Google Working on Browser for iOS That Would Break Apple's App Store Rules

[inkswamp]

Chrome is still better than Safari as all websites work, unlike Safari (including Mac).

I haven't had a website not work on Safari lately. Can you show me an example?

Meanwhile, I don't see Safari being the insane resource hog that Chrome routinely becomes. Never get slow-downs and things bogging down on Safari the way they do on Chrome.

I guess it depends on your perspective and what you think is "better."

 

[macintologist]

I think there are two reasons why this is going to happen and why iOS will loosen up:

1) Phones in 2023 are incredibly powerful, basically on par with desktops. It's not like 2010 where phones were weak and needed to be protected. iOS has built in battery detection in the software to help users understand which apps are leaking the battery.

2) Apple has a really solid security system on macOS to balance security and convenience, where by default all non-Mac store apps are banned from running, unless you dive deep into the settings and disable that. All apps have to be notarized by Apple to run. Apple could simply extend the macOS security system to iOS.

 

[strongy]

One press of a 'button'? I don't think that's an iPhone you're using.

if you hold down your finger on the safari icon from the home screen, a menu pops up and one option is bookmarks

 

[orev]

It would be strange if Google was NOT doing this. I expect they have had their own version of IOS Chrome under development since the iPhone first came out. Any company as big a Google, with a clear interest in having their own browser, would always needs to be ready for the rules to change. They wouldn't be waiting for some rumors and then start scrambling to throw something together.

This is the same with alternate app stores. There are already a few companies (possibly Google as well) with IOS app stores ready to go. They're just waiting on the rule change to launch them.

 

[DuckyDelite]

TLDR

Will use 90% CPU, hog all the ram and be full of “web3” scams that steal money from marks and rubes.

And pass your data to random 3rd Party Ad servers and allow browser extensions to do whatever the heck they want.

I'm excited that to see it might be possible to make network calls outside the really bad Apple network stack, but not excited that I'll have no clue what network protocols each iOS app is using. Hopefully this is something I can choose in future Settings on an app by app basis.

 

[DuckyDelite]

Why does Apple even have this "webkit-only" restriction?

Technically any OS can have this restriction. For example, Windows doesn't recommend devs make direct hardware calls. Usually they are abstracted behind API layers, like the Graphics Device Interface for graphics card.

The difference with iOS is Apple owns the only mechanism to install new Apps (App Store). Apple can look at all submitted code to see if devs are using an API (like webkit) or not. Good for OS stability (and security). Bad for competition.

In the Mac and Windows world, you can still install anything from anywhere. Great when you want that awesome new free widget that shows random cat pictures. Bad when you find out the Cat Widget also install its own network stack that is sending all web calls and keyboard clicks to unknown servers 😥

 

[Haiku_Oezu]

Hope they release it as an ipa I can sideload if Apple doesn't end up relenting on the rules

I'm mad curious to see how badly it thrashes the battery and if it doesn't then I'm stoked at the idea of having access to Blink on mobile

 

[Cuesca]

I don't understand the appeal of Chrome especially on a desktop/laptop, its a resource hog and tend to break your adblocking extension with every new iteration especially on google websites like Youtube.

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

This makes one wonder who lobbied Congress to get this issue on the table. Three guesses as to which group(s) that may have been…. 😒

 

[topdrawer]

I haven't had a website not work on Safari lately. Can you show me an example?

Meanwhile, I don't see Safari being the insane resource hog that Chrome routinely becomes. Never get slow-downs and things bogging down on Safari the way they do on Chrome.

I guess it depends on your perspective and what you think is "better."

there are a few hacky sites that allow for things like accessing your usb devices through your browser. for example to hack your switch so you can pirate games. safari doesn't allow this.

but also compatibility relies on the web developers. some are on windows and don't test on safari.

 

[BaldiMac]

Amazon dominates eBooks, so governments target Apple.
Google dominates smartphones, so governments target Apple.
Google dominates browsers, so governments target Apple.

Coincidentally, Google and Amazon significantly outspend Apple in lobbying.

 

[ackmondual]

That falls on developers. If a product is dominating maybe there’s a reason. Same could be said about iPhones or literally anything else, don’t victim blame the consumer.

I really do wonder if it's possible to dethrone all the leaders of their respective industries...
Windows for desktop/laptop OS
iPhone for smartphones
Chromebook for netbooks
Switch for handheld gaming
Heck, throw in Amazon for online shopping

... It would seem like when someone/group becomes a legitimate threat, the incumbent will take heavy handed measures to ensure they stay dominant (save for government intervention).

 

[webkit]

Amazon dominates eBooks, so governments target Apple.
Google dominates smartphones, so governments target Apple.
Google dominates browsers, so governments target Apple.

Coincidentally, Google and Amazon significantly outspend Apple in lobbying.

A lot of this can depend on the government and country/territory in question e.g., it is Apple, NOT Google, that "dominates" mobile OS in the U.S. with around 58% share.

Also, this is not about targeting companies but rather targeting behavior. If, for example, Google was restricting sideloading, alternative app stores, alternative browser engines, etc. on Android like Apple does on iOS, they could be facing the same complaints and scrutiny.

 

[BaldiMac]

A lot of this can depend on the government and country/territory in question e.g., it is Apple, NOT Google, that "dominates" mobile OS in the U.S. with around 58% share.

Sheer luck on my part that I said "governments" and not the "US government". Install base, yadda yadda.

Also, this is not about targeting companies but rather targeting behavior. If, for example, Google was restricting sideloading, alternative app stores, alternative browser engines, etc. on Android like Apple does on iOS, they could be facing the same complaints and scrutiny.

If you regulate something only one company is doing, then you are targeting that company. If Bob has a red ball and everyone else has green balls, then outlawing red balls targets Bob.

