Bloomberg: Apple May Let iOS Users Set Third-Party Web Browser and Mail Apps as Defaults Over Stock Apps

[1345873]

Regulation for the wrong reasons tends to create more problems than it solves, imo.

Bet you’re happy the voltage on your work is the same as it at home or in your hotel.. who’s to say what’s wrong or what’s right regulation? Apple? Google? Pfizer? Monsanto? Or us, the people ic regulatory authorities?
For example, lets fluctuate the Voltage in the US between 100 and 1000V randomly. Apple would be one of the first to ask to have it regulated.

 

[CarlJ]

Bet you’re happy the voltage on your work is the same as it at home or in your hotel.. who’s to say what’s wrong or what’s right regulation? Apple? Google? Pfizer? Monsanto? Or us, the people ic regulatory authorities?
For example, lets fluctuate the Voltage in the US between 100 and 1000V randomly. Apple would be one of the first to ask to have it regulated.

Your argument appears to be entirely based on his having said, "Regulation is bad in all cases". But that's very clearly not what he said.

 

[Classie]

Here is an idea, they just don’t download another brewers? Then you can go the extra steps they can’t download anything. I do a lot to tech stuff for family and friends, and I’m not even worried. My mom is in her 70’s, and I’m not worried at all.



Because I’m not an Apple fan boy who uses just Apple stuff. I have Linux, Windows, and Android, along with Mac and iOS, I love being able to use a browsers that is cross platform that syncs all of my bookmarks. As others said, most people just use the default stuff anyways. This is why Google paid a lot of money to Apple to be the default search, because again, most people don’t change the defaults.

This is as bad as when Apple switched to Intel Processors “omg the world is ending, Apple is going to Intel”

I meant, why can’t you just download and use the browser-app that you prefer. What is the need of making it the default app. Or are there some limitations doing it this way?

Is there a benefit for Apple allowing third party apps to be set as default?
Isn’t there just a risk that they lose the control and invite potential fragmentation/problems into the iOS. Maybe even security issues. Similar discussion that applies to the App Store and demand for Apple to stop their “monopoly”?

 

[I7guy]

Ok. So if there are 20million. Out of almost a billion phones. Statistically insignificant.

A statistically insignificant sample can still kill this entire “rumor”.
[automerge]1582315787[/automerge]

Bet you’re happy the voltage on your work is the same as it at home or in your hotel.. who’s to say what’s wrong or what’s right regulation? Apple? Google? Pfizer? Monsanto? Or us, the people ic regulatory authorities?
For example, lets fluctuate the Voltage in the US between 100 and 1000V randomly. Apple would be one of the first to ask to have it regulated.

This is a red-herring argument, imo.

 

[4487549]

I get the feeling very long term this might not turn out well for end users. If Apple makes this change then Chrome will grow to dominate even more so than now. The Safari user base will shrink away to nothing. Apple will spend fewer resources developing Safari because of its disappearing user base. More people will move to Chrome. And the cycle will keep repeating until there is only one viable player in the market, Chrome. And in the end that will be bad for users.

Your logic is my fantasy for maps but Apple has doubled down on reality.

 

[MisterSavage]

I meant, why can’t you just download and use the browser-app that you prefer. What is the need of making it the default app. Or are there some limitations doing it this way?

Because if you're in another app and click a browser link some want it to open in their browser of choice.

 

[sidewinder3000]

I would probably still use Safari.
Mail App I may actually use Gmail as a default.
But it shouldn't stop there. Maps also should be an option.

They won’t do Maps yet. Google screwed Apple years ago. Apple essentially made Google Maps into the success it became, and then they insisted on mining user data when it came up for renewal, and so Apple severed ties and had to build Apple Maps geo data from the ground up — it’s taken years to catch up. Apple Maps finally has a fighting chance, but they likely won’t, and shouldn’t, open it up for a while. Now that the underlying geo data is finally there, there are many features they still need to add To catch up a,d in some ways hopefully surpass Google Maps. Next 3 years should be interesting.
[automerge]1582328235[/automerge]
The challenge for Apple: make Apple services the best in class in all categories, and no one would have any reason to switch. But unfortunately, that’s not always the case. The demise of Apple‘s incredible market share lead in digital music is almost tragic.

They basically pioneered the category, and then allowed Spotify to worm their way in when they could have easily prevented it. Same with Samsung and large phones. And Amazon and Alexa. All of Apple’s biggest rivals are in areas they pioneered and allowed to enter the category by being slow to evolve after their original innovation.

