If there was any uncertainly before whether there were any survivors from the audience depicted in the 1984 commercial, no more.
Ironically, it's been clear ever since iOS assured its place as half of a duopoly that the Hammer Thrower had assumed the role of the vanquished Big Brother, and has been comfortably ensconced in the executive offices in Cupertino, tasked with the role of overseeing iOS and the App Store.
And the surviving audience members have blended back in with the rest of he populace in user land, only now moved onto worshiping a different figure, as well congregating here.
Many, if not most, users failed to recognize and understand the efforts the regulators made to combat the IE hegemony, and why it was detrimental to the health of the web as a whole. But it was needed, and while those efforts fell short of Microsoft's own complacency and what the market's own forces achieved, users were spared, whether they realized it or not.
Having a choice and not exercising it is a personal prerogative, but it is on a different plane that not having a choice. Choosing something other than Safari, Mail, and Music may seem relatively inconsequential in the overall scheme of things, but the principles are the same.
There are those who are not old enough to recall those bad days, and there are those who are. Then of the latter, there are those who don't recognize, or are loathe to admit, that the roles in that famous commercial have been reversed, and Apple is now the Big Brother IBM of the tech world, with its own obedient audience.
In many respects, Apple exhibits many of the same behaviors that caused its users to despise IBM and Microsoft, companies which had the market power and weren't afraid to exert it to their own benefit.
Making Safari the default iOS browser is just Internet Explorer in a different context, but worse, as there is no option to change it. "Think Different?" That pretense is long dead and buried, and never in the spirit of iOS to begin with.
Such a move is long overdue, and there is little doubt that Apple would not consider it if the company, and the rest of the tech world as a whole, wasn't feeling some heat from concerned regulators.
If you're content with Safari and it does all that you need, great. But for other users, there are stronger, more powerful tools that better suit their needs, and it is exceedingly frustrating to have Safari, because of its blessed position, intrude in the workflow because Apple allows no other way.
The argument that other browsers are just "skins" because they still (must) utilize WebKit, and no different, misses the point.
A browser is more than just a rendering engine and script interpreter. What developers choose to front that framework can make an enormous difference in usability and capability, and there are those, such as iCab, that fully exploit that freedom.
A fully customizable chrome. (see the flip flopping iOS 13 Mail.app UI to see how frustrating that can be when Apple calls the shots and engages in change for the sake of change)
User defined gestures.
Built-in URL/CSS/Cookie filtering so no external ad blocker is needed.
User agent option.
User profiles. Kiosk mode.
Full import/export of user settings and content.
It is more capable than some desktop browsers are, and provides that experience on iOS.
Not everyone wants, or needs, such a thing, and that's fine. But Apple's refusal to permit users to select their own defaults is a serious hindrance to those who do, and detract from utility of iOS devices as tools.
