Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

Your first misunderstanding is this assumption that competition and user choice hinges on the axis of "browsers and app stores". This isn't an objective fact, it's an opinion. A different and (at minimum) equally valid opinion is that user choice can hinge on the axis of phone ecosystems. Yet another axis could hinge on apps themselves — perhaps none of us are "free" until Facebook, Instagram, etc are all required by the EU to allow anyone to write fully featured native front-ends. Perhaps the freest of all is a marketplace with a diversity of axes, which is precisely what laws tend to demolish.

Your second misunderstanding is your continued smuggling in of the concept of "user choice" in a marketplace where users do not and cannot have anything remotely resembling real freedom of choice, no matter how many browser engines or app stores are available. Open source ecosystems aside, >99% of "choices" are made by the software developer exclusively. Choosing to acquire the same corporate-capitalist closed source spyware from vendor A or vendor B is an illusion of choice.

Your third misunderstanding is this absurd and self-evidently false claim that people who like the status quo will be able to simply ignore the new alternative app stores and browsers. If loading alternative app stores really does become seamless, companies like Facebook and Google will have absolutely no incentive to list their apps in Apple's store. In fact given that Apple's pro-privacy policies (like App Tracking Transparency) are causing these companies to lose enormous amounts of revenue, they have a MASSIVE commercial incentive to abandon the Apple App Store.

You say these laws are about to be passed. I haven't seen how any of these EU laws get around the reality of Apple's ownership of its own intellectual property. I can't imagine how the EU could force Apple to supply its intellectual property to app developers under different terms. So even if the EU does force open iOS to alternative stores, I'm really not sure how developers are going to legally build apps to put in those stores.

As for your continued barbs implying that I oppose user choice, I'm wearing a "mask", that I hate markets, that I hate opinions, that I'm taking away freedoms, that I am offering "fake arguments" which I "don't believe" and will be "crying" about EU laws. All I can say is that rejecting the possibility that someone can sincerely hold a different opinion to you is disappointing — and represents a barrier to intellectual curiosity.

We’re trying to fix real world problems caused by anti-competitive behavior. Any debate needs to start with the premise that web apps are not competitively viable on iOS and that Safari is in a poor state.

Then the next step is to discuss potential solutions.

Yes, you keep copy-pasting that. As if that absolves you of factually incorrect statements.

> We have an exceptionally detailed understanding of the bugs and functionality issues of the browser.

And yet you fail to understand that hardware APIs are opposed by BOTH Safari AND Firefox. And yet you include them in your lists as if they were actual standards that Safari absolutely must implement. They are not. Same for a bunch of other Chrome non-standards.

In a recent discussion it turned out that you didn't even know what actual objections BOTH Safari AND Firefox have against them.

Same for pretending that Edge is different from Chrome because it removed Google-only services from it. It's not. It's a re-skin with very minor modifications.

You've listed over thirty things that Edge removed from Chrome to make a "different browser". Can you name 10 or 5 of them that are actually relevant to actual web?

Your entire OWA isn't arguing in good faith and is basically parroting Google's propaganda word for word.

> Any debate needs to start with the premise that web apps are not competitively viable on iOS and that Safari is in a poor state.

No. Any debate in good faith has to start with discussing the state of the open web and Chrome's utter dominance of it. As the top comment rightly said, "People keep arguing Apple is being anti-competitive. But no one seems to recon with the possible consequences of what they’re asking for." [1]

Should Safari be better? Yes. Should it be "better" by blindly implementing whatever Google throws over the wall and gullible developers eat up as if it was heavenly manna? No.

> Then the next step is to discuss potential solutions.

Breaking the web forward: https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/08/breaking_th...

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31895335