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.
Apple Argued Safari Is Three Different Browsers to Avoid Regulation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
OK, so you think the DMA would've caused OS/2 to… what? Suddenly make software developers care about it?
Like, you know OS/2, but don't understand at all what a ridiculous, ahistorical claim "[a platform vendor disappearing] would be actually a great move and open the mobile market to more competitors" is?
Well, simply look at the base that drives Apple.
Remove all the European code contributions from FreeBSD which Apple forked, and all Apple OS's becomes a pile of crap. Apple wouldn't even have an OS, nor even a Browser, because their Browser engine is also based on a fork of KDE's KHTML engine, and much more.
Btw. to be clear, I'm absolutely not anti-American, and even have relatives there.
America does and have many great things, it is a nice country.
I Just got me a thirsty American car because the engines of the German ones sucks lately.
But that's another topic, the Chinese will take over that business anyway.
Anyway, one of the things that differs Europeans from Americans is their mindset...
Americans always hunt for the BIG thing, BIG corporations, and love show off with them.
See we have Microsoft, Apple, Google and Arsebook, but these big corporations don't serve the overall economy like smaller companies do.
American Milk and European Milk:
Europeans are not mainly after BIG companies, if it happens - it's not bad, but we prefer to support a bunch of smaller companies that keeps the economy healthy. If one goes bankrupt, no problem, we have plenty other companies to fill the gap. It's because of that mindset why the Digital Markets Act was made, not because we hate BIG American companies. BUT the BIG ones was anti-competitively threatening the smaller ones who drives our European economy, and we like it that way. This is also why we have a topnotch healthcare system that is not capital driven like the American one.
There is also a reason why Linux was invented by an European, one who had a "free OS for all" mindset, and not a mainly capital driven mindset. Well, Linux didn't make to the Desktop en-masse yet and probably never will, but it drives almost all the internet and corporate backend.
Microsoft once called Linux a cancer, I would say this description fits more to Apple now a days.
Apple is what the scene calls and hate "a Leecher", and one of the worst, who does not contribute enough back.
Becoming dependent of a company like that, it's the worst thing ANY country can do.
Last edited:
Or, perhaps, Apple will actually improve Safari to even mildly competitive levels in terms of quality when they can't rely on artificial protections rather than merit/quality of the software.
That's why, as an AAPL user, I want to see this happen (even though it's sad it's taken EU regulation to do it, much like USB-C).
Apple became as good as it is b/c it had to compete. It had to "Think Different". It had to hustle and out flank, out innovate, and out execute MS, RIM/BlackBerry, Intel, etc. They are becoming (have become?) the prettier, outwardly friendlier, better marketed gatekeepers focused less on customer quality and more on "Shareholder value" (which do not always overlap, in fact, at this point, rarely do) that they fought to get here.
It's a cycle, and the quarterly earnings cycle and public markets the way we've organized them in current capitalism guarantees it. I'm not anti-capitalist, and I'm certainly not pro-government, I'm just really anti-either extreme, and we're very much on the "pro-big business, anti-government" swing of the pendulum these days, which is equally as unpalatable to me as "pro-big government, anti-business".
Apple won’t update Safari for iOS devices without forcing an iOS update. I say allow competing browsers, if Apple’s not going to do that then I’d like to get it from someone else.
Allowing different browsers that will be updated throughout many iOS versions (like it happens on Mac), will solve my last major issue when following my policy of never updating iOS. It’s the final hurdle. Apple allows (or is forced to allow) competing browsers on iOS and it will be perfect.
Allowing different browsers that will be updated throughout many iOS versions (like it happens on Mac), will solve my last major issue when following my policy of never updating iOS. It’s the final hurdle. Apple allows (or is forced to allow) competing browsers on iOS and it will be perfect.
The EU commission is staffed with experts in respective relevant fields and industries. As they are hired and nit elected bureaucratic air heads.
I know it might be nuts to you but we have trilateral talks between, commission, council and parliament.
And especially the fact There are no motions to dismiss or for summary judgement in the E.U.
USA:
EU:
So apple haven’t even gone to court yet.
Google’s stranglehold of web browser technology will be complete once EU forces Apple to allow third party engines on iPhone. At the moment, Safari is the only real world alternative for Google’s technology.
