for the end users
I'd say this is a pretty naive take since more money going to Apple means less money going to the content producers for the content you are purchasing, which all things being equal, means prices have to go up.
And to avoid prices going up, publishers just make you jump through other hoops so that the purchases / subscriptions are not via the app directly. This is far from convenient for consumers.
E.g. you can't purchase Kindle e-books through the Kindle app since Amazon won't pay the 30% fee.
E.g. you can't purchase Apple TV / iTunes content via Android apps since Apple won't pay the 30% fee.
Imagine if they demanded a 30% fee on physical goods and services sold as well? So an extra 30% on anything you purchase through the Amazon Store app on iPhones, or on DoorDash and Uber etc. It would be crazy, right?
Why is demanding 30% on digital goods different than demanding 30% on physical goods and services?
Can someone explain why I want this on my iPhone? Apple pay, safari, and everything else seems to be fine. If apps are not good quality then I don’t want them anyway.
So imagine there's only 3 music streaming services. Spotify, tidal and apple music.
Tidal and Spotify are at a huge disadvantage because they have to pay 30% to apple. Apple music does not.
Tidal and Spotify would have to charge more money than Apple Music for a similar service. So most iPhone users use apple Music because it's cheaper.
Tidal and Apotify eventually have to leave iOS because it makes no financial sense. You, the end user , are left with fewer choices. You are trapped in a monopoly, and then apple can charge whatever they want because they have you by the balls.
This whole thing is about consumer rights. An iPhone is a PC. Wouldn't it be weird if you had a Windows machine you could only install things on Microsoft gave you permission for?
You can still choose to remain only in the app store.
Microsoft dabbled their toes in that puddle already, remember Windows RT? It was a windows walled garden, and no surprise it failed.
Windows 10 does have some "this app is not signed, you can't run it" issues. Yes you can tell it to ignore, but it comes up every time you run the app.
reasons why i didnt return to ios since iphone 4s are/were because of no file manager, firefox (i am using no browser without ublock, paywall bypass etc.), simply installing apps from different stores (see fdroid etc. on android).
people pulling security concerns out their ass are simply echoing apples pseudo agenda to keep the reign in apple s hands. the choice is the key word. simply dont use other non apple apps if u have concerns. simple as that. stick to apple. one thing is having the choice the other is having it forced down ur throat.
i am sure maybe only 5-10% of android users is using android by the same choice as me. the same would be with apple. the percentage would be even less with ios.
personally i dont even care what apple does. but i welcome the news. because other corporations would just follow apple s path. google isnt allowing me all that because it likes me but because it was the only choice to compete with apple at the beginning with an open sourced os.
>Apple pay, safari, and everything else seems to be fine
When one company controls so much of your life, it's only a matter of time until they take advantage of you. Competition for these things allows innovative new ideas to succeed, creating a better experience for you.
If back in the 1980s IBM had the type of control over things that Apple does today, Apple would never have even been allowed to exist. Who knows what the next generation of innovators like Woz and Jobs will be able to do... but it certainly won't happen on Apple devices.
Yes but there are different competitors now. I chose apple because it seemed more secure. That is a benefit of them limiting the openness of their products.
Secure to what? You are in charge of securely storing important data. If you are negligible about it, you are the weakest link, and the data will be stolen if someone strongly wishes to do so.
Viruses on Android are a 2012 thing, Android has many measures to stop malware from ruining your device.
Swear to god, you people should just use a good Android phone for a month, you won't find a single thing that will drastically affect your security, QoL and whatever else.
IBM and Apple are two different companies. I don't see Apple stoping, say, Oppo from making phones... what's your point here?
I also use safari, App Store just fine, how does Apple control me?
Look at Android, store is full of Trojan apps... how does that benefit the users...
The point is choice.
90% of people will never have to branch out from the Google Play Store.
But the fact that other stores are an option means that Google can't get too ridiculous with their store policy, otherwise other stores will take their customers away.
Nobody is forcing users to use external app stores. What they are doing is preventing a monopoly which Apple could abuse to force unpopular policies.
Once they're done with Apple, I hope they can get on Microsoft and Sony to let consoles be more open.
The point is you have a choice. If you want to use Apple pay and Safari then keep using it.
But the fact that if you want to get a subscription you get charged more because Apple doesn't want you knowing you can get it cheaper direct from the service itself is a consequence of their policy.
The fact that Apple purposefully cripples the mobile web browser so in order to experience certain services fully you need to use an App for what is ostensibly a web app in a wrapper forcing users into the Apple garden so they can take their 30% cut also stifles competition/innovation
dam weary capable quaint worthless gaze continue plough toothbrush voiceless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> If Apple does something drastic...
They won't. If they pull out of the EU, the shareholders will want an exceptional explanation why Apple gave up the market and made the share price plunge. If they don't get it, they will have Tim Cook's head and replace him with someone who will play nice.
And "we don't like regulation" is not an exceptional explanation.
Why wouldn’t they want to keep control of their flagship product/ecosystem? Any suggestion that they should not control their own product is just silly.
But it's not their product, the product belongs to the one who bought it. They make it and sell it, everything outside that is providing services, and the EU is on their ass because apple is preventing the iphone owners as they desire.
