Brave Browser Reports Spike in EU Installs After iOS 17.4 DMA Changes

[Mikey44]

Tell me you don't understand EU anti-monopoly and anti-gatekeeper goals without telling me.

Always awesome to see US user trying to speak about EU-related stuff. Do you have something more to make me laugh?

The reason Microsoft had issues in the early 2000’s is because of Windows Media Player; and then later Internet Explorer. They had to remove what I would consider core functionality from the EU versions of Windows. They had to sell a version of Windows without Windows Media player, and then sell a version of Windows without Internet Explorer.

This was an issue because Microsoft had 80% of the market, and was charging for its OS both to the end user, and OEMs (manufacturers of PC’s).

The reason Apple is having to rewrite how iOS functions is because the EU had to write new legislation to include Apple, which is what the DMA if we are being honest.

Apple holds a ‘vertical’ monopoly in that they manage every little bit of the experience, and try to ensure that experience is good. This is why Apple didn’t have to do the browser choice on macOS, like Microsoft did. Windows was considered a horizontal monopoly, and was seen as abusing a position of power. macOS has only ever been supported officially on Apple hardware.

iOS has been built from the beginning to not fall into the same errors and traps that macOS and Windows had. iOS has the same ‘vertical integration’ that macOS has. Pretending that this is the exact same as Microsoft in the 2000’s is folly.

 

[mrochester]

That's not really true. More choice is always better.

Here you're saying "They don’t gain anything by picking another browser as it’s the same old internet underneath that browser.". And that's literally false. With Brave for instance, consumers get functional ad blocking among other features.

And yes, it's always good for the customers in the end - more competitive market brings more features and it brings prices down as well.

Consumers get ad-blocking in safari too, when they add an ad-blocker extension.

More competitor isn’t always good because that usually leads to a race to the bottom, which degrades quality and incentivises predatory business practices. But then I hear you argue ‘but the EU has regulations against predatory business practices!‘ to which I respond that the predators don’t care, and they’ll take your money and be off with it before anyone in power can do a thing about it.

The trick is to not let it possibly happen in the first place.

 

[3530025]

Consumers get ad-blocking in safari too, when they add an ad-blocker extension.

In such case they're not getting it in the Safari, but rather in the different product. ad-blocker is on part of the Safari itself.

More competitor isn’t always good because that usually leads to a race to the bottom, which degrades quality and incentivises predatory business practices.

This is wrong and I totally disagree with this. It's quite the opposite.

 

[mrochester]

In such case they're not getting it in the Safari, but rather in the different product. ad-blocker is on part of the Safari itself.


This is wrong and I totally disagree with this. It's quite the opposite.

Look at the App Store to see what happens when theres too much competition. It’s flooded with rubbish with all sorts of predatory prices/subscriptions that app developers love.

You need to read about the paradox of choice. Too much is a bad thing.

 

[webkit]

The users already made the ‘right choice’ when they picked their phone. However, the EU didn’t think that was the ‘right choice’, hence the DMA. There’s no reason why chrome wouldn’t face the same fate when it becomes totally dominant.

The DMA didn't say consumers picking a particular phone was or wasn't the right choice. They are regulating the anticompetitive behavior(s) of dominant players. People who bought an iPhone can still use the App Store, still use Safari, etc. etc. etc. None of that is being taken away.

This is not just about being or becoming dominant, it's dominance combined with anticompetitive behavior.. As long as Google isn't engaging in anticompetitive behavior (particularly regarding Chrome), there would be no reason to restrict it from being a default choice option.

 

[DamFu]

Not an advertising at all. Rather an unfair competition, because Safari comes preinstalled.

Microsoft 2010 with its IE all over again.

See, I don’t have a huge issue with opening things up from a technical perspective. My issues are with statements like this. How is it unfair? I spend the money to develop and release a product. Allowing other people to have equal footing on my platform should be my decision. There are other platforms available for consumers to use if they don’t like my rules, on my platform.