Google will release native Chromium, and Chrome and Edge will start using it.
Well done, EU, especially when they are doing this to “foster innovation and competition”
EU is delusional if they think that new web browser engines will emerge because of this. They do not emerge even now; not for Windows, not for Mac, not for Android. Even Microsoft gave up the development of their own because it’s insanely complex.
I find it amusing that MacRumours forum members are actually rooting for this.
Apple own browser is not that different than chrome. It is just a web kit browser. When Microsoft dropped edge in favor of going webkit we dropped to gecko (Firefox) and everyone else.
Tight integration was what caused Internet Explorer to be scrutinized. There is no good reason for Safari to have bits and pieces hidden in the operating system any more than there was for Internet Explorer.
There is also no good reason for Firefox, Chrome, and others to use a Safari backend. They are quite capable on their own and more secure.
It isn’t as EU don’t perceive a monopoly as problematic or bad. Only the practice of anti competitive behaviour and abuse of dominant market position is targeted.
EU don’t have the mission statement to decide winners or save failing products.
Nothing prevents a new fork of Blink to be created or alternative products and browsers.
If safari can’t win and needs to use anti competitive practices to protect itself against competition, then that means it needs to face unrestricted competition and win on merit.
Safari is three browsers is a ridiculous defense. Obviously the intention is total browser market share by a company. Microsoft gets to own any remaining IE market share too.
I really hate government regulation in to these matters, but frankly Apple has been asking for it…
The tricky part is allowing JIT for alternative JavaScript implementations. I really think Apple should do it– at least with an entitlement. They have been pushing back on this since it has a security implication that Apple doesn’t have any control over. Not that other browsers are insecure, but that Apple will need to depend on others for security fixes.
Apple discourages JIT for security, app startup performance, and performance per watt. JIT is a good solution for extension languages and developer tools. If they are forced to allow it, hopefully it is open to apps in the Developer category too.
I really hate government regulation in to these matters, but frankly Apple has been asking for it…
The tricky part is allowing JIT for alternative JavaScript implementations. I really think Apple should do it– at least with an entitlement. They have been pushing back on this since it has a security implication that Apple doesn’t have any control over. Not that other browsers are insecure, but that Apple will need to depend on others for security fixes.
Apple discourages JIT for security, app startup performance, and performance per watt. JIT is a good solution for extension languages and developer tools. If they are forced to allow it, hopefully it is open to apps in the Developer category too.
Last edited:
This is simply untrue. Most people finance their tech and especially iPhone through their carrier. If they lose that option, they will be forced to switch. It’s true that some will go far and beyond to obtain Apple products but that’s not many. Just the diehard fans and not the general population.
MacRumors is the single largest group of anti-Apple fans. The constant sour grapes and whining can be hard to stomach.
LOL it was not the lack of software developers, you clearly never used it.
OS/2 could run Windows 16/32 bit applications, and porting programs to native code wasn't rocket science, too. OS/2 had no market power, it was the unknown newcomer who got pushed out of the market by anti-competitive mafia style contracts between Microsoft and the hardware industry. Microsoft tied Windows to Hardware sales by including the exclusion of parallel sales and support of other OS's in their contracts with the hardware industry.
Want to sell Windows, too? Don't sell other OS's nor support them!
Just like Google did with Android, which was also tackled in the DMA, and additional lawsuit's.
For an abusive anti-competitive platform vendor like Apple is, Yes the disappearance of Apple in the EU would push the competition in the EU even more forward than the DMA, at long term.
Last edited:
… they do. Individual members might try and save it but EU won’t lift a finger to prop up a terrible product for the sake of competition.
The fair opportunity for any competition to enter the market is what’s important.
OK, sure.
"If we remove market participants we deem anticompetitive, market participants who behave better will magically appear. There's no flaw in this plan whatsoever!"
If you paid your current girlfriend as much as Apple pays their legal team, she might let you win that argument.
On the flip side, how different are all the Chromium browsers really?
If people want Chrome, go get Chrome. Sheesh. If they aren't smart enough to get Chrome on iOS, they can buy a Samsung. hat's the point of trying to force the matter on iOS? If someone hates Apple that much, do buy an iPhone.
