Apple has become what it meant to destroy. Power corrupts.
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.
Mozilla is 'Extremely Disappointed' With Implementation of Apple's EU Browser Engine Change
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The EU always has it in for big tech as it’s an easy target for fines, especially if it’s for companies outside of the EU.
An example would be the $4.3B fine to Google for the way it promoted chrome within Android, whilst VW group for the decade mis-sold ‘clean‘ diesel engines got a paltry $1B fine and protection from future litigation.
It seems like it's like that with all things they are forced to do by fair competiton regulations. They comply by the letter, but invest lots of energy to still act the same harmful way and delay the time when they have no other way than really comply. It's all about squeezing a few extra bucks out of unfair advantages, even if it makes everything worse for consumers and developers.
You have just disproved your own point. Offering an example of how the EU fined a company from outside the EU, and also fine a company from inside the EU - whilst trying to say they they treat ‘outsiders’ differently.
The discrepancy in the amount of the fine is directly related to the earning of the company. Google pay more because it’s deduced from their substantially higher profits.
The discrepancy in the amount of the fine is directly related to the earning of the company. Google pay more because it’s deduced from their substantially higher profits.
@All of you who are equally disgusted by Apples proposed changes, please write to Miss Vestager to urge her to take action:
margrethe-vestager-contact@ec.europa.eu
margrethe-vestager-contact@ec.europa.eu
Again, that's a good thing.
I don't want the web to be an application platform. I want native applications and Apple was the only one who really fought for this and tried to make the web a worse experience.
Yes, that's what I'm saying. It has the potential to affect me negatively and I don't want that.
If that means limiting choice for you and making your life miserably, that's fine by me.
Side loading will affect me. It means there isn't just one place to find all the software for the device. I might to do things differently to get this software if I want it.
I don't want to do things differently.
1. It will only be different if you choose not to use Safari, unfortunately.
Here's another surprise for you: I don't want the web to be an application platform either, so I love that Safari doesn't support a lot of new web technologies. By having a lot of Safari users on iPhones outside the EU and iPads all over the world it increases the probability that web sites will be compatible with Safari which is important for me since I use Safari on the Mac. Also the lack of support in Safari for certain stuff, forces some companies to develop apps for iPhones instead of just going for a website. Again a great thing.
2. Yes, I want developers to be treated as second class citizens. I consider them evil and enemies until proven otherwise.
I need Apple to work as a shield between developers and me. Lot's of developers seems to want to know who their customers are, contacting them by email or app, showing them ads and other bad stuff.
I think you have a disturbing and bizarre outlook on the situation.
Extensions: many are not available on Safari (uBlock being the most important/widely used) and you have to install as if they are separate apps.
Tab management: control tabbing between two tabs is so convenient (Mac).
Some sites do not play nicely with WebKit (rare but it happens).
I find the ui not the nicest on safari but that is taste or preference I guess.
Apple's application of kindergarten logic to all of this makes me want to re-consider Android for the first time since I got my iPhone 3GS. Sadly the value of the Apple ecosystem is somewhat irreplaceable, and considering I have 1x MacBook Pro, 1x iPad Pro, 5x Apple HomePods, 2x Apple TVs, moving to something else would be frustrating and costly.
There is no denying that Apple's overall quality of hardware and software is simply superior to what I can get anywhere else. But their anti-competitive behaviour is getting out of control.
There is no denying that Apple's overall quality of hardware and software is simply superior to what I can get anywhere else. But their anti-competitive behaviour is getting out of control.
Because I use Linux as my main OS and there, Safari doesn't exist.
In Phil Schiller’s press release he talks about possible hit to battery life when mentioning different browser rendering engines. Why? Why would a different rendering engines cause battery life issues? Or is that just scaremongering from Schiller because Apple doesn’t want users to be able to experience anything other than WebKit on iOS/iPad OS?
It could be that the other engines aren't as optimised as WebKit.
But then again, the other browser will optimise for that as well, they don't want to lose their customers either.
And even if the battery life was worse, maybe it's a trade off that I'm willing to make in order to have a consistent browsing experience?
During pwn2own, Safari was always the first to fall. Apple didn't see the gaping holes.
When I use Safari on macOS, it's only because it isn't as advanced in security and tracking prevention, so Hulu doesn't complain about it, as it does with Firefox and even, Chrome.
When I'm on iOS, I always use Firefox, unless forced to use the full Safari app.
Then we have issue with is security and when browser angle of attacks happen it is a security hole in the in the OS being exploited.
Apple only knows 1 thing. Money. When they start losing money thanks to behave like this, they will learn.
The EU won’t sue, they’ll fine them heavily and threaten to remove their licence, ban sales.
If they have the means and capital, by all means. EU makes Apple not happy, so why not?
The EU created the DMA. The DMA set the user cap at a level that excludes iPadOS from the regulation. Apple isn't violating anything by not allowing individual browser engines on iPadOS. They're following the regulation structure.
That’s clearly not the point though. The point is Apple is fragmenting its own system at the detriment to both devs and customer base, in order to have a cry about being mandated by law to implement changes.
No, they don’t need to make sure the iPad abides by the same rules. But in actively preventing it they’re fracturing their own ecosystem. They could have bitten the bullet, and done something elegant.
Instead they’re acting like