Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 167 posts

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#131

Post by skc »

giantrobot wrote: post #127
skc wrote: post #36

An investigation that will lead nowhere seeing as there is no alternative. This is what happens when the tech press is cheered on for laughing off anyone that dares to compete with iOS and Android. Yes, I'm still very bitter about the demise of WindowsPhone and PalmOS. Had they been championed a little more the mobile OS landscape would have been much more vibrant and exciting.

You can't regulate capable competition into existence. PalmOS and Windows Phone/Mobile/10 both died because their parent companies screwed up. PalmOS was a painfully out of date design by the time it got stuck on phones. No amount of regulation was going to solve the clusterfuck of Palm and PalmSource. Nor was regulation going to make Cobalt actually ship and work as advertised. Regulation also wasn't going to stop M…

Nobody's talking about regulation.

And I think you're confusing WindowsPhone for WindowsMobile by the way.

My main issue was that these two OS's Palm and WP had a mountain to climb facing off against iOS and Android and it wasn't helped by the tech press poo-pooing their efforts at every turn, often gleefully so.

I think it's a shame that we will never see a third player in this space.

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#132

Post by tzs »

TekMol wrote: post #80
chupchap wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems there is no solution for this? Get YouTube Premium?

I would pay for many things on the internet if there was something like digital cash. But the way it is, every time I pay for something, the mega corporations can tie my identity to everything I do. I am not ok with that. So the barrier to pay for something is very high.

Depending on your level of paranoia, one of these might work.

1. Buy a prepaid reloadable credit/debit card. In the US you can do this at major supermarkets, Walmart, and I think many convenience stores. You can load this by transferring funds from your normal bank account.

Your bank can tie your identity to that, but they don't know what you are using the prepaid card for. The prepaid card company knows what you are using it for but doesn't know who you are. Same with whoever you buy things from with it.

2. Buy a prepaid credit/debit card using cash.

3. Buy a prepaid reloadable credit/debit card using cash. Use this for your internet purchases. To reload it, buy prepaid non-reloadable debit cards using cash and use them to reload the reloadable card. (I'm not sure you can use one card to load another, though. Using credit cards to load prepaid cards is usually forbidden I believe, but I couldn't find anything on using debit cards to do so).

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#133

Post by tzs »

ajvs wrote: post #76
the_other wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, at this point, Apple’s resistance to allowing other browser engines is the only viable resistance to a Blink/Chromium monopoly.

Not really since CMA also took aim at Google Chrome's dominance. If that is made no longer the default browser then it'd go a long way to increasing browser diversity. I can only hope Gecko (Firefox) grows in the wake of that.

Chrome is not the default browser on Windows yet massively dominates there with around 9x the usage of Firefox (and around maybe 6x the usage of the Windows default browser, Edge).

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#134

Post by adrr »

Thlom wrote: post #109
adrr wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of that 60% is because safari is the only browser on IOS? I use safari on Mac because it has all more passwords as 90% of my web browsing is on my phone. With auto generated passwords it forces me to use safari.

You can use 1Password or other password managers. At least 1password works like a charm on both mac and iPhone across browsers just as good as keychain.

Just paid for 1password because of this issue. Still other issues that annoy me like safari issues with my kids online learning sites that I have to put them onto my laptop so they can use Firefox or chrome.

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#135

Post by wubin »

tgv wrote: post #68
Gigachad wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rendering engine is less important than the JS apis. Safari is missing half of them and some of them are flat out broken.

Safari is not missing anything of value: it's mainly access to USB, Bluetooth and such which have no place in a browser. And Firefox doesn't support many of them either. It's just Google trying to get more data about you.

> USB, Bluetooth [...] have no place in a browser

How about letting users decide to which capabilities they give permission depending on what they need? I don't want to push them to download and install a whole software package locally which has usually access to more data and hardware APIs compared to a webapp that temporarily lives in a browser tab.

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#136

Post by edsimpson »

duncanc4 wrote: post #107
TekMol wrote: post #33

Is there a mobile browser for iOS that supports uBlock Origin? On my Laptop, I get no YouTube ads. It seems uBlock Origin removes them. On my iPad, I get YouTube ads in an unbearable frequency. It seems there is no solution for this? How is the situation on Android?

Use Yattee, it blocks ads and improves your privacy. I have a developer account and just resign their ipas to install it. Looks like you could install it via TestFlight as well. https://github.com/yattee/yattee

This is awesome! Had no clue this existed.

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#137

Post by Jcowell »

Matl wrote: post #129
tgv wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apple were forced to allow Chrome on iOS, Chrome's influence would grow even stronger. So why do you think that's an argument against wrappers around Safari?

Because Safari's not up to snuff and also because Firefox should also be able to compete. If you block browsers based on Chrome's dominance, Chrome effectively already won. What I predict would happen is that Apple starts investing heavily in WebKit to compete and Firefox would have a compelling offering there like it does on Android. Most people would stick with Safari because is is the default and they wouldn't eve…

If there’s one thing I’m certain of is that given the ability to use it’s own engine Firefox will still lose to Chrome. Willing to bet $100.

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#138

Post by mrcartmeneses »

As a user I have no desire to even try any browser other than Safari in my iPhone. As a developer I have a strong desire to not have to deal with multiple browsers on iOS. Forgive my ignorance but I’ve got no idea what tangible benefit a new browser engine would give. Perhaps I’m just lazy and part of the problem.

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#139

Post by scarface74 »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #41
scarface74 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that include consoles and smart TVs?

If they get to the point of hurting competition, why not?

Hurting competition? Console manufacturers have had stricter requirements and more onerous developer restrictions than any mobile platform since the 80s.

Re: Apple and Google’s mobile browser ‘stranglehold’ may face UK investigation

#140

Post by Jcowell »

wubin wrote: post #135
tgv wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safari is not missing anything of value: it's mainly access to USB, Bluetooth and such which have no place in a browser. And Firefox doesn't support many of them either. It's just Google trying to get more data about you.

> USB, Bluetooth [...] have no place in a browser How about letting users decide to which capabilities they give permission depending on what they need? I don't want to push them to download and install a whole software package locally which has usually access to more data and hardware APIs compared to a webapp that temporarily lives in a browser tab.

> How about letting users decide to which capabilities they give permission depending on what they need?

No. In a war between Users and Developers the users always lose if there is monetary gain to be had.

It isn’t as simple as “hey if you don’t want this permission that’s okay go on ahead !” It’s “we’re going to get this data whether you like it or not”

I rather Strong strict privacy laws before opening the chrome dominance that will come.

Post reply on HN