What's next? Force Macs to run Windows because coming pr-installed with MacOS is biased?
Show me a google chrome browser that isn’t a memory/battery hog and I’d be open to the argument. Google has had years to clean up chrome and it still wastes resources. I use Chrome and Safari on my systems, Windows, iOS, and Mac. I have found that google solves issues by just use up more of the systems resources so their browser looks and acts great.
This is kind of similar to when Steve Jobs wrote his “thoughts on Flash“ article where they wouldn’t allow flash on iOS. While Chromo is no Flash its does have some of the same issues and I thinks a valid argument that Apple would like their hardware to perform well now and into the future and not have an app use up a lot of resources.
That being said I think choice is a good thing for people to have. I just don’t trust that Google and other browsers based off of its base are in it for anyone but themselves.
Being a customer and user, even a fan of a given brand or business, doesn't require or demand that you blindly support everything that brand or business does. In fact, it often demands that you be critical, dissent, and "whine" or have "sour grapes".
In fact, I'd suggest people who cannot see Apple for both their successes/good parts and failures/bad parts are a member of the Apple Fan Boy Cult and the rest of us are actually the only ones in touch with actual reality where things aren't just "good or bad" and we all must sit back and drink the Kool-Aid mixed by Cupertino and pretend to enjoy it, and worse, pretend that it must be good for us somehow.
The arguments for it being a good thing are about as sound as the argument that Safari is really three different browsers, so there is that.
If Apple could saddle Google with removing ALL the tracking (under pain of multi billion dollar fines), it would be a fun exercise.
Or is some enterprising individuals decompiled and stripped all the tracking out to show how much better Chrome would be without the dead weight (a group did something similar to copy protection in productivity software and it was 25% faster).
EU and those on EUs side didn’t argue that. People who think Apple should exist the market said that.
The impact of Apple leaving voluntarily because they don’t like the legislative landscape is that someone is going to fill that need for phones and tablets etc and capture that revenue that Apple no longer have access to.
Edge isn’t a memory hog on windows compared to chrome. And I’m sorry to break it to you, but on iOS you are only using WebKit.
The same thing is true for Apple so that leaves us in quite the pickle.
They can and already do🤷♂️ with the blessing of EU providing the billions in fines to Google for breaking privacy and anti competitive laws… and hold the record for largest fine so far for trying to game the legal system.
Well how do you think chrome with WebKit works?
Well, it's not mainly Google's or other Browser's fault.
Apple is also a memory/battery hog, but Apple tries to freeze(a.k.a. App Nap) and over-optimize all in favor of their battery runtime. In a few cases it's good, in others it isn't, it's more often a trade off.
I would prefer to give a bit of iDevice battery runtime to be able to run application services of my choice in the background, but Apple does not allow this. That's why you can't use IRC Apps on iOS without having a bouncer, otherwise you would flood the Channels with join and disconnect messages due to Apple's Application freezes, and probably get banned.
On macOS,Windows,Android you have the freedom to run anything you like, or any service you like in the background, this of course costs battery. Apple also tries to freeze these Apps, but they don't always succeed.
See this as a car's stop-start technology, i hate that kind of things, it often adds more harm than benefits.
That's also one of the reasons why Apple keeps releasing updates and aggressively tries to fix battery drain over and over in vain, because they are constantly over-optimizing on the edge of what's doable in term of battery.
They are constantly fighting with their own features and often have to castrate and over-optimize their own software for the sake of battery runtime promises, small abnormalities shakes their whole system:
watchOS Update Coming Soon With Fix for Apple Watch Battery Drain
Apple is preparing a fix for an issue causing some Apple Watches to experience excessive battery drain after being updated to watchOS 10.1, the...
www.macrumors.com
It's also one of the reasons why you often stumble over forum topics about safari annoyingly auto closing tabs, safari not snappy, iOS annoyingly killing apps and games, etc. in conjunction with low RAM and battery runtime.
In this case I wouldn't blame Chrome, simply because Apple has the tendency to over-optimize their Apps, and because Google might have a different view of what's important and what kind of trade off they accept in term of battery consumption.
Last edited: