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

161–167 of 167 posts

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

#161

Post by stjohnswarts »

lupire wrote: post #147
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.

Firefox on Android ia a bad experience because the rendering engine is different and slight changes have a big effect on complex plages on tiny screens.

lol why did I never have a problem with that when I was on android? People always say FF on android was awful but I just never saw it. When you got them to really talk about it they just didn't like that it didn't look like Chrome and bitter "power users" who were mad at FF for tightening up extension security. I use Apple these days because I got tired of how fiddly Android was.

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

#162

Post by stjohnswarts »

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?

No but if you turn on strict mode, it gets you 95% there in firefox and brave.

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

#163

Post by stjohnswarts »

TekMol wrote: post #150
lupire wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are watching YouTube. They have your IP, and can tie your identity using that.

Who? And how would they do that?

Unless you are very careful google knows exactly who you are even with multiple layers of ad blockers and VPN. It's built into their browsers and services. They are the best in the world at it barring state agents like FSB and CIA.

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

#164

Post by ubermonkey »

timmg wrote: post #156
ubermonkey wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't see the problem. Apple is a minority player in this market. Android presumably allows whatever you want, right? If you want the customized experience, use that.

> Apple is a minority player in this market. In the phone market? Maybe by units. Certainly not by revenue. Either way, they have a monopoly on "iPhone apps" and their distribution. You can argue whether that's a market in itself. But lawyers and regulators can make an argument too.

Revenue does not determine market control. Market share does. They are DEFINITELY a minority player vs. Android in terms of handsets in use. It’s not close.

Closed platforms have always been a thing. Mostly, they’ve been game consoles. It is hard to understand how Apple should be forced to do anything on antitrust or monopoly grounds, though, based how we have traditionally understood anticompetitive practices.

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

#165

Post by scarface74 »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #154
scarface74 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That's not the same as hurting competition though. Are there games that consumers are playing on mobile platforms that aren't allowed on consoles?

The approval process and the dev kit requirements for console games have always been a nightmare for third party game studios compared to just buying a $599 Mac Mini and $99/year to get into the developer program.

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

#166

Post by philistine »

lupire wrote: post #146
philistine wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The true culprit of Chrome's dominance, I presume, is Google giving Chrome the only ad ever to appear on the google.com landing page. An ad that has been there for close to a decade. That is the attitude of a monopolist in one area (search) using its dominance to establish dominance in another area (browsers). That nobody has reamed Google for giving Chrome an ad on the landing page without ever selling that space to…

Advertising is not establishing dominance.

Giving yourself a preferential treatment not available to your competitors due to your control of another market is establishing dominance.

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

#167

Post by [deleted] »

giantrobot wrote: post #116
kouteiheika wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree. The only thing bad here is Safari's engine. Okay, let me give you an example. One of many I have. I run a website. I have many gigabytes of audio files. I'd like to 1) not have to store multiple versions of the same files, and 2) I'd like to encode them using the most efficient codec available. This means I'd like to use Opus. Every browser supports it since *6 years* ago.... except Safari. Okay, they…

Opus isn't a Safari bug. Opus is only supported for WebRTC. At no point did Apple advertise Opus support anywhere else. Nor does Apple claim any support for the Ogg container format. Safari on iOS also doesn't support Indeo 5 video in an AVI container, that's even older the Opus/Ogg! /s

[deleted]
Post reply on HN