UK Revives Antitrust Probe Into Apple's Browser and Cloud Gaming Restrictions

[npmacuser5]

Europe is not against apple but they have very strong regulation against abusing market position. They strongly regulated against big company using there raw size to keep competition out or companies using their market power to squeeze others outs. Basically take make it easier for a better mouse trap to get going and a foot hold.

This is fairly normal and Apple tends histority to abuse their position to squeeze others and Apple has massive market power hence why you are seeing it now.

Let me understand. The EU has strong regulation. Than why do they essentially have so few businesses that compete in any technology form. Hard to name any technology developed and built in the EU. If the regulations worked as stated, there would be a very large technology product development in the EU. You would have many smart phones, computers, etc competing. A classic case study in does regulations work. Seems they do not.

 

[Analog Kid]

So EU government should fund development of their own phone then.

Or make all the decisions for one, which is basically what they’re doing— although this particular one isn’t the EU, but the UK…

 

[1129846]

You can buy Android and use Chrome browser, you have freedom to buy any phone you want.
What next, why is Apple forcing users to use iOS ?
Apple should design iPhone so that users can install Windows, Linux, Android on it ?

Oh that bs argument.

That is like saying don't like the state/ cpuntry/ city you are in sell your home and move.
Never mind that it might be farther from your family. Never mind if the people and the city are corrupt and abuse their power. Don't like it move.

That is the level of your argument. Hence it is an invalid. You basically are saying apple tells you want is right and can not complain.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Let me understand. The EU has strong regulation. Than why do they essentially have so few businesses that compete in any technology form. Hard to name any technology developed and built in the EU. If the regulations worked as stated, there would be a very large technology product development in the EU. You would have many smart phones, computers, etc competing. A classic case study in does regulations work. Seems they do not.

Well there is. Who do you think designs the technology used for manufacturing the cutting edge silicon chips that intel, AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Qualcomm etc use for the last 10-20 years?

Your problem is you think a big company is good.

And in USA you have the wrong understanding of freedom to honey mean: freedom from government interference.

Here it means: freedom from corporate & government interference, and the government has the job to protect your rights and freedoms from being interfered by everyone.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Let me understand. The EU has strong regulation. Than why do they essentially have so few businesses that compete in any technology form. Hard to name any technology developed and built in the EU. If the regulations worked as stated, there would be a very large technology product development in the EU. You would have many smart phones, computers, etc competing. A classic case study in does regulations work. Seems they do not.

Perhaps scratch the surface and learn who/what is truly behind those companies tracing ownership and innovation leaders is way more complex than the geographic location of their HQ. I’m sorry to say, but you seem to apply a very superficial and junior level understanding of how things work.

 

[1129846]

Let me understand. The EU has strong regulation. Than why do they essentially have so few businesses that compete in any technology form. Hard to name any technology developed and built in the EU. If the regulations worked as stated, there would be a very large technology product development in the EU. You would have many smart phones, computers, etc competing. A classic case study in does regulations work. Seems they do not.

Tech not a good to use for that argument because as an industry it is very young. It is more of an anomaly and date back more to the early birth that had the perfect storm. Look at the age of the big tech companies and when they were founded. They all are relatively close together and took off early. This is why tech pay in the united states is way out of line with the rest of the world. That is after taking account for general pay. Tech workers in USA are paid more relatively to everyone else.

So not the best case. Also the USA used to have much more strongly enforced anti trust laws. Instead we are swinging back to the more monopoly side of things that hurt competition.

 

[djphat2000]

People use chrome by choice, not by force.

This is true. BUT, the choice part is due to there being options.

This isn’t an IE case like it was before with Microsoft. In fact, Apple not allowing other browsers is MUCH worse than what Microsoft did in the 90s.

That is arguable. However, you could always download another browser. With Microsoft and IE at the time, the expectation was that you simply would not install another browser. And the more Microsoft pushed IE only functionality (.NET ActiveX). Well, you at times could only use IE. This was very true for many business web portals unfortunately.

Microsoft did allow other browsers and the internet wasn’t as essential as it is today. And yet regulators hit it hard.

As a desktop OS yes, you could install whatever you wanted. However, for the likes of Netscape. IE as a default AND integrated within the OS. Remember, File Explorer and internet Explorer was basically one and the same. You couldn't compete.

Today the internet is pretty much a basic necessity, Apple doesn’t allow third party browser engines and somehow google is the bad guy and the one to blame? How? I can’t

In this instance, if Apple allowed it. Safari would die. I think it is fair to say Apple invested pretty heavily in Safari. We can argue about liking it or not. Good enough or not. But, they do invest in it. If they wanted to keep a native Mac browser alive. They would have to switch like Microsoft did to Chromium. If you ask me, and maybe even Apple. They would stay Safari is faster and will be more optimized for the Mac than any other browser. Reason enough for me to keep it. And since every OS seems to have a default built in browser. I'm going with they keep Safari around. If not with Webkit, then with Chromium later on.

