Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Browser Rules Stifle Innovation on iOS, Says UK Regulator
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Really? Provide one instance where the UK did any innovation in the smartphone environment. Or any computer environment.
I always find these things to be the old “day late and a dollar short”. For one, who would even notice what browser engine is being used? The only times there’s issues is when lazy web devs make things that sniff for this and don’t operate properly outside of Blink. That’s what should be tackled.
And then right here at home, this whole notion that Google can’t pay for default status - cool. But will it truly matter? Chat/SearchGPT isn’t just creeping up fast, it’s sprinting. It seems like there’s actual remedies from non-traditional players coming and these actions being taken are so late they’re ultimately pointless.
And then right here at home, this whole notion that Google can’t pay for default status - cool. But will it truly matter? Chat/SearchGPT isn’t just creeping up fast, it’s sprinting. It seems like there’s actual remedies from non-traditional players coming and these actions being taken are so late they’re ultimately pointless.
And the UK also developed the Arm ISA. So if it wasn’t for us, no A or M series SoCs.
Considering we are talking about a web browser it's a funny comment.
A classic example of innovation being stifled by Apple due to restrictions/limitations/obstacles put in their way is if memory serves me right is a weather app, given rave reviews by MR members for being so much better than Apple's own version and what happened? Apple buys the company that created the app to stop it competing with theirs.
This is how Apple does things when it comes to innovation, it stops others from doing it.
This is how Apple does things when it comes to innovation, it stops others from doing it.
Then tell everyone the browser from the UK that is being stifled by Apple. Tell everyone exactly what browser the UK has produced. A browser is in fact a computer environment.
Speaking as a UK resident, I'll start paying attention to the CMA when they finally find their b**ls and force BT to sell off OpenReach, the organisation which owns the national infrastructure. If that's not a monopoly, I don't know what is. BT is not, has not and never will run OpenReach "at arms length".
The company, or its owners, did not have to sell to Apple. Apparently the owners thought it was a good deal.
The first one.
At the minute, yes. There is perhaps an arguement that once one company gets too much control over how we even perceive the web then it needs to be reined in.
Take Apple's new 'distraction blocker' feature. I think its absolute genius, mainly because it saves your webpage configs and keeps the things you removed gone. It makes the whole internet personally customisable. Couple this with Adb+ and it actually makes things useable again.
Websites creators I imagine have the opposite opinion. Its one thing to block obtrusive vide ads but entire sections of a webpage that they painstakingly designed?! Is that too much control?
The only innovation possible on iOS is the innovation Apple allows.
Maybe Apple should consider two brands - Apple & AppleNonUS. The two brands would have different offerings. Apple would remain as we know it today and maybe exclusive to US. AppleNonUS is offered outside the US and you almost don't need product owners. Foreign governments will be responsible for dictating every service and feature, as they seem to be hell-bent on doing. To be clear, many governments reaching a similar conclusion on a service, feature, product, etc. doesn't mean it's the desire of their citizens. These are bureaucrats who are swayed by lobbyists and self-interest. And then you have folks who genuinely believe that the government knows best and is always looking out for them.
Let's say I owned a piece of property and setup a market and charged folks to sell their products, let's say 30% of sales. People are not forced to sell their product at my market. They can also go setup their own market. The idea that the government should step in and dictate the terms of my market is not in line with a market economy. Companies want to benefit from what Apple has built. Pay to play. Their platform, their rules. If I build a product that is based on someone else's product, then that's on me....and that's the risk. If they change their product and mine stops working, is that their fault? Apple doesn't owe these companies anything, unless they are a paying customer - then they should abide by the agreed upon terms of service. When you build something that has dependencies (i.e. phone hardware, phone O/S, software delivery platform), you inherit risks. This is the nature of the business. You are dependent on things you don't control. What if Apple decided to not make phones any longer? Do we regulate Apple to be forced to continue because all these folks are so dependent on their products? They literally started their businesses knowing the terms and conditions of Apple. Folks and companies have it in their minds that if they simply want to do something, they should be allowed to....like they are owed. Why?!
Ok, let the hate begin.... lol
Let's say I owned a piece of property and setup a market and charged folks to sell their products, let's say 30% of sales. People are not forced to sell their product at my market. They can also go setup their own market. The idea that the government should step in and dictate the terms of my market is not in line with a market economy. Companies want to benefit from what Apple has built. Pay to play. Their platform, their rules. If I build a product that is based on someone else's product, then that's on me....and that's the risk. If they change their product and mine stops working, is that their fault? Apple doesn't owe these companies anything, unless they are a paying customer - then they should abide by the agreed upon terms of service. When you build something that has dependencies (i.e. phone hardware, phone O/S, software delivery platform), you inherit risks. This is the nature of the business. You are dependent on things you don't control. What if Apple decided to not make phones any longer? Do we regulate Apple to be forced to continue because all these folks are so dependent on their products? They literally started their businesses knowing the terms and conditions of Apple. Folks and companies have it in their minds that if they simply want to do something, they should be allowed to....like they are owed. Why?!
Ok, let the hate begin.... lol
Come on, lets be real here, if Apple comes calling with a huge bundle of money saying they want to buy your company, are you going to say no?? of course not. Just because the owners of the company sold it to Apple it does clear Apple at all. From what I remember none of the features of the weather app was incorporated into Apples own weather app when the company was bought. MR members still said Apple's weather app was bad.
Of course not. Years ago I had a printer driver for Epson that provided advanced features in MSBasic. Microsoft offered me some money for the driver, and I took it. What my driver provided never showed up anywhere in MSBasic. What Microsoft did with the driver, I have no idea.
Strawman. The US isn’t telling mobile phone manufacturers what connector to use. The US isnt telling mobile phone manufacturers their nfc chip must be open. The US isn’t imposing idiotic regulations based on revenue etc etc.
Or maybe apple is in the right and countries hate the success.
Well the US literally almost ended a phone manufacturer (Huawei) al least in Western markets. Not that I'm shedding any tears for them but it did happen.