I admit, I know nothing about Brave. I do know I can choose another browser if I want, to which point I would research what’s available. Lord knows Google services remind me I should be using Chrome every time. We live in a time where things have to be dumbed down because government officials think we need our hand held.

 

[mrochester]

The DMA didn't say consumers picking a particular phone was or wasn't the right choice. They are regulating the anticompetitive behavior(s) of dominant players. People who bought an iPhone can still use the App Store, still use Safari, etc. etc. etc. None of that is being taken away.

This is not just about being or becoming dominant, it's dominance combined with anticompetitive behavior.. As long as Google isn't engaging in anticompetitive behavior (particularly regarding Chrome), there would be no reason to restrict it from being a default choice option.

Google gives away chrome for free and monetises users through its own ad network. That is very much anti-competitive as they tie the browser to their ad network.

google would need to divest chrome so it didn’t receive any money from the google ad business to not be anti-competitive.

In fact google ties nearly all of its product to its dominant ad network so the whole thing is ripe for being split apart so that the various Google products have to stand on their own two feet.

 

[carrrrrlos]

I was on Brave for some time, but now a big fan of arc browser - link is for arc, i’ll also get a fun icon for sharing, not monetary

A friend is sharing Arc with you!

Experience a calmer, more personal internet in this browser designed for you. Let go of the clicks, the clutter, the distractions.

arc.net

 

[Arsenikdote]

...as it would hide any trend and useful information.

In this case almost the opposite it happening. The increase at first glance is very large, it would seem at least double. Remember, the whole point of visuals on a chart is to be able to understand the situation without having to dive into the numbers, otherwise just show the numbers only. In this case, it was not a doubling of the user base, it was a smaller gain. Still a spike to be sure, just not as large as is represented with the visuals only. The reason to build the chart in this way is to over-emphasize the gain in users. I am pretty sure that was the intent by the company, and they accomplished it.

 

[webkit]

Allowing other people to have equal footing on my platform should be my decision. There are other platforms available for consumers to use if they don’t like my rules, on my platform.

So you believe Microsoft should've been allowed to restrict or even completely block alternative browsers like Netscape Navigator on Windows? Consumers in the 1990s could've perhaps chosen Mac OS, OS/2, Linux, BeOS, etc. instead if they wanted to have Navigator?

 

[webkit]

Google gives away chrome for free and monetises users through its own ad network. That is very much anti-competitive as they tie the browser to their ad network.

google would need to divest chrome so it didn’t receive any money from the google ad business to not be anti-competitive.

In fact google ties nearly all of its product to its dominant ad network so the whole thing is ripe for being split apart so that the various Google products have to stand on their own two feet.

That doesn’t necessarily make Chrome anticompetitive as what you're describing is more of a Google search issue. Google being free is not unique as pretty much all browsers are free, including Safari, and consumers are able to pick and choose which one they want to use. Browser engines can be a different story as Apple had been restricting alternative browser engines on iOS.

 

[mrochester]

That doesn’t necessarily make Chrome anticompetitive as what you're describing is more of a Google search issue. Google being free is not unique as pretty much all browsers are free, including Safari, and consumers are able to pick and choose which one they want to use. Browser engines can be a different story as Apple had been restricting alternative browser engines on iOS.

But Chrome being monetised by Google ads is anti-competitive. Chrome should be free to be monetised by other ad networks or direct user fee.

 

[sleeptodream]

A reminder not to use Brave browser as the founder is a homophobic/transphobic jerk

 

[sleeptodream]

That’s not misleading, it just means some people don’t know how to read a graph

It’s extremely misleading. They literally teach in schools that this is misleading.

 

[contacos]

It’s extremely misleading. They literally teach in schools that this is misleading.

depends on the context? If I make an analysis of an age group and the topic at hand (e. g. development of age of people parking at a car park) automatically excludes a specific group (people under 18), I am not gonna start my graph at 0, I’d start at 18

 

[CouldBeWorse]

Wow, just over 3,000 additional downloads in a market of over 100 million users! Hard to imagine how they will keep up with that level of growth.

