41–50 of 62 posts
Are people honestly surprised that companies being forced by the EU to give up parts of their competitive advantage would be maliciously compliant? That’s honestly baked into the regulatory system. Make better legislation next time LOL I stand with Apple here :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"nobody cares about PWAs" says commenter in reply to post that seems to care about PWAs also, I care about PWAs glad we could make your day by introducing you to something new I think if it were a viable option on an iphone, a nonzero number of people would choose the more privacy-preserving aspects of a PWA over installing a random app
> also, I care about PWAs / glad we could make your day by introducing you to something new As the creator of pwascore.com, I'm in your elite club of the teensy percentage of people who care about PWAs. > I think if it were a viable option on an iphone¹, a nonzero number of people² would choose the more privacy-preserving aspects of a PWA over installing a random app ¹They are, and ²they don't. It'd be nice to blame…
a) Native app: publish to App Store, make links on your website directly open the App Store page where the user can install your app
b) PWA: your app is usable directly on your website, but push notifications don't work unless your users add the page to their home screen. You can't have a button on your website to install it - you must instruct the user to navigate some Safari menus to find an option which is hidden *six* taps away
Do you think b) is a viable option? I don't, and I'm sure that's one of the reasons the tech industry is anti-PWA. It also doesn't help that Apple drags its feet with supporting new standards (web push only supported in iOS Safari from 2023, but 2016 in other browsers).
Are people honestly surprised that companies being forced by the EU to give up parts of their competitive advantage would be maliciously compliant? That’s honestly baked into the regulatory system. Make better legislation next time LOL I stand with Apple here :)
Why is it you feel the need to defend a trillion dollar company?
If you don't like how Apple conducts their business, you really should want clear, open discussion of flaws in EU regulations that make them not effective against Apple, rather than threads full of blaming Apple for reacting to the incentives in front of them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"nobody cares about PWAs" says commenter in reply to post that seems to care about PWAs also, I care about PWAs glad we could make your day by introducing you to something new I think if it were a viable option on an iphone, a nonzero number of people would choose the more privacy-preserving aspects of a PWA over installing a random app
This is completely illogical. There are a lot more dark pattern tracking that websites can do across websites than native apps without a user’s permission
I think it is a valid article but it tries very hard to ignore that it seems like at least 12 (21%) of the requests are currently in development at Apple. If all of them are medium/complex requests then they are all still within the advertised timeline. So yes, technically nothing was released yet but I read at least an implied suggestion that nothing will be, which does not look like a conclusion that can be drawn a…
First paragraph
> 56 interoperability requests under the Digital Markets Act have produced no concrete solutions by Apple,
The chart, stupidly created as a pie chart and with percentages rather than numbers: 21% of requests are in Phase III, ie implementation by Apple.
When liars make clear their intent is to deceive, the correct reaction is to ignore them entirely. You can fairly quibble about what requests are approved or not, but honest people fairly communicate the state of things.
"Interoperability only works when it is built into the platform from the start"
-- Lucas Lasota, FSFE Legal Programme Manager
To my mind, this is almost exactly opposite of true. Most new capabilities need to be incubated in private first, so that the APIs can get real-world usage and have a chance to evolve into a stable state before they become public interoperability promises.
TLA overload strikes again. Reading this after a day of fighting microcontrollers made me interpret the headline quite differently. Ignoring DMA requests and contradictory documentation sounded entirely on point.
"12 too long" might lead to acronyms.
would be nicer if they could say:
Apple ignores 56 interoperability requests under the Digital Markets Act, leaving third-party developers locked out of iOS and iPadOS.
So the solution is for Apple to offer Linux (or FreeBSD, etc.) as setup options for people who don't want to be locked into a proprietary, walled-garden, vertically integrated platform?
That is an interesting idea. Apple has some experience writing hardware drivers for other operating systems, as they did with the Boot Camp drivers for Windows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, the article does say that "When the DMA took effect, it expected gatekeepers like Apple to deliver interoperability by default [...] Instead, Apple created a request-based system where each developer must seek permission for specific features" and "the process can stretch across months or years before developers see any practical benefit, even though the underlying right to interoperability is alre…
the process can stretch across months or years before developers see any practical benefit, even though the underlying right to interoperability is already supposed to exist Not that I don’t think Apple is being petulant and maliciously compliant, but just because a politician passes a law declaring something to be so doesn’t mean that it is so. Apple built their platform for years assuming a lot of these things are…
Not surprised, I can't still install any app I want on an iPhone despite the DMA/DSA Acts pushing clearly in that direction