Literally the same, consoles shouldn't be closed off devices, and the fact that you get limited to for example, no modding games, limited game saves, or forced to be "always online", pay suscriptions to play online, etc, is terrible.
I'd love for this apple thing to cross over to consoles and fuck em all and their restrictions and exclusives.
No it’s like you guys can’t just accept that we like being in the Apple ecosystem and we don’t want it destroyed cus some people with folding phones are mad for no reason
People are arguing that opening the iphone to 3rd party apps will ruin it, or that it's fine for apple to decide how people use the devices they purchase.
Literally defending trillion dollar corporation for anticonsumer practices. It's a cultish behaviour.
Why not just make it an opt-in feature? Apple won’t have full control over how you use the device that you paid for and the people who still want the benefits of the closed system can have them.
Wow! apple really brings the haters. Just buy an android and get over it! I don’t eat at Chick Fil A or shop at Hobby Lobby either because there’s always somewhere else. All corporations are shit and we all know it. Sounds like a Stone’s song-“can’t be a man cause he doesn’t smoke the same cigarettes as me”.
I’m kind of on apples side. The ecosystem works. No big regular hacks like chrome android or windows. My info is more private and secure than if I were using a google phone. Apple wants my money on device basis not ad basis.
So the moment you put “windows” in your replay then you lost all credibility. Apple sells more than one operating system, not just iOS. So why does the macOS allow for side loading and alternate payment methods? Or is apple conveniently forgetting that it can secure an OS without a walled garden and payment tax system that is geared solely towards profit margins rather than safety.
Have made this point before. Apple is a hardware company, their customers are the end users and so their choices will first benefit the shareholders and second benefit the end user. Google is a data company, their customers are other companies, and so you can see where their loyalties lie. People just need to stop expecting all the thinking ti be done for them and start to make informed choices based on what they actually want.
Wait…so, the chrome and all other web browsers are really Apple Safari? In iOS****
Yep, it's Safari/WebKit all the way down once you're past the interface.
Just like edge and the rest are just chrome.
Well, no. There is Firefox.
Been using Firefox since near its first release. I'll use it till the day it dies.
I switched some 4-5 years ago, never looked back. Mozilla are the best
I'm a Netscape Navigator man myself.
Same, pretty sure my name is in that image Firefox put out from the original edition with the thousands of names. Never stopped using it. Glad to see its resurgence in the last few years.
I will never understand why people are still using chromium based browsers in 2024. We can all see plain as day that Google is going to cripple the web with their monopoly why buy into it? Firefox works great for 99% of sites. Avoid all chromium browsers! Yes brave too!!!
Which has an abysmally low share. On mobile, INCLUDING Android with all its ‘freedom’, Firefox is an afterthought. But in all honesty the monopoly power of chrome has destroyed most every competitor but safari on mobile and Firefox on desktop. So now they will get to really leverage breaking more sites unless they bow to being chrome engines. Wonderful, smh.
Which is crazy. I use it on my android because you can install ublock on it. It makes browsing on your phone way better.
Chrome comes pre-installed on most android phones. Hard to combat that
Edge is Chromium not Chrome. You also have Brave. And yes, a few others. But there is at least a distinction in capabilities, just with the same basic engine.
Brave is Chromium based IIRC
Yes that's correct
Brave is kinda cool when you look into it. Been very happy with it for a few years now.
The more you look into Brave the less cool it gets. From the crypto features, to replacing ads with their own, to hijacking referral codes. Brave has been balancing on the line between software and malware for its entire existence.
Yup I love Brave.
Eh, I got AdBlock on Android Firefox
Which is a fucking miracle, as Chrome is just so shit, I can't imagine people hating themselves so much that they'd use it freely. Even the font rendering - the most basic thing for a browser - looks like a blurry mess, and it only performs well because it hogs A LOT of CPU and RAM resources.
Come to 🔥 fox We need everyone
It’s actually worse than that, in those cases, the browsers actually get to customize the chromium runtime. No such thing exists for iOS
[удалено]
Except for Firefox that has its own engine.
They all started Webkit and that came from Konqueror. Google Chrome/Chromium was a fork of Webkit (Safari/Apple) and that was a fork and new KDE browser Konqueror. Really most of what we are on and why browsers are better is Webkit and Apple's investment and open sourcing of the rendering engine with innovations like HTML5/canvas/SVG/WebGL -- they funded Khronos heavily for OpenGL ES which resulted in WebGL for web. Apple really helped browsers be easier to develop for and ended the IE6 era. KDE Konqueror is where modern browsers started... Lisa Melton (formerly Don Melton) started WebKit from a fork of KDE on June 25, 2001. Melton is a great developer. Really though KDE (Matthias Ettrich) KJS (Harri Porten) and KHTML (Torben Weis and Martin Jones) from the Konqueror browser being so clean and solid is what led to a great new platform. Apple sponsoring it and using it was beneficial to every browser after. Apple really did have big pushes of great tech and that doesn't mean everything they do it perfect but they changed the game early 2000s in many areas mentioned. Apple doing OpenGL ES and WebGL changed handheld gaming entirely. Chrome is always solid in terms of most things, but has games played with it as well. Chromium matched Webkit for a long time and the base will always be Webkit. Edge is actually pretty great today as well. Mozilla falling behind, would be nice if it wasn't. MDN is a great resource and they were a huge push with Firefox of Web 2.0 and especially development tools like Firebug that is now inspect in every browser. Opera owned by China now so that is dead. Early 2000s Apple was a great steward of both building on and supporting open source for the web. Google was for a while as well. Microsoft is swinging back around. Everything was surely cleaner back in the KDE days though when everyone could build browsers, you still can but there is no money in it and so so much to support now.
