Imagine going to online discussion platform just to tell you don't have to explain anything to randoms.Nobody needs to explain their needs …especially to a random commenter online (you)
Imagine going to online discussion platform just to tell you don't have to explain anything to randoms.Nobody needs to explain their needs …especially to a random commenter online (you)
No, you're not. 🤣I would say pull out of the EU market altogether. And I am a significant owner of AAPL shares. I will take whatever loss the decision brings.
Just ditch EU market, oversaturate neighbour countries and watch how they quickly take all their demands back after europeans had to gray import Apple for couple years.
I'm surprised so many people upvoted your misinformed comment.I honestly don’t really care. A majority of people use Chrome on all of their platforms. They aren’t blocked just not the default browser.
Selling them to Germany with x1.5 margin will improve their economy quite a bit.Albania and Moldavia can't wait to be oversaturated by overpriced Apple products for people with avg annual salary of $6000
It reduces security and battery life. The same reason Apple was the first one to kick Adobe Flash out of platform back in the day.if they permit websites to use these features, it reduces the need for native apps
And this is just made up bs for more drama. It's the same engine as desktop Safari, getting constant updates.Apple has no real incentive to improve the engine, as it has no competition (because they forbid competition.) In fact, they have an enormous incentive to not improve the engine
I literally gave you a list of features that other features have had for years which Apple refuses to add to WebKit, even though it means WebKit isn't standards compliant. Remember that Apple has employees on these committees that create these standards.And this is just made up bs for more drama. It's the same engine as desktop Safari, getting constant updates.
If Apple was going to do that, it would’ve stopped selling products in mainland China a long time ago. Not going to happen as long as there’re still profits to be made in these regions. (And yes, plenty of people will switch platforms rather than going through the hassle and expense of importing from sellers in other countries.)Just ditch EU market, oversaturate neighbour countries and watch how they quickly take all their demands back after europeans had to gray import Apple for couple years.
Yet people on this forum shamelessly defend Apple’s practice. For what reason? If you want to keep using Safari then keep using Safari. Nothing is going to prevent you from doing that…I'm surprised so many people upvoted your misinformed comment.
Other browser engines are banned from the app store. Yes, "Chrome", "Firefox" and other browsers are on the app store, but they don't use the engine that they use on macOS, Windows, Linux, and Android. They instead use WebKit, Safari's engine, because Apple requires them to do so.
As some examples, on every platform except iOS, users can grant access to the browser to access USB devices, use wireless game controllers, the accelerometer, check your battery status, or vibrate the device.
Websites that use these features simply don't work on iOS, because Apple hasn't added these features to WebKit. Installing other browsers won't fix the websites, because those browsers are skin deep - they're just a different wrapper around the same WebKit engine.
Apple has no real incentive to improve the engine, as it has no competition (because they forbid competition.) In fact, they have an enormous incentive to not improve the engine - if they permit websites to use these features, it reduces the need for native apps, which reduces the need for the app store, which means Apple can't shamelessly rob devs blind.
As a web developer I tend to avoid experimental web standards (obviously), but what I noticed the most is Safari has a lot of weird issues the other browsers don’t have. For example, I wrote some WebGL code and the performance is much worse in Safari on my Mac than Firefox. So I would be lowering the resolution in Safari to obtain the same level of performance I get in Firefox. This is despite the full support for WebGL being there in Safari and it’s far from a new or experimental standard.I literally gave you a list of features that other features have had for years which Apple refuses to add to WebKit, even though it means WebKit isn't standards compliant. Remember that Apple has employees on these committees that create these standards.
Remember when Apple first switched from Internet Explorer to WebKit explicitly to support those standards? And when everyone said IE was bad for its lack of standards compliance? Now it's Apple that totally ignores standards. What's more, they don't document WebKit at all, so it's a nightmare for web developers to support Safari, even though they have to since if they don't support Safari, they don't support iOS because of Apple's artificial browser engine monopoly on iOS.
Jump down on this page to see a list of features that Chrome, Edge, and Firefox have all had since October 2022 or earlier but which Apple has no plans to support yet:
Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc
caniuse.com
Wait, are you suggesting that Android is a cesspool of garbage and iOS isn't, because of Chrome? Or because of the apps you can install?If iOS is a cesspool of Garbage, why are you here? All Apple browsers run Webkit, and this is kind of an Apple focused website.
I am able to surf the Web just fine from Apple devices, so 'need' and 'essential' might be strong words. It certainly seems like the internet happens just fine on Webkit.
First of all - you don‘t have to install any third party tools. Second - do you really believe that something like Chromium or Firefox is insecure compared to Safari?Other engines = security issues on the platform + tracking.
I've actually understood there's nothing to talk to you about when you started whining one can't give accelerometer permission. Accelerometers are a security hole, ranging from device fingerprinting using sensor calibration data to reading what is typed on keyboard near the phone.I literally gave you a list of features that other features have had for years which Apple refuses to add to WebKit, even though it means WebKit isn't standards compliant. Remember that Apple has employees on these committees that create these standards.
Remember when Apple first switched from Internet Explorer to WebKit explicitly to support those standards? And when everyone said IE was bad for its lack of standards compliance? Now it's Apple that totally ignores standards. What's more, they don't document WebKit at all, so it's a nightmare for web developers to support Safari, even though they have to since if they don't support Safari, they don't support iOS because of Apple's artificial browser engine monopoly on iOS.