 

[Abazigal]

The challenge for Apple: make Apple services the best in class in all categories, and no one would have any reason to switch. But unfortunately, that’s not always the case. The demise of Apple‘s incredible market share lead in digital music is almost tragic.

I don't think it's feasible to expect that Apple services be the best in all categories.

Apple is just one company, with a finger in many pies. It's not realistic for Apple to devote enough manpower to make maps as good as google maps, not when this is something that Google is focused on doing 24/7. All the more when you consider that google maps is a source of revenue for google, vs Apple who doesn't earn a cent from Apple maps.

Same with spotify (one company) vs apple music (a feature in an ecosystem).

That said, I do believe that from Apple's perspective, they are more concerned about the strategic and security implications of default apps. Opening up system default apps to any third-party app will definitely result in users choosing alternatives to their stock apps, which I feel are key to Apple’s ecosystem of services and iPhone experience as a whole. Apple essentially sees certain iPhone apps as being critical to controlling the iOS ecosystem.

In addition, Apple's history (especially their humiliation at the hands of Microsoft) naturally predisposes them to desiring absolute control over their platform wherever possible, even if it comes across as being overbearing to a bystander. Apple doesn't want a scenario where any one third party app or service ends up becoming so dominant that it ends up holding sway over users. I suspect this is why Apple gives their own stock apps and services such preferential treatment, and every other third party app is essentially a second-class citizen. They believe that their stock apps are key to the iOS experience, yet know that they cannot expect to match third party developers feature for feature (nor do they have any desire to), and so they favour their own apps with exclusive features such as default status and Siri integration to give users a strong incentive to want to use them over third parties, who in turn find themselves having to work even harder to make their apps way more superior to the stock iOS apps so as to give users a compelling reason to opt for them.

At the end of the day, while I do understand many of users' desire for better third party app support, I do feel that much of the criticism misses the mark. It all boils down to Apple being Apple and believing that they know best when it comes to deciding what makes for the best user experience for its end users. It doesn't matter whether you as the customer agree with Apple's decision or not.

 

[TheIntruder]

It's astonishing, and kind of sad, how so many reject the notion that being given a choice of the tools you wish to use, on your own device, is a good thing.

There are those who obviously have never given perhaps more than a cursory glance at what third-party apps can offer, or do better than the ones Apple provides.

To label all browsers the "same" because they share the same engine displays a fundamental lack of understanding of how browsers are constructed. To draw one analogy, VW's ubiquitous EA888 engine is shared among all of its marques, and up and down the line, from Skoda to Porsche, and from the Polo to the Q7. Please show how all those vehicles which utilize that engine are all the "same." The plainly obvious fact is that they are not; each of them suits the particular needs of each segment in which they compete.

Nor would the allowance to set a default other than Safari or Mail necessarily lead to the likelihood, or a rush to port Gecko, Blink or another renderer to iOS.

All of the apps that some users wish to use, without having Safari, Mail or Maps intrude, are already on the platform. If they presented an unacceptable risk to Apple, or iOS users, they wouldn't be there, and the situation, as it stands, represents one of the most clunky and ugly facets of iOS.

Memories can be short, but if Apple and Jobs had persisted with their original vision for the iPhone, which did not include an App Store, it would have never have enjoyed the success it has.

If Apple doesn't relent on hanging onto this last bit of being a control freak, a part of that legacy, of its own volition, then it is inviting government intervention, which may go beyond what it was already willing to accept without any outside coercion. The fact that this change is under consideration shows that Apple recognizes that, even if many users don't.

 

[1144557]

If Apple doesn't relent on hanging onto this last bit of being a control freak, a part of that legacy, of its own volition, then it is inviting government intervention, which may go beyond what it was already willing to accept without any outside coercion. The fact that this change is under consideration shows that Apple recognizes that, even if many users don't.

Agree totally, but to clarify, I think this also has some large part to do with the App Store monopoly investigations/lawsuits going on; that Apple favors its own apps.

This could certainly shoo the dogs off by saying hey look we let other apps have default status too! I would guess that as far more likely than a "goodness of their heart" or they had a change of heart philosophy change type reasoning here. As said, Apple still thinks it knows what people want best, for better or for worse.

Sure it could be an attempt to sway more Android users over with more "customization" but after 14 OS versions I just highly doubt that motivation suddenly.

 

[ipponrg]

I don't think it's feasible to expect that Apple services be the best in all categories.

Apple is just one company, with a finger in many pies. It's not realistic for Apple to devote enough manpower to make maps as good as google maps, not when this is something that Google is focused on doing 24/7.

Why wouldn’t it feasible? I thought people such as yourself brag about how much money they make and that they can buy all the resources they want?