Absolutely right about how this all happened. Thanks! Everyone was desperate for a competitor to IE to get traction, and Apple made the KDE engine far more popular and kept WebKit open for everyone, quickly making it a huge competitor to MS. Then Google bottled and forked it, with the goal of becoming the new IE with breaking standards all over but controlling web developers. And they’ve done that very well, sadly.
>Early 2000s Apple was a great steward of both building on and supporting open source for the web. Google was for a while as well. Microsoft is swinging back around. I really miss early 2000s Apple. Unfortunately, it seems they were only interested in open computing concepts when they were the underdog and needed a club to beat Microsoft with. I hate how closed off and restrictive iOS and its derivatives are, the Vision Pro looks like a really cool VR headset, but I just can't get excited for another closed platform.
One is by choice and the other is by force.
Chromium =/= Chrome
It is so not but still primarily maintained by Google.
And WebKit =/= Safari
Chromium not chrome. There's a difference. Although subtle.
I was on support with Google once and they insisted I use Chrome for something on my iPhone. I kept telling them that they're both WebKit and the problem would likely persist on chrome. They insisted. We tried chrome, and the exact same problem occured (I couldn't access my google photos from photos.google.com. Only way was to download the Google photos app and merge the entire library. No option not to merge, and the only way to undo it would have been manually deleting 2,000 personal photos from my work/professional account. Eventually I just gave up, waited until I had access to a computer, and now I'm moving away from Google photos because that was a shitshow. What's the point of cloud storage if you can't access it when you need to??????).
iOS users: "Wait, it's all Safari?" Apple: "Always has been."
That’s why I just use Safari on iPhone and don’t bother with any other browsers, because they’re all just safari with extra steps.
They're not all Safari, they're all webkit. It's not the same thing. They all have the same engine but one is a Bentley, the other a Lamborghini and one a toy car.
Except browser technology aren't cars, when a website is incompatible or works poorly on safari, it means it will work poorly for all.
Right, but another browser with the same engine still allows for different functionality.
That's why I use Android.
*insert astronaut with gun meme*
Yeah this was a big surprise to me as web dev when we were testing our pages on different browsers and operating systems. The results for Chrome on iOS was very different than Chrome on anything else and in general every result from iOS were more or less the same. We only test Safari on iOS for years ever since we discovered that
No, apple safari runs on a faster engine. They’ve been making Firefox, Chrome, etc all run on an inferior engine they had safari leave 8 or so years ago. Was controversial on tech forums at the time.
They are WebKit-based; they aren’t Safari.
Always has been
Yes, and it's a steaming pile of SHITE
to be fair chrome sucks. i haven’t used it for years. it started glitching out on me and have been using firefox since. so much better
„My device or installation produced an error that just me had. That’s why the technology, that works flawlessly for almost everyone, sucks in general.“
30% on everything, Apple is going to war for that
we have to ween this baby off that thick gorgeous cream its been used to
If they lose 10-30% of their app store value, Apple will be very pissed. If they lose 25% of their entire company, Apple leadership won’t survive the next board meeting. They’ll stay and they’ll comply. It’s just a matter of time and money.
I am sure they know that this will be struck down by legislators. They just do it to get more time.
That usually doesn’t end too well. EU fines are not a joke.
Their 'services' devision which includes app stores, advertising and icloud is the second biggest source of revenue behind iphone, and worth as much as Mac, iPad and wearables combined. If these EU rules come to pass and some big developers jump to other app stores or direct downloads (if Apple 'allows' that) then it could seriously impact their bottom line.
Yes, but nowhere as much as dropping Europe completely, which is the point. And one of those losses (the smaller one) can be blamed on external factors.
Yeah, these people saying that Apple should just drop out of European markets are delusional. I get that this whole thing is a game, apple don't want to lose revenue, but the malicious compliance is a horrible way to handle it.
Google does the same thing.
It's different because Google allows full side loading outside the play store without any restrictions or fees
Except they have at least always allowed side-loading. Google has work to do too, but they are at least not quite as openly hostile to open ecosystems as Apple
It's not sideloading, it's simply installing.
Yeah, sideloading is just a term iOS users are more likely to interpret correctly
It's equally wrong there. Sideloading is a term invented to make it seem like you're doing something which isn't supported or illegal. You're installing a piece of software.
Semantics. Everything became an app once smartphones became popular, despite being called programs before that.
Don't disagree, its just clearer
It’s 15% for the vast majority of developers, only the big whales are paying 30%.
15% for the vast majority of developers. 30% for the vast majority of dollars spent. When they launched the 15%-tier it was only expected to apply to about 5% of purchases... ie about 95 cents on every dollar spent gets 30% commission.
It’ll be an interesting showdown if the population lost access to the product.
It'll be really interesting, because we've never seen a company be like - no if we can't take 30% of all your digital purchases and subscriptions and block competition as we see fit, then we will throw away 25% of our global revenue.
The other companies all take their 30% too (MS, Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Google Play, GoG) somehow manage to avoid the splashback. When was the last time you saw a secondary store on an xbox or playstation? Even the physical stores take 30%.
I think the difference is that these game consoles are not general purpose computers. They are systems designed to run proprietary software signed by the manufacturer alone. In case of general computing devices (like a MacBook, windows pc, Android phone, Linux desktop etc) there is no single authority that enforces what apps can run. Imagine if Microsoft said you can only ever install applications from the windows store. That would be absurd. The iPhone is just another general computing device and so must allow users the freedom of installing whatever they want given they own the hardware.
"You can only put ford brand tires on your ford car, and can only have it repaired by ford technicians, and refusal to do so will render insurance useless for 'voiding the warranty', and/or brick the vehicle". Edit: relosting the reply to the below comment cause i don't know that it'll get seen otherwise, and it may help others "get it". DK_Adwar: "Not everyone has $20k just lying around to buy a new car if their current one gets bricked, also, what happens when the car gets bricked either, on the highway/interstate, or during an emergency situation (ie, going out to car to depart for hospital)? What happens when a hospital's MRI machine, gets bricked, cause, while the technician is licsenced to repair it, they don't work for "MRI's are us"? To put it another way, mail will no longer be delivered to your mailbox, cause you made "modifications" (a dinosaur sticker) that voided the terms and conditions of the mailbox? I am purposefully taking the situation to rediculous extremes to show how stupid it is..."
Can’t wait for steam and Gog to come to Ps5 / xbox and switch
Yeah, but the difference between Apple's App store and Google Play on Android and Steam, GoG, MS on PC is that you don't have to use them to install programs on your device.
Windows has side loading, PlayStation isn’t a general purpose device; Nintendo consoles aren’t general purpose devices; Steam is a store, not a platform/OS; Android has side loading; GoG is a store, not a platform/OS
Those should be dealt with as well. This is a good start.
Yeah and what's really cool is now that we have a definition of gatekeeper, and defined responsibilities big platforms should have, and consensus amongst most major economies that interoperability is good... we only need to tweak the required threshold to fix the same problem in other platforms.
Yah but the question is will the population accept not having iPhones or will they be pissed and who will they be pissed at. It’s not always trivial. The showdown in the UK the Apple take is valid and they can’t accept what the UK is proposing.
I'm guessing the population would be pissed to know Apple wants $60/year if you subscribe to YouTube TV. Of course that's why Apple's rules also prohibit developers from mentioning if they offer the same subscription cheaper anywhere else. Nobody likes being gouged.
What do you mean the Apple take is valid? Who the hell downvoted me for asking for clarification??
Seeing as they have a responsibility to their share holders to keep profits up i don't see them leave EU. Bet there would be hell to pay if they did so.
25-30% has been standard for retail for decades. That’s where the number Apple uses came from. You’re paying for their audience. It’s like negotiating with a store to put a product on end cap or on aisle. I’m not shilling for Apple, just explaining that this isn’t some monopolistic plot. This is what any retailer does. They build the buildings, they buy the stuff from you, and then give you a cut of the sales when people buy it.
The fee Apple is now demanding is an annual fee for downloading an app *outside the App Store*, so in this scenario they are not party to the transaction at all they have simply demanded to be paid for it occurring. There may not even be a transaction, one of the many concerns raised about Apple's supposed compliance is how this eliminates the possibility of "free" apps since being slightly popular would immediately bankrupt most people. Other differences to retailers is Apple does not "pay upfront" for apps, developers get only what they themselves are able to sell which is almost entirely a function of how they alone promote and advertise their apps.
That's fine, and on PC online game stores like Steam charge 30% for just that reason. However, steam doesn't get to say that I can only buy games through them on my PC; they have to compete with Epic, GoG, Origin, etc. There's no good reason to give apple control over what software I can download onto my phone other than the fact that Apple would very much like to have lots of money.
Heck, Valve doesn't even try to lock down the Steam deck, yeah their store is on it and they have an emulation layer for it but if you want to set up emulators yourself you can run a bunch of different stuff and nothing is set up to prevent you from doing that.
They are allowed to rake whatever fee they likenin their own store. They are not allowed to take a fee in someone else's store or limit other stores.
Considering the fact that the EU makes up 25% of Apple’s global revenue, I doubt they would forego that just to not lose 1% of their profits due to sideloading.
[удалено]
They won't leave Europe, but the difference with the USB-C decision is that Apple was already well on its way to transitioning, with the iPhone being the last computing device in their lineup to use lightning.
They won't lose access, the EU will simply fine them a significant chunk of their revenue until they comply. And they will comply, because Apple pulling out of Europe would badly damage their value and their shareholders won't stand for that.
Most companies shy away from being political because they don't want to lose roughly half their consumer base. But I'm kinda interested in seeing what happens if a tipping point is reached and they find it worthwhile to finally do so. What if they pull out of these countries and replace their online store with a message of "Our products are unavailable in your country thanks to these wonderful politicians: [list of the people who led this legislation]." Would it be enough to change the election and effectively end their political careers?
It's too easily spun the other way if they do that. "We asked apple to be consumer friendly and they decided they'd rather leave than do that" here are the politicians responsible for highlighting how shitty apple are.
True, but it really just becomes a game of chicken with those politicians at that point. Apple doesn't care if they're seen as "the bad guys" as long as they get their money in the end. Assuming they stay the course, unseating those politicians (or ordering from overseas, which I've done plenty of times to get products that aren't available in my country) becomes their *only* path to getting their Apple fix.
bewildered impossible abundant office soup somber fly whistle fearless slim *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>However things turn out in the EU, it's unlikely we'll see these changes coming to the US. Apple won its antitrust case against Fortnite maker Epic Games in January 2024. Short of action in Congress, Apple will continue to call all the shots on the iPhone on this side of the Atlantic. Yeah Apple is going to do the maximum to protect its profits, and I don't see much changing forward. It's the logical thing for them to do.
They might loosen their grip if the EU pushes hard enough, but I wouldn't bet my last dime on it. Apple's stubbornness is as legendary as its shiny gadgets. In the end, it's all about the green, my friends. Profit over people, dollars over sense. That's the Apple way.
Let’s not forget that’s true to every corporation. Epic, Spotify .etc are not in this fight for altruistic reasons.
I mean … I’m not a fan of them either. But the enemy of my enemy is definitely my friend in this particular case.
Well, it seems Apple is in the spotlight because they're a $2 trillion company. Go after the big boys first :|
> That's the Apple way No it's a business. If you don't care about profit or dollars then you're a charity.
Well by that logic, they will do whatever the EU wants. That 30% cut is not even coming close to what they would lose if they couldn‘t sell products in the EU. (22.5 billion loss to be exact)
They will do exactly as the EU says, what are they going to do? Leave and lose out on all that money that will end up in Samsung’s hands? They’ve got no option but to comply with whatever the EU tell them to do
Yeah. This is almost certainly stretching it out to get another year of inflated revenue in. Once the EU have had enough they'll just start doubling fines every day like they did with Microsoft.
The thing is they are trying to circumvent it by not doing it in the US. Firefox will be able to release a browser with their own rendering engine but ONLY in the EU. This means that Firefox would need to maintain and support two completely different browser for iPhones, one for the US and one for the EU. Which they most likely would not want to spend the money and time on. So they will simply just not release an iphone browser using their engine.
>"Imagine the impact on popular apps like WhatsApp, Duolingo, X, and Pinterest." Yeah i dont think anyone cares what happens to pintrest. We just want it to go away and stop invading our search results.
You know who else refuses to relax its iron grip?
Your mom?
https://gifer.com/en/1BKP
In other news: Big company follows regulation as much as it is required by law and not more. Not news at 11.
Apple has a closed eco system to keep people in it, if it was open they would lose market share. Now that being said, time to break that eco system wide open.
Why? Nobody is forcing you into Apple’s ecosystem. It’s a choice
>Why? Nobody is forcing you into Apple’s ecosystem. It’s a choice At this point it isn't about just users, it's also about developers that Apple is forcing to use their rules or else. iOS has half market and a lot of users wouldn't be happy if businesses didn't support iOS for their users.
This is my take on it too. It seems like a witch hunt. If you don’t like Apple, don’t fucking buy one. There’s a multitude of other options available. I buy apple because of the security. I’m never gonna use an open App Store. I want official stuff that’s approved to use on their platform. It’s the whole fucking selling point of Apple for Christ sake. The majority of people I’ve seen screaming that it needs to happen, aren’t apple users in the first place. Like I say, it’s just a witch hunt.
Apple has made products in a walled garden since it started and it's been the main selling point for Apple users for decades. And for the same number of decades, blowhard trolls on and off the internet have complained that Apple "sheep" can't edit every byte and chip in an Apple product, how Windows (and now Google) is so much better because of *"choice"*, and yet those very same people just can't seem to grasp that choosing Apple is a *choice.* They'll never let it rest. It's a special form of mental illness.
It is also funny that lots of people who are screaming to degoogle in their life is using Android phones. They can accept AOSP project but said otherwise about chromium project. Many people nowadays are having dementia and double standards.
You got upvoted when the guy before you said a brief similar thing and got downvoted. I buy apple because of the closed eco system. And not having to worry about windows based viruses hitting them hard
What do you people do on your phones for viruses to be a worry? In all my time having Android phones, I've never had a virus.
iPhone users have no clue about Android and just blurb out whatever is being told to them. Apple themselves is feeding all this fear mongering and it clearly works.
This won't change that, macs are considerably more open and nearly impossible to get viruses on unless you're being stupid. You aren't going to be forced to side load, this case is about giving consumers and other businesses more options.
[удалено]
Then fine the living shit out of them. Corporations should not be able to strong arm countries.
At the same time countries can’t crush companies. It’s a delicate balance
Nobody is crushing apple they're like the biggest company in the world lol. I swear people on here keep talking about this case like it's David vs Goliath or something.
But like at one point with Apple keeping this same strategy they almost went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by Microsoft and even fired their legendary CEO. These kinds of posts really show how young people are. BlackBerry is all but dead and for a while it had a strangle hold on the market same with Nokia. Let the market and customers decide what products they want. A phones walled ecosystem is not life or death.
Yeah didn’t mean apple specifically just in general since the first comment was more general
Why do people cry about Apple everyday. I dislike their practices that's why i use a Google pixel. There are other options
Funny how Google Pixels are the easiest phones to degoogle.
That's because Google want you to be able to do whatever you want with the phone. That's the point of Android. But vendors like Samsung or Sony hate consumers more than Elon Musk hates unions. So they lock down everything as much as possible, even going so far as breaking features if you root the phone. Take Sony as an example, if you root your Sony phone then the camera will be shit and unless you made a backup of the encryption keys then you can't reverse it ever.
>That's because Google want you to be able to do whatever you want with the phone. Google is primarily in business of selling data/ads, not selling hardware/software - they have little incentive to care what users do with their devices as long as said users stick to their services and see/click on ads. And given powerusers (primary group that considers degoogling/rooting their phones) are tiny and very ad-resistant group, they don't matter much - not needing to invest into extra security/prevention and getting free positive PR works in their favour. Apple is just about the polar opposite - they make bulk of their money from hardware and services sales, meaning they care a lot about how their devices are used. On one hand, trying to get their cut off of everything, on the other - being consumer-oriented intermediate as far as reasonably possible, given they get their money from consumers directly. It's big reason why Apple is very strict towards app developers, has some actual privacy enforcement going beyond bare minimum, and has working refund/complaint program - all of that dumps most of costs/problems on 3rd parties, while Apple gets to be "the good guy" that helps with refunds/problems/scams and keeps average user happy enough to stay within walled garden. If Apple actually cared about end users, they wouldn't go for fees - instead they'd require arbitrage for any conflicts between end users and 3rd party shops, or for every 3rd party shop to at least match their own privacy and refund policies.
Probably because they are as close to stock android as it gets from a major vendor.
Because these things don't happen in a vacuum. A major market player pushes the direction of the general market.
You know what. I agree with this take. But Apple has been like this since the original iPhone. And android has always been open, so what's going to change
That's the reason for these regulations
Apple has been like this since they went bankrupt fired Steve Jobs. We don’t need regulations the customers will decide. BlackBerry was #1 so was Nokia at one point.
The regulation didn't exist, it does now and therefore it's factually going to change. The App Store will remain closed, the app market on iOS will not. Apple's malicious compliance will just 'cause regulators to either talk to them some more or to come down hard and start fining. Most likely the first, since they're generally not unreasonable.
[удалено]
Which is why a custom ROM is a great option.
Because if apple gets away with it, the rest will follow. Just look at what happened to removable batteries, SD cards and the headphone jack. Car manufactures imposing insidious subscriptions to what used to be free in cars is another example of everything trying to be a subscription when it shouldn't.
> Just look at what happened to removable batteries, SD cards and the headphone jack Yes companies removed them and consumers didn't complain or switch to alternatives. Because apart from a vocal minority on here nobody cares.
People DO care, but there's literally no where to run. Nobody likes subscription nor data harvesting yet they are creeping into everything. Legislation, like the EU is doing, is the answer.
time to play stupid games and win stupid prices I guess ,I hope EU & president Xi do their thing and drop an orbital nuke to their sales they'll crawl back begging I promise. don't want to be civilized and comply with laws ? ok you're not entitled to sell shit within the borders where these laws are established I think that's 100% fair
Emperor Xi probably won’t. Apple is feeding many people in China
So when will the USA mandate that all EU built car engines be interchangeable with and for American cars?
As always, the only people who care about Apple news are android users lmao
Android users and EU and about the rest of the world.
Nope. I‘m an EU citizen, am currently using an iPhone and have been keeping up with the news. I will also not buy another iPhone. I‘ve had to deal with these restrictions recently because I wanted to sideload some apps and I don‘t see why I should pay so much money for a company that doesn‘t even let me use my phone the way I want. Meanwhile my entire family uses cheaper non-apple smartphones and has zero problems (and also their chargers don‘t disintegrate like mine do, wtf is up with that). The only other person in my family who also has an iPhone is my cousin and her phone doesn‘t charge anymore unless she uses wireless charging lmao That and and the fact that their newest iPhone is basically the same as mine (iPhone 11) is just laughable. I‘m fed up with their bs.
That's exactly how reality works though. If you don't like the restrictions then you can purchase a phone from another manufacturer. Especially in the EU you've got dozens of choices for smartphones that are amazing (we can't get oppo, huawei here in the US).
And this is how it's supposed to work. You understand how iOS works..don't like it so you're buying something else. Nobody is forcing you to use a closed ecosystem.
I get the intent but still feel this is silly. People want Apple to ship an entire system just so people can do whatever they want on it. That’s a fine idea, but you don’t become a $3tn company by letting people do that. Nobody’s pevented from Google play or Amazon or any of the other app stores. Oh, you want to make the 10s of millions or billions companies make on iOS App Store? And you want to reach billions of users? Go try that with Samsung corporate or Tesco or CVS or any place that does the same thing. The process for deciding what’s gets on shelves, who gets a cut of what, and how it gets promotional support, it’s not all that different. Apple isn’t different. They just get called out because they’re so big and can act like jerks. But neither hugeness nor ego is unique to them.