 

[Jay Tee]

You can buy Android and use Chrome browser, you have freedom to buy any phone you want.
What next, why is Apple forcing users to use iOS ?
Apple should design iPhone so that users can install Windows, Linux, Android on it ?

So EU government should fund development of their own phone then.

Problem is Chrome browser will take over iPhones and EU basically helped google to increase their market share.
People should decide what they want, not government.
If people want to install any app store they want, any browser they want then there is Android for that.

Mind-boggling isn’t it; whatever happened to private property and personal choice? If you don’t like something, don’t buy it.

This is politics by other means; nothing more.

 

[Analog Kid]

Alternative browser engines are allowed on Macs yet Safari/WebKit has seen its desktop browser share grow significantly over time. Why should allowing alternative browser engines on iOS essentially mean the end of Safari/WebKit or sites saying, "for best experience, use Chrome", abandoning other browsers, etc.?

Because that's where the natural market state is. If developers could, they would save themselves the time and trouble of developing for multiple platforms, and they would choose the platform that let them extract the most value from their users. Everything else means less money for devs.

Just like Google created Android to protect its search business on mobile, they've created Chrome to provide a browser conducive to their business-- they are data merchants.

At the moment, developers aren't willing to sacrifice the lucrative market of iOS customers, so they ensure compatibility. It's one thing to tell customers to install a different browser to use their site, but it's another to tell them to use a different phone.

At the moment Safari marketshare is half on the desktop what it is on mobile.

 

[svish]

Lot of legal issues for Apple!!

 

[SoldOnApple]

Why can't EU let us have retro game emulators in the App Store? When I was a kid that's what I would put on all my devices. It's basically the only thing I really want that the App Store doesn't have. I do it with dev account now but it's a bit of a headache, and if emulators could go mainstream then they would get a lot more updates and features. Some of the best ones wouldn't even charge money for it, they'd do it for the love of retro games.

 

[Wanted797]

I tell you what: Steve would've pulled Apple out of Europe.

Public companies can’t just do that. They have a responsibility to the shareholder.

 

[Total Respray]

EU is soon going to control everything a company does with their software/hardware.

This is a UK decision, not an EU one.

 

[Shirasaki]

I tell you what: Steve would've pulled Apple out of Europe.

We are fast approaching the end of 2023. Where is Apple’s initiate to pull out of Europe? I am still waiting.

 

[Shirasaki]

It’s nothing but apple choose to not bother about other platforms for their safari browser and neglect it for decades until chrome becomes too big to fail. No one to blame but them. Their lockdown strategy pushes complacency, limits exposure while make their browser worse than chrome in many ways. If Apple barely make a dent in browser market with such heavy fist, something has gone fundamentally wrong. Admit it before it is too late.

 

[webkit]

Because that's where the natural market state is. If developers could, they would save themselves the time and trouble of developing for multiple platforms, and they would choose the platform that let them extract the most value from their users. Everything else means less money for devs.

Just like Google created Android to protect its search business on mobile, they've created Chrome to provide a browser conducive to their business-- they are data merchants.

At the moment, developers aren't willing to sacrifice the lucrative market of iOS customers, so they ensure compatibility. It's one thing to tell customers to install a different browser to use their site, but it's another to tell them to use a different phone.

At the moment Safari marketshare is half on the desktop what it is on mobile.

Part of the reason Safari share is lower on desktop than mobile is because Apple's OS share is lower on desktop than mobile. Safari/WebKit will never likely be at or near the top, especially since it's not even available on major operating systems like Android and Windows, but there's no reason to expect many users or developers to suddenly abandon Safari/WebKit just because alternative browser engines become available on iOS.

 

[Shirasaki]

At the moment, developers aren't willing to sacrifice the lucrative market of iOS customers, so they ensure compatibility. It's one thing to tell customers to install a different browser to use their site, but it's another to tell them to use a different phone.

Which further cement the deal that Apple taking advantage of their lockdown stance on browser engine, and still refuse to release their browser to other platforms, even on windows. UK push effectively sounds alarm bell inside apple so hopefully they are going to work harder to not lose Safari marketshare When the protectionism is weakened or destroyed.

 

[CarAnalogy]

The idea here is to allow users decide which browser engine they want to use on iOS instead of being forced to use WebKit. If Apple wants to see broader use of WebKit, perhaps more improvements to Safari and/or broader availability (Android, Windows, etc.) is the answer. Restricting browser engine choice on a major mobile OS is not the answer.

I know this is right in theory. But in practice I’m afraid it will mean a nail in Safari’s coffin. For better or worse iOS is propping up Safari browser share numbers. I really don’t want to go back to the bad old days of 98% Internet Explorer / 2% abandoned husk of once great browser like we had when Microsoft was where Google is now.

And we talk about protectionism but Windows is fiercely promoting Edge and Google is fighting just as hard, Android the situation is reversed. There’s no oxygen in the room for another browser on Microsoft or Google’s platforms because they won’t let there be. And the irony is it’s the same engine, they’re just fighting over who gets to do the snooping on the user’s browsing.