Jump down on this page to see a list of features that Chrome, Edge, and Firefox have all had since October 2022 or earlier but which Apple has no plans to support yet:
Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc
caniuse.com
It's just easier to develop for one browser. Developers simply push market to Chrome monopoly, that's it. Being different doesn't make Safari bad.it's a nightmare for web developers to support Safari
It's not a question of belief, it's a fact. Apple drops a lot of unsecure and battery unfriendly features.First of all - you don‘t have to install any third party tools. Second - do you really believe that something like Chromium or Firefox is insecure compared to Safari?
Idk,As a web developer I tend to avoid experimental web standards (obviously), but what I noticed the most is Safari has a lot of weird issues the other browsers don’t have. For example, I wrote some WebGL code and the performance is much worse in Safari on my Mac than Firefox. So I would be lowering the resolution in Safari to obtain the same level of performance I get in Firefox. This is despite the full support for WebGL being there in Safari and it’s far from a new or experimental standard.
Its not absurd lawsuit, imagine you couldn't install anything on your mac, other than wat Apple allows in its app store.Absurd response for an absurd lawsuit. It's pure comedy from both parts at this point.
Its not absurd lawsuit, imagine you couldn't install anything on your mac, other than wat Apple allows in its app store.
EU don’t care about a monopoly, they care the fact context specific monopolies unfairly influence competition with artificial barriers that aren’t justifiable in proportion with their impact.
And what do you think is going to happen to this percentage in the US when the most popular phone changes from being webkit only? Again, replacing a context specific monopoly (just iOS users, Webkit) with a global monopoly... (Chromium, so Edge, Chrome, Arc, etc...)
That is the problem, EU have zero issue with a chrome monopoly and have zero interest in preventing a monopoly being developed as it’s not a crime. They care about fair market competition first and foremost.As I said in my original post, I usually side with the EU, but I find this move to be extremely short sighted. How could they even go about breaking up the Chrome monopoly this will create when Google isn't headquartered in Europe? This isn't like USB-C where there's no downside to forcing companies to comply... This isn't a case where "the best browser will win," Google already makes using many of their websites annoying with non-chromium browsers and even browsers that aren't google chrome. And it's so popular now many websites don't even bother to test if their code runs correctly on Safari or Firefox. This will just get worse.
They aren’t banning it if Apple voluntarily leaves.as much as I agree, that isn't an option. It's the top 3 markets in the world...I'm guessing after the US, it's the biggest....that said, maybe thats exactly what they should do. I find it hard to believe the peope of the EU would stand for the EU banning one of the biggest tech companies in the world from doing business in one of the largest economies long term because of petty bs like this.
If you want help to have more options, then I’m sorry to say but EU won’t ever help in that endeavour as it’s beyond their mandate.1. There are hundreds of computer manufacturers, but all using just one software: windows. Except for the macs and maybe the google chromebooks, every computer out there is basically using MS Windows as its OS regardless of who manufactures the hardware. So it’s basically just three choices for us. Likewise in the smartphone market: every manufacturer but apple uses android to power their smartphones, so it’s just ios or android we have as choices.
Sure, but you are identifying an issue we think is completely legitimate. If in a fair market the users still choose x and giving them a monopoly then that’s fine.2. Given the current situation, if apple were to leave, Android would basically become a smartphone monopoly. It’s clear by now that no smartphone manufacturer in the world is interested in investing to develop its own OS, that’s why they all go the easy way and use Android. If they were interested, they’d have already done so and there would be more mobile OS options than just iOS or Android.
You aren’t sued by anyone, Google just like Apple can’t push chrome on the users who purchased said product.There is an ARM based version of Windows. So it isn't as ludicrous as you make it out to be. I made a product. You want to force me to allow your product on my product even as you actively undermine my product in your ads and try to circumvent the features I build into my product to appeal to my customers. You've even SUED me to try and force me to let you circumvent those features.
Nobody is forcing a single standard on Apple, they are completely free to provide safari, and users can continue using safari if it’s actually the best for them.If Google wants to run Chrome on iOS, they have to write it to Apple Standards (Webkit).
If Google, or anyone else, wants to force different standards on Apple, and given their less than stellar track record on 'doing the right thing' with regard to privacy, let them pound sand.
Not at all, considering it would just be a black market economy. Just how you get a 1.000~$ fine for importing a harmless 1$ kinderegg to the USA, you think you can import a 1.000$ item with a sales ban?Selling them to Germany with x1.5 margin will improve their economy quite a bit.
It’s not a lawsuit, Apple filed a complaint against the regulators and claimed they aren’t covering by the law.And that's the reason for which I own a Mac but not an iPhone.
I already vote with my wallet. There is no reason for a lawsuit.
Grey market*. Still bought in official store though.Not at all, considering it would just be a black market economy. Just how you get a 1.000~$ fine for importing a harmless 1$ kinderegg to the USA, you think you can import a 1.000$ item with a sales ban?
What does it mean for Apple to pullout of EU? Using the iOS AppStore in EU with European bank cards and still having the services provided doesn’t change apples legal obligations.Grey market*. Still bought in official store though.
Yeah, you can easily import it as your personal device.
Officially device you buy on grey market was sold by Apple to end customer e.g. in Turkey. Or you just go to other country yourself and buy it there.What does it mean for Apple to pullout of EU? Using the iOS AppStore in EU with European bank cards and still having the services provided doesn’t change apples legal obligations.
If Apple closes all their stores in EU but local chains and network providers are still allowed to sell it and eu citizens are still able to use every service, then nothing changed.