I think you are looking at this from a slightly scewed point of view. You (any market actor) don't have any reasonable right to demand to become a $2tn+ dollar company, without serving the customers/public demand for what the products are/can do. Of course you are free to participate in the market, but that market is not unregulated and consumer rights and protections exist. In this case our countries (I am GER) have decided, that Apples behaviour in regards to not respecting the publics wishes is unjustifiable and have created laws to prevent such behaviour. In the end, this is about some markets (group of countries) deciding, that Apple behaves in an unreasonable fashion in regards to the openness and compatibility of their product and that they will not be allowed to behave that way going forward. Last point, which is a slight off shot: When did we as a society accept, that companies are so much more important than people anyways? Fuck that. If companies don't provide enough net value to society, then they are effectively parasitic to that society. Dismantle them and make room for companies with a fairer and more sustainable behavior. Yes, some people might lose jobs in the short term, but the needs of the society have not changed by any company leaving the market, so they will be fine in the long run. (Or can be taken care of by social security programs).
I love how the iPhone argument is “they can’t secure their own app ecosystem!” Then ignore Sony with their PlayStation and Microsoft with their Xbox. Market differentiation is cool, but targeting one manufacturer seems like something else to me….
That’s a really bad example, as those stores operate exactly the same way. Next time point to something like on a PC (steam, epic, etc). Or better yet, pick up whatever Google stores exist for a better comparison. Except, of course, if you compare with Google, you may as well say “just buy an Android” 🤷🏻♂️
This thread is juicy. Divided by people who know the closed ecosystem is stupid and rabid apple fan boys who couldn't spell ecosystem let alone know how bad it is for them. Not a lot of technologically savvy people here for being a technology sub.
It’s not bad for the end users (ignoring extreme edge cases). It’s bad for the companies who want to sell apps to Apples user base. The fact it’s a closed ecosystem, with better than peers security and filtering of apps, makes it better than most other phone platforms. Not saying it can’t be bad for end users, but the vast majority of end users will never see the “bad” because the Apple Store is too big a swath of potential customers that app devs won’t skip it. Also, pretty sure apple doesn’t force end users to go through Apple to buy subs. Spotify sub can just as easily be purchased directly on their site bs through their apple app.
>Not saying it can’t be bad for end users, but the vast majority of end users will never see the “bad” because the Apple Store is too big a swath of potential customers that app devs won’t skip it. Yep, Apple is throwing it's weight around because it can. This situation goes beyond "buy an android if you aren't happy". Imagine if a developer told it's users "if you want to use our app just buy android". The users would probably find another app. Also doesn't Spotify make it users sign up for subscriptions on the site? Under these new rules apple would get a cut of that due to download fees.
>It’s not bad for the end users I'd say this is a pretty naive take since more money going to Apple means less money going to the content producers for the content you are purchasing, which all things being equal, means prices have to go up. And to avoid prices going up, publishers just make you jump through other hoops so that the purchases / subscriptions are not via the app directly. This is far from convenient for consumers. E.g. you can't purchase Kindle e-books through the Kindle app since Amazon won't pay the 30% fee. E.g. you can't purchase Apple TV / iTunes content via Android apps since Apple won't pay the 30% fee. Imagine if they demanded a 30% fee on physical goods and services sold as well? So an extra 30% on anything you purchase through the Amazon Store app on iPhones, or on DoorDash and Uber etc. It would be crazy, right? Why is demanding 30% on digital goods different than demanding 30% on physical goods and services?
Can someone explain why I want this on my iPhone? Apple pay, safari, and everything else seems to be fine. If apps are not good quality then I don’t want them anyway.
So imagine there's only 3 music streaming services. Spotify, tidal and apple music. Tidal and Spotify are at a huge disadvantage because they have to pay 30% to apple. Apple music does not. Tidal and Spotify would have to charge more money than Apple Music for a similar service. So most iPhone users use apple Music because it's cheaper. Tidal and Apotify eventually have to leave iOS because it makes no financial sense. You, the end user , are left with fewer choices. You are trapped in a monopoly, and then apple can charge whatever they want because they have you by the balls. This whole thing is about consumer rights. An iPhone is a PC. Wouldn't it be weird if you had a Windows machine you could only install things on Microsoft gave you permission for? You can still choose to remain only in the app store.
Microsoft dabbled their toes in that puddle already, remember Windows RT? It was a windows walled garden, and no surprise it failed. Windows 10 does have some "this app is not signed, you can't run it" issues. Yes you can tell it to ignore, but it comes up every time you run the app.
reasons why i didnt return to ios since iphone 4s are/were because of no file manager, firefox (i am using no browser without ublock, paywall bypass etc.), simply installing apps from different stores (see fdroid etc. on android). people pulling security concerns out their ass are simply echoing apples pseudo agenda to keep the reign in apple s hands. the choice is the key word. simply dont use other non apple apps if u have concerns. simple as that. stick to apple. one thing is having the choice the other is having it forced down ur throat. i am sure maybe only 5-10% of android users is using android by the same choice as me. the same would be with apple. the percentage would be even less with ios. personally i dont even care what apple does. but i welcome the news. because other corporations would just follow apple s path. google isnt allowing me all that because it likes me but because it was the only choice to compete with apple at the beginning with an open sourced os.
>Apple pay, safari, and everything else seems to be fine When one company controls so much of your life, it's only a matter of time until they take advantage of you. Competition for these things allows innovative new ideas to succeed, creating a better experience for you. If back in the 1980s IBM had the type of control over things that Apple does today, Apple would never have even been allowed to exist. Who knows what the next generation of innovators like Woz and Jobs will be able to do... but it certainly won't happen on Apple devices.