 

[AbhijitShanbhag]

but for EU 25-30% market share is definitely enough to be considered as gatekeeper and thus have to follow the DMA rules.

I personally don't see pushing the competition as a bad thing.

Brother, let’s be real then. Why isn’t Spotify actually given a status of Gatekeeper? 56% of Market Share in EU, 51B Market Cap. It certainly qualifies being thrashed the same way American Big Techs are being attacked by the EU under the so called ‘gatekeeper’ status

Always awesome to see US user trying to speak about EU-related stuff. Do you have something more to make me laugh?

It’s not about that. The Commission is utilising its powers to thwart any form of competition to European Companies. It’s clearly a blatant anti-American corp, and I think EU shouldn’t call themselves as being fair to users, to defend their actions. Clearly if they really were Pro-Consumers, Spotify would be scrutinised the same way other tech giants are being treated, and rather been treated worse, for the fact that they pay artists way less than any other music streaming service out there.

If it really is a Pro EU Corp Promotion by the Commission, it must have the courage to clearly speak about it, rather than just call their actions as Pro Consumer and defend it. Nothing is Pro Consumer about Vestager’s Actions in supporting companies like Spotify, when the company itself is as morally bankrupt (or if not more than) as Apple

 

[DamFu]

So you believe Microsoft should've been allowed to restrict or even completely block alternative browsers like Netscape Navigator on Windows? Consumers in the 1990s could've perhaps chosen Mac OS, OS/2, Linux, BeOS, etc. instead if they wanted to have Navigator?

Those browsers weren’t blocked and neither is Brave. I just downloaded it and immediately was prompted to make it my default browser. There is a difference between blocking it from running and advertising other browsers available. In its base form, it is a slap in the face to consumers because the message that sends is the general end user is not capable of deciding in their own, it has to be advertised to them.

 

[sleeptodream]

depends on the context? If I make an analysis of an age group and the topic at hand (e. g. development of age of people parking at a car park) automatically excludes a specific group (people under 18), I am not gonna start my graph at 0, I’d start at 18

Right that’s fine, but when you’re showing a change over time as in this graph, and you’re putting it out to the general public as Brave is doing here, knowing very well that many people don’t know how to read a graph, it’s essentially being used as a tool for persuasion

Considering their CEO sounds like kind of a slimeball, it doesn’t surprise me. Gosh even the name Brave, it’s so pretentious lol. Makes my skin crawl the same as when Apple uses the word “courage” ha

 

[revs]

I mean if you read through the list you can see it isn’t alphabetical lol.

Yes it’s randomised.

My point is a lot of people will just pick whatever is at the top so they can dismiss it and just get to a website.

So I was wondering how many actively pick Brave (or whatever else), vs just whichever is first in the list.

 

[omihek]

Apple has Courage, but they're still not Brave enough it seems...

 

[XXPP]

People installed it by mistake.

 

[cnnyy20p]

The chart is not misleading, it starts from the lowest it has on the period in exam. Starting from zero is not always the best thing to do. For example if you wan to talk about the American GDP and how it varied in the last three years it wouldn’t make sense to have a graph starting from zero as it would hide any trend and useful information.

This is the correct way to do an height skip. I know this doesn't mean much but that zig zag still gives viewer attention. I did learn about this graph manipulation in high-school. Did you?

 

[Populus]

Chrome will simply cement its dominance even further and then we’ll need more regulation to reduce that.

Yes, I agree with you. And I’m afraid Firefox is not appearing on that selection screen, which is bad for avoiding Chrome monopoly.

 

[3530025]

My point is a lot of people will just pick whatever is at the top so they can dismiss it and just get to a website.

Can you back your claims regarding this somehow? You present it as a matter of fact ("lot of people will"). What if I tell you from a psychological research people tend to rather choose familiar stuff more likely?

Therefore most people are most likely to just pick familiar Safari if they just want to dismiss the dialog screen.