Of course Apple can excel in all their respective areas if they manage and listen to the right people. They don’t have that many fingers in pies. They have certainly exceeded in some areas and performed abysmally in most others. IMO, one of the main issues is they prioritize retail considering most of their staff is retail.

 

[Abazigal]

Why wouldn’t it feasible? I thought people such as yourself brag about how much money they make and that they can buy all the resources they want?

Of course Apple can excel in all their respective areas if they manage and listen to the right people. They don’t have that many fingers in pies. They have certainly exceeded in some areas and performed abysmally in most others. IMO, one of the main issues is they prioritize retail considering most of their staff is retail.

Apple excels in using their control over hardware, software and services to produce a superior user experience that consumers are willing to pay for. This doesn't mean that their hardware, software or services are necessarily the best in their respective fields, but that when put together, the end result is more than the sum of their parts.

For instance, there is that YouTube video of Jonathan Morrison showing how he can edit 4k videos on a Macbook running FCP. This is an example of how optimised software can make up for seemingly mediocre hardware, leading to a better experience than the specs would otherwise indicate.

Likewise, take the Apple Watch for example. Through the control Apple exerts over its platform, Apple has put Siri on your wrist and Apple Music in your ears. It doesn't matter how much better google assistant or spotify is when they aren't available on the watch.

And going back to the main point, is Apple obligated to make other apps available as default options on your smartphone or smartwatch and if so, why? One can argue that more choice is always better, but I feel that at the end of the day, Apple built their own platform, and I don't think that Apple favouring their own apps and services necessarily makes them a monopoly in need of regulation.

This doesn't mean I won't welcome the ability to set overcast or spark as my default apps, but my point is that Apple doesn't, and shouldn't, have to do so if they don't feel so inclined.

If anything, it just goes to show the importance of controlling the key technologies underpinning your products. Owning Apple Music means that Apple is free to tinker with it as they wish and optimise it to run properly on their hardware and integrate with their services as necessary. Can you imagine if instead of acquiring Beats, Apple had entered into a partnership with Spotify to put music streaming on their Apple Watch, and spotify decided to play punk one day and hold back their service in order to demand for more money? Which is precisely what Google tried to do with Apple (which backfired when Apple refused to capitulate and introduced their own maps app). And the bigger and more successful Apple becomes, the more everyone else seems to want a piece of Apple, and the more control Apple will need to exert over its platform, if only to retain the strength it needs to stand up to any foe no matter how strong.

In the end, the safest hands are still your own.

 

[cult hero]

Please.

I use Safari on both my Mac and on my iPhone, but iOS Mail is... uhhh... suboptimal.

 

[TheIntruder]

Agree totally, but to clarify, I think this also has some large part to do with the App Store monopoly investigations/lawsuits going on; that Apple favors its own apps.

This could certainly shoo the dogs off by saying hey look we let other apps have default status too! I would guess that as far more likely than a "goodness of their heart" or they had a change of heart philosophy change type reasoning here. As said, Apple still thinks it knows what people want best, for better or for worse.

Sure it could be an attempt to sway more Android users over with more "customization" but after 14 OS versions I just highly doubt that motivation suddenly.

Right, I crammed too much into that sentence and made a mess of it, but the basic gist of it is that Apple would be wise to make such moves on its own, rather than being forced to by regulators, who could try to go beyond what Apple might do voluntarily.

And really, I suspect many of us would be placated by simply putting in provisions to handle URLs and mailto: links that don't automatically lead to Safari and Mail, or Maps. Nothing else would need to change, those 3rd party apps are already installed, and it won't be the end of Apple's world.

 

[BMox81]

No issues with any of the default apps and prefer them to any of the others.

 

[0924487]

This would be awesome; I'd be *thrilled* to have Firefox, the best browser, as my default browser - icing on the cake if Apple would also allow use of the Gecko rendering engine!

Firefox, at least on Mac, does not support trackpad gestures, such as pinch to zoom. It just feels like using Linux, with no UI/UX elegance.

 

[1144557]

Likewise, take the Apple Watch for example. Through the control Apple exerts over its platform, Apple has put Siri on your wrist and Apple Music in your ears. It doesn't matter how much better google assistant or spotify is when they aren't available on the watch.

And going back to the main point, is Apple obligated to make other apps available as default options on your smartphone or smartwatch and if so, why? One can argue that more choice is always better, but I feel that at the end of the day, Apple built their own platform, and I don't think that Apple favouring their own apps and services necessarily makes them a monopoly in need of regulation.

Because right there you made the US regulators'/government's case for a monopolistic behavior- not allowing competition.