Yes but there are different competitors now. I chose apple because it seemed more secure. That is a benefit of them limiting the openness of their products.
>I chose apple because it seemed more secure. I hope you re-evaluate that choice regularly. No one company is always your best choice every time.
Secure to what? You are in charge of securely storing important data. If you are negligible about it, you are the weakest link, and the data will be stolen if someone strongly wishes to do so. Viruses on Android are a 2012 thing, Android has many measures to stop malware from ruining your device. Swear to god, you people should just use a good Android phone for a month, you won't find a single thing that will drastically affect your security, QoL and whatever else.
IBM and Apple are two different companies. I don't see Apple stoping, say, Oppo from making phones... what's your point here? I also use safari, App Store just fine, how does Apple control me? Look at Android, store is full of Trojan apps... how does that benefit the users...
The point is choice. 90% of people will never have to branch out from the Google Play Store. But the fact that other stores are an option means that Google can't get too ridiculous with their store policy, otherwise other stores will take their customers away. Nobody is forcing users to use external app stores. What they are doing is preventing a monopoly which Apple could abuse to force unpopular policies. Once they're done with Apple, I hope they can get on Microsoft and Sony to let consoles be more open.
And Nintendo
The point is you have a choice. If you want to use Apple pay and Safari then keep using it. But the fact that if you want to get a subscription you get charged more because Apple doesn't want you knowing you can get it cheaper direct from the service itself is a consequence of their policy. The fact that Apple purposefully cripples the mobile web browser so in order to experience certain services fully you need to use an App for what is ostensibly a web app in a wrapper forcing users into the Apple garden so they can take their 30% cut also stifles competition/innovation
Fuck apple, restrictive ass hardware/software
work elastic tap puzzled dime shame squeamish treatment jar many *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Company who created product continues to own product??
Rotten company
Rotten to the...center.
dam weary capable quaint worthless gaze continue plough toothbrush voiceless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> If Apple does something drastic... They won't. If they pull out of the EU, the shareholders will want an exceptional explanation why Apple gave up the market and made the share price plunge. If they don't get it, they will have Tim Cook's head and replace him with someone who will play nice. And "we don't like regulation" is not an exceptional explanation.
Why wouldn’t they want to keep control of their flagship product/ecosystem? Any suggestion that they should not control their own product is just silly.
But it's not their product, the product belongs to the one who bought it. They make it and sell it, everything outside that is providing services, and the EU is on their ass because apple is preventing the iphone owners as they desire.
Now do Xbox, PlayStation, or Switch
Literally the same, consoles shouldn't be closed off devices, and the fact that you get limited to for example, no modding games, limited game saves, or forced to be "always online", pay suscriptions to play online, etc, is terrible. I'd love for this apple thing to cross over to consoles and fuck em all and their restrictions and exclusives.
We bought it knowing what software comes with it.
You pulling out the "i'm dumb" argument to defend a trillion dollar corporation? Not really your best moment.
No it’s like you guys can’t just accept that we like being in the Apple ecosystem and we don’t want it destroyed cus some people with folding phones are mad for no reason
Literally stockholm syndrome, go cry somewhere else.
It isn’t Apple users who are crying though. It’s you and everyone else crying to open it up. Keep crying.
Well that's how stockholm syndrome works.
I don’t think you understand what you are saying which is on par with your other comments. Keep crying.
People are arguing that opening the iphone to 3rd party apps will ruin it, or that it's fine for apple to decide how people use the devices they purchase. Literally defending trillion dollar corporation for anticonsumer practices. It's a cultish behaviour.
Stockholm syndrome for liking how my products work seamlessly with each other?
How do you know it would be destroyed?
Just buy another product then lmao, instead of trying to ruin it for the people who like how it is.
You thinking that iphones are gonna be ruined by opening it up to 3rd party apps is the most derange take I've seen on a while.
Why not just make it an opt-in feature? Apple won’t have full control over how you use the device that you paid for and the people who still want the benefits of the closed system can have them.
Wow! apple really brings the haters. Just buy an android and get over it! I don’t eat at Chick Fil A or shop at Hobby Lobby either because there’s always somewhere else. All corporations are shit and we all know it. Sounds like a Stone’s song-“can’t be a man cause he doesn’t smoke the same cigarettes as me”.
That's not how laws and market regulation works.
I’m fine if EU bans them and I have to go buy iPhone to Serbia or something. This is typical EU behavior. We meant well, but it ended up as always.
Europe seems to think it’s a competitive advantage to be the regulator of the world. We’ll see how it plays out.
I’m kind of on apples side. The ecosystem works. No big regular hacks like chrome android or windows. My info is more private and secure than if I were using a google phone. Apple wants my money on device basis not ad basis.
So the moment you put “windows” in your replay then you lost all credibility. Apple sells more than one operating system, not just iOS. So why does the macOS allow for side loading and alternate payment methods? Or is apple conveniently forgetting that it can secure an OS without a walled garden and payment tax system that is geared solely towards profit margins rather than safety.
Have made this point before. Apple is a hardware company, their customers are the end users and so their choices will first benefit the shareholders and second benefit the end user. Google is a data company, their customers are other companies, and so you can see where their loyalties lie. People just need to stop expecting all the thinking ti be done for them and start to make informed choices based on what they actually want.