 

[nt5672]

Then you don’t understand your average iPhone purchase, their will install chrome because their have heard it’s better or are familiar with it on a desktop or laptop and when their notice their new or present iPhone is getting hotter, slower and battery doesn’t last as long as prior their will cry afoul that Apple is to blame with the new OS update and it’s forced obsolescence. Just like the crowd that howled about Flash not being supported on iPhone. Sorry but just like Flash, Chrome should be laid to rest or rewritten.

Well people learn not to visit certain parts of the city because they are dangerous, they will learn to not download certain apps. It is not Apple's or your job to be the nanny.

 

[webkit]

Sheer luck on my part that I said "governments" and not the "US government". Install base, yadda yadda.

Is it very relevant as not all governments have the exact same laws and a company doesn't necessarily have the same market share or business presence in each country/territory.

If you regulate something only one company is doing, then you are targeting that company. If Bob has a red ball and everyone else has green balls, then outlawing red balls targets Bob.

The laws are about dominant companies unfairly restricting or stifling competition in a market. This is nothing new and has long been a cornerstone of antitrust laws and regulations. Google, Apple, etc. are all subject to these laws if they meet the “dominance:” criteria and are engaging in anticompetitive behavior.

Obviously, laws and regulations didn't specify activities related to things like browser engines or smartphones 50 years ago because those things didn't exist back then but the overall substance of the laws have been around for ages and that is what is being applied to today's markets, technologies, etc.

 

[BaldiMac]

Is it very relevant as not all governments have the exact same laws and a company doesn't necessarily have the same market share or business presence in each country/territory.

Sure, but you didn't describe different governments and different laws. You just wanted to repeat your install base number that had nothing to do with my point.

The laws are about dominant companies unfairly restricting or stifling competition in a market. This is nothing new and has long been a cornerstone of antitrust laws and regulations. Google, Apple, etc. are all subject to these laws if they meet the “dominance:” criteria and are engaging in anticompetitive behavior.

Obviously, laws and regulations didn't specify activities related to things like browser engines or smartphones 50 years ago because those things didn't exist back then but the overall substance of the laws have been around for ages and that is what is being applied to today's markets, technologies, etc.

Again, you're just repeating your same talking points which have nothing at all to do with what I said. In fact these two paragraphs are almost exactly the same points as your response to a completely different comment in another thread a few moments before.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/biden-administration-report-recommends-sweeping-changes-to-apples-ecosystem.2379414/post-31944491

 

[_Spinn_]

Be prepared to see Safari’s market share plummet when this happens. I’d love to run native Firefox on my iPhone but I doubt they have the resources to port it to iOS. Mozilla has been slowly dying ever since Chrome came out. Even Microsoft couldn’t complete. The only winner here will be Chrome and then regulators will be shocked at the results.

 

[BaldiMac]

I have no problem with Apple being told to allow third-party browsers to use alternative engines.

But I'd still want to prevent the following:
1) Every web view app bundling their own (outdated) browser engine to insure compatibility.
2) Apps replacing native UIs with cross-platform web-based interfaces.

 

[ian87w]

Good!
Hopefully Firefox will be ready to go when able also

Very excited to have full "real" browser alternatives, including their extensions.

Firefox doesn't even support tablets on Android. I don't have high confidence.

 

[ian87w]

I don't understand the appeal of Chrome especially on a desktop/laptop, its a resource hog and tend to break your adblocking extension with every new iteration especially on google websites like Youtube.

It's the brand awareness thanks to Microsoft made IE so bad with IE6. Back then, Chrome was a lean and fast alternative to IE and the fact that it syncs with everything in your Google Account including bookmarks and passwords, it hooked most people. Even lay users have been trained to install Chrome everytime they have a new computer.

Most Mac users I know use Chrome as well. It's already ingrained in their mindset. If the real Chrome is available on iphone, Chrome will literally become THE internet. Google already ruled mobile (Chrome is pre-installed on all Google certified Android phones) and most Windows users use Chrome. The iphone literally is the last holdout.

To combat this, Apple really need to push Safari on Windows and Android. I never understand why Apple stopped developing Safari on Windows.

 

[ian87w]

Be prepared to see Safari’s market share plummet when this happens. I’d love to run native Firefox on my iPhone but I doubt they have the resources to port it to iOS. Mozilla has been slowly dying ever since Chrome came out. Even Microsoft couldn’t complete. The only winner here will be Chrome and then regulators will be shocked at the results.

It's funny how these regulators didn't even see how Google forces Android OEMs to pre-install Chrome in their devices to be certified for GMS. Microsoft got punished for bundling IE on Windows, yet Google gets a complete free pass

It shows that these regulators only see the money Apple is making, and they want a piece of it

 

[ian87w]

The laws are about dominant companies unfairly restricting or stifling competition in a market.

Android is the dominant mobile operating system in the world. Google forces Android OEMs to pre-install Chrome on their Android devices to be certified. On my S21, I can uninstall the Samsung browser, but I cannot uninstall Chrome.

So one has to wonder why the scrutiny is on Apple.

 

[dk001]

I haven't had a website not work on Safari lately. Can you show me an example?

Meanwhile, I don't see Safari being the insane resource hog that Chrome routinely becomes. Never get slow-downs and things bogging down on Safari the way they do on Chrome.

I guess it depends on your perspective and what you think is "better."

PWAs?

 

[dk001]

Amazon dominates eBooks, so governments target Apple.
Google dominates smartphones, so governments target Apple.
Google dominates browsers, so governments target Apple.

Coincidentally, Google and Amazon significantly outspend Apple in lobbying.

My understanding was that Apple dominated in the US.
Globally they do not.

Never mind - someone else already mentioned it.