There is a HUGE difference between FAVORING their own apps, if they set it up so the Apple apps out of the box are default (favoring is ok since most wont change the setting), and not allowing you to change them at all.

That is a competitive disadvantage to the competing services/apps out there that are already on the platform but cannot be set as defaults as people are less likely to use them if they cant say click an email link to open the Gmail app or a url to Chome. It's too many extra steps to make using the apps worth it for many.

 

[I7guy]

Because right there you made the US regulators'/government's case for a monopolistic behavior- not allowing competition.
....

Seems only the courts can decide this. Smart watch industry is not a monopoly. And apple has been setting its‘ policies on its hardware and software. Of course there are some court cases pending, and we will have to see how they turn out.

 

[cmaier]

There is a way to give choice without compromising the it just works part.

No. Choice always, every single time, involves compromise. It’s a fundamental law of software engineering, and derives inexorably from the basic principles of mathematics.

It’s fine to say “the compromise is acceptable to me” but it’s either disengenous or wrong to suggest that there is no compromise.

 

[Johns12]

How would your use of the phone change if Apple allowed other Apps as default? They would ship the phone as it is now with their Apps as default. IF YOU want to change them you can. How does that change what App you can use as default?

 

[Tech198]

Too right ....!.. Mac has had that for ages.... I have Firefox as my default browser, even some links in Mail, opens Firefox as my default browser, not Safari, on Mac..

This has been a long time coming on iOS... And the wait is finally over..

(hopefully)

No. Choice always, every single time, involves compromise. It’s a fundamental law of software engineering, and derives inexorably from the basic principles of mathematics.

It’s fine to say “the compromise is acceptable to me” but it’s either disengenous or wrong to suggest that there is no compromise.

On iOS that would be an 'exception' to the rule, and the only reason would be Apple controls things better than the Mac. You'd still have some issues, but due to the increased security, and lack of passing of info between apps, managing what goes out of the network better etc... the advantages outweigh the negatives i reckon always

You have that issue on Mac, because Apple doens't control it the same way as iOS. But users wanted it, so we got it.

 

[I7guy]

...But users wanted it, so we got it.

What us IOS users have is a rumor. It’s not fact until it is.

 

[1144557]

No. Choice always, every single time, involves compromise. It’s a fundamental law of software engineering, and derives inexorably from the basic principles of mathematics.

It’s fine to say “the compromise is acceptable to me” but it’s either disengenous or wrong to suggest that there is no compromise.

Hogwash see the post below yours, just as I said:

How would your use of the phone change if Apple allowed other Apps as default? They would ship the phone as it is now with their Apps as default. IF YOU want to change them you can. How does that change what App you can use as default?

The phone ships stock to the default Apple apps as it is now. You have the CHOICE to go into settings and dictate a different default app for certain ones IF YOU WANT.

Win win. Using some big words and "fancy language" in your argument doesnt make it any less correct and apologist sounding. No one is saying there is no compromise, but the benefits to all far outweighs any compromise that has to be made. There is no legit argument otherwise.
[automerge]1582465635[/automerge]

Seems only the courts can decide this. Smart watch industry is not a monopoly. And apple has been setting its‘ policies on its hardware and software. Of course there are some court cases pending, and we will have to see how they turn out.

Im not sure what you are referring to with watches exactly. But that's a bit different; that is trying to make whole operating systems compatible to get notifications from the phone to watch.

Yes I get you can get some limited notifications on an Android watch paired to an iphone (very very limited from what I understand) and the Apple Watch doesnt work with Android.

That is more an OS/compatibility thing than an app already on the platform thing. Im not seeing how that is related to the allegation Apple favors its own apps and you cant change the default Apple ones.

The issue here would be like Microsoft making Windows so that you can ONLY open a .doc file in Word with a double or right click. It's the default word processing app with no way to change it. Sure you can install another app but there would be no way to open that file natively in it. That to me is anti-competitive to hawk your own software without giving other software makers a fair chance.

 

[BMox81]

So when it’s all said and done, this is basically people wanting Apple becoming Android isn’t it?

 

[sracer]

Android fans: we’ve had this for years
Also Android fans: crap! My reasoning for not switching to iOS is getting more difficult.

Why? Why would anyone switch to a platform that lags in bringing features (that are important to them) over to it?

Apple is grudgingly and slowly introducing features to iOS. The more people who switch to iOS, the slower features will be added to it.

If anything, iOS users should be thanking those Android-holdouts because if it weren't for them, Apple would have no incentive to bring those things over. (Many Apple users complain of ecosystem lock-in that hold them captive)