 

[npmacuser5]

Tech not a good to use for that argument because as an industry it is very young. It is more of an anomaly and date back more to the early birth that had the perfect storm. Look at the age of the big tech companies and when they were founded. They all are relatively close together and took off early. This is why tech pay in the united states is way out of line with the rest of the world. That is after taking account for general pay. Tech workers in USA are paid more relatively to everyone else.

So not the best case. Also the USA used to have much more strongly enforced anti trust laws. Instead we are swinging back to the more monopoly side of things that hurt competition.

Two things, if tech not a big deal, why regulate not a big deal. Secondly, if EU manufacturing is making parts and other technologies for our tech companies, that is a good thing. Why would one regulate a good thing. More sales the better.

 

[webkit]

I know this is right in theory. But in practice I’m afraid it will mean a nail in Safari’s coffin. For better or worse iOS is propping up Safari browser share numbers. I really don’t want to go back to the bad old days of 98% Internet Explorer / 2% abandoned husk of once great browser like we had when Microsoft was where Google is now.

And we talk about protectionism but Windows is fiercely promoting Edge and Google is fighting just as hard, Android the situation is reversed. There’s no oxygen in the room for another browser on Microsoft or Google’s platforms because they won’t let there be. And the irony is it’s the same engine, they’re just fighting over who gets to do the snooping on the user’s browsing.

I agree that iOS browser engine restrictions are "propping up" Safari share numbers but don't feel that allowing alternative browser engines will practically mean the end of Safari/WebKit. Even though alternative browser engines are available on Macs, Safari still appears to maintain mid-60s percentage browser share on macOS. Why shouldn't Safari/WebKit be able to maintain at least that much on iOS after alternative browser engines are available?

I also think Apple should make Safari/WebKit available on other major operating systems like Android and Windows. That would help with usage levels as well.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Let me understand. The EU has strong regulation. Than why do they essentially have so few businesses that compete in any technology form. Hard to name any technology developed and built in the EU. If the regulations worked as stated, there would be a very large technology product development in the EU. You would have many smart phones, computers, etc competing. A classic case study in does regulations work. Seems they do not.

Which is exactly why Apple, Google, and Microsoft should do a joint announcement, leave the EU/UK, and let them suffer without any technology until they back the **** off.

 

[Analog Kid]

Which further cement the deal that Apple taking advantage of their lockdown stance on browser engine, and still refuse to release their browser to other platforms, even on windows.

Which is another way of saying: Apple has put together an ecosystem that works well within itself and promotes the privacy and security of its users. They have no aspirations outside their walled garden and don't intend or desire to become a monopolistic power in the market.

The European regulations are systematically trying to cut system level innovation off at the knees and reduce everything to the lowest common denominator.

 

[I7guy]

You really think WebKit is so bad that basically the only reason it is used on iOS is because users are forced to?

Perhaps regulations like this will push Apple to try to make WebKit and/or Safari more desirable not only for users but developers. Making Safari/WebKit available on Android, Windows, etc. would help increase usage too. Restricting browser engine choice on a major mobile OS is not the answer.

It’s going to be a mixed bag across the globe and I know this will go in circles but here goes. Apple should be allowed to have a closed ecosystem and people should vote with their $$$.

 

[Analog Kid]

I agree that iOS browser engine restrictions are "propping up" Safari share numbers but don't feel that allowing alternative browser engines will practically mean the end of Safari/WebKit.

How can those both be simultaneously true? iOS is propping it up but if you remove the prop the numbers won't fall?

I also think Apple should make Safari/WebKit available on other major operating systems like Android and Windows. That would help with usage levels as well.

I'd have thought a user named "webkit" would know this, but:
Webkit is already open source.
The Windows port of Webkit is maintained.

Chrome is built on a version of Webkit that Google forked so they could make it more amenable to Google's purposes.

Apple does not package and distribute a version of Safari for Windows any more, but why should they have to? And won't this then just raise the regulatory risk on Safari if it's now gaining dominance in the market?

I greatly appreciate Apple's products and ecosystem, and willingly come to Apple to enjoy that experience. I don't see why they need to pay the cost of supporting that experience on other platforms with no revenue to justify it, and I don't see why they need to undermine that ecosystem because someone covets their 20% browser share.

All of these arguments keep coming back to what Apple should do to compete-- they're competing just fine. If you want people to leave iOS, create an ecosystem with a better user experience and entice me to go. Give me a reason to want to move to a new ecosystem, don't just destroy what I love about the ecosystem I'm in and say "there's nothing left for you here, you may as well try something else."

 

[webkit]

people should vote with their $$$.

Unfortunately, Apple doesn't allow users of a major mobile OS (iOS) to "vote with their $$$" by allowing them to use browser engines other than WebKit and/or app stores other than the App Store and/or sideload.