Yeab but buddy, why is that supposed to be Apple's problem? Or Google's? Or Microsoft's? Why don't governments enter the market with their junk for critical infrastructure? Because it's cheaper to force someone else into it?
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.
Japan Law Will Require Apple to Allow Non-WebKit Browsers on iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeab but buddy, why is that supposed to be Apple's problem? Or Google's? Or Microsoft's? Why don't governments enter the market with their junk for critical infrastructure? Because it's cheaper to force someone else into it?
I agree if the cell phone market was non competitive. Last I looked there were hundreds of competitors.
For sure.
Sure. In a security vulnerability world the size of a football field, the attack surface of iOS will increase to the size of a quarter from what is currently the size of a dime.
Still an increased surface area for attacks. I don’t know how much you follow security practices but zero day vulnerabilities are “not fun”.
Because they enjoy incredibly dominant positions in their markets to the point where users have very little to no choice but to use their products. Just like was the case with IBM and Standard Oil in previous generations.
Because it is usually preferable to everyone involved to allow private enterprise to continue providing goods and services under a regulated framework than it is to completely shut down that private enterprise.
Scale matters and zero-day vulnerabilities are something that have to be dealt with either way. A zero-day happening once every eight months instead of once every twelve months in exchange for using the full-featured browser of your choice seems like a pretty good trade, tbh.
The above is an opinion. I’m generally against this type of regulation but it does open up a can of worms for iPhone users who use multiple browser. Denying it won’t make the issue go away.
Ignoring your dismissal of legitimate issues as "marketing fluff" (which shows you have no actual response to the completely valid security issues opening up browser engines introduces to Apple's customers), calling iOS browser engines "critical infrastructure" is quite the stretch. We're not talking the electric grid, water supply, air traffic control, or even the internet itself, we are talking about browsers on one company's mobile OS, that has a minority market share of like 25% worldwide. That's like saying the design of my Tesla is critical infrastructure for transportation, so Tesla has to retrofit it with a gas engine on their dime if I ask because I couldn't be bothered to buy a car that met my needs in the first place. It's a completely ridiculous argument.
If multiple browser engines are a must-have for you, Android and desktop platforms exist. The government forcing Apple to redesign its products is the government saying "you can't make a different product design choice from your competitors, even when customers are free to choose something else." That's not something the government should be doing; and the government shouldn't be doing it even in the alternate universe where the completely valid security issues you are handwaving away didn't exist.
The companies change TOS and what the offerings look like all the time, post purchase.
Should we be entitled to refunds when they do it? (on software and hardware)
It isn’t Apple’s problem, they are free to not sell their products in areas where there are rules they don’t want to follow. All markets have rules for different areas (even the US) and companies can decide if they want to participate in that market or not.
And folks defending Apple on all these topics should know this well.
When China says "jump" ... Tim instantly says "how high".
When they don't comply elsewhere it's a choice they are making.
Yes they are, but what's preventing someone from just making a better product that will outcompete them? They got to their positions thanks to their own hard work I'd say, no? IBM was the big fish, Apple started in a garage and look at them now. Did Apple create a better product than IBM? Yes, did that make Apple more successful than IBM? Yes. Just because a business has a dominant position doesn't mean a nobody with a product that's just better can't outcompete them.
Nobody says they should shut something down. Provide an alternative, a BETTER alternative with all sorts of junk support, and if people want it, people will buy it and won't buy Apple. It's that simple.
Why would that change anything? Laws and rules change over time for everything, if we didn’t allow for changes just because certain active companies doesn’t like the rules we would never make progress and still use paint with lead in it.
If Apple doesn’t want to follow new rules of a certain market they are not forced to continue selling in that market.
Guys you literally don’t understand what you’re defending here. Governments sticking their fingers into what you can and can’t and should and shouldn’t have on your personal device is a bad thing. Just like they can force Apple into doing something you will benefit from in short term, they can force them into doing things you definitely won’t be happy with and you will think back to your comments here and to the clown who warned you. Just wait and see. Ask UK how they like it.
We do actually -- you simply disagree, which is just fine.
What you stated were the obvious things to get regulated.
There are more than one supplier of toilet paper; Apple is not the only one making a smartphone. It’s their product, they should make it any way they want it. If some people don’t like it, they are not forced to buy an iPhone.
YOU ARE NOT FORCED TO LOAD ANY THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.
Yes there's some junk, but lots of it is of a higher quality and useability than Apple's software. Why not have the choice? Some government mandates actually help the consumer, when my GF upgrades her iPhone she will be able to use the same charger as my phone, and my laptop. And her laptop. etc.
For now at least.
Even if you and a few others want this and that crap from Androids on iOS, why should it be okay for a government to force a company into allowing it if they clearly don’t want it? It’s 3rd party engines and app stores and USB-C today, you will voice your approval, but just wait until they start pushing for access to your phone remotely. Well basically you already own an Android so it’s nothing new for you, but we don’t want this type of junk on our iOS. Or at least not until there’s an alternative to iOS that isn’t filled with government-forced junk.
This is when folks reply with: "But the companies will give customers instructions on how to install things third party and do risky scary stuff!"
A piece of FUD that has not been true on Android, so I'm not sure why it gets rolled out like some big "gotcha".