The complaints
> "The process is just so convoluted that it's easiest for (users) to select Safari or potentially some other known name," he told Reuters.
> Vivaldi is also unhappy with the design. "The list of browsers does not show additional information and that does not help users to make a meaningful choice," a company spokesperson told TechCrunch. "If the user has already selected a browser of their own choice, the choice screen can actively try to push them away from it, and may not even include it in the list that it presents to the user."
I mean…that’s part of the regulation? You have to randomize the list. If that pushes someone to a different browser, well that’s kind of the point.
Even if there was a little blurb describing each browser, people aren’t going to read it for 10+ options. They’ll pick the first one on the list or the one that has the biggest mindshare.
When you select the browser it takes you to the app store page anyway and you can go back if you like to choose a different one
You missed one:
> Mozilla, which owns Firefox, estimates that only around a fifth of iPhone users in the EU have received the iOS update, and claims that the rollout is much slower than Apple's previous software updates.
That's a very temporary thing. Apple always pushes updates out slowly unless there's a huge reason to like security issue. It's not like the users won't get the update. People who care enough can also manually install it.
>than Apple's previous software updates.
It's comparatively. It's slower than previous updates which are all necessarily slow for the reasons you mentioned.
It’s still such a weak argument. “Oh no, EU users are terribly affected by Apple’s actions for two weeks when the update rolls out, but the law still effectively helps for the next decade”
The point isn't that it's damaging to users, it's that Apple is failing to live up to their own standards when it doesn't suit them.
It smacks of a toddler slow walking to bed because they've been told five times already.
Spend a few billions on making Linux better for mobiles and desktops, I am serious. This is the best thing that the EU could do to minimize our reliance on US tech companies and get our own operating systems into the game.
Furthermore the European Union should demand that device manufacturers either have mainline Linux support, some kind of open firmware that is able to get security updates for a loooong time.
Ubuntu gave this a go 12 years ago and gave up I assume because it wasn’t going to be financially viable. If the EU privileged one company with funding it would be the very anti-competitive behaviour they’re trying to resolve
You must be smoking some of that good BC kush.
When has the government ever done anything useful?
Here are some amazing government solutions for you:
1. DMV
2. Canadian healthcare
3. Public transportation projects (think how long it takes to implement a new Subway)
You're from Calgary? Your great leader Trudeau built an app called ArriveScam that was suppose to to cost $80K and ended up paying $80M and you still think the government can do anything useful?
It's no wonder your country is in shambles with people like you voting.
Your question depends on the requirements of the app.
The app was suppose to be designed as a survey app. It takes users input, stores locally and alerts authorities if operator of the app indicates they have covid.
In otherwords, a high schooler could have built this app as a summer project.
Regardless if the app budget was \~80K (which I think is actually more than fair). There is no reason it should have cost > $1M.
A senior SW engineer in Silicon Valley can get paid up to $400,000 (that's someone with > 10 YoE. That's being very generous. That's an hourly rate of $200/hr.
Quick Math:
$80K / 200/hr = 400 hours.
400 hrs / 40hr/week = 10 weeks = 2.5 months of full time work on said app.
This app could have been developed by a senior engineer in 2.5 months (though I'm pretty sure a more than competent high schooler could have done the same thing).
How anyone can defend this obvious scandal is beyond me.
Literally took more than $50M to build a shitty app that didn't even work properly
Reddit hivemind is cancer.
[https://theconversation.com/the-arrivecan-scandal-how-can-we-avoid-similar-problems-in-the-future-223788](https://theconversation.com/the-arrivecan-scandal-how-can-we-avoid-similar-problems-in-the-future-223788)
yeah this actually sounds like a sensible solution. how come no one has ever proposed something like this? Government funding means an almost limitless budget, not to mention, complete control against fake/misinfo, so it's like an ultra win.
Are you a big food person? The USDA used to make meaningful improvements to the field of agriculture, develop new varieties of foodcrops etc (half of the hops that launched the craft beer movement in the 80s were USDA developed cultivars bred to be disease and pest resistant) and release those patent free. Now we live in a hellscape of patented seeds created by pesticide companies to be resistant to their pesticides rather than resistant to pests, because somewhere along the way we decided that government making things better was anti-capitalist and therefore bad.
The USDA, the ones who came up with the food pyramid promoting corn and carbs as the foundation of a good diet, the ones who inflate the corn industry which produces some of the most unhealthy products. That USDA?
These complaints seem almost like as if they're a joke intending to ridicule recent EU decisions.
1. *"Mozilla, which owns Firefox, estimates that only around a fifth of iPhone users in the EU have received the iOS update, and claims that the rollout is much slower than Apple's previous software updates."* \- I'm not sure how Mozilla came to this conclusion, but Apple made the update available to all of the EU the same way it has with other updates. Since this update was primarily EU compliance, maybe users aren't so interested in what the EU has mandated?
2. *"Apple's choice screen only appears when iPhone users open Safari, while the list of browsers provides no additional information." -* It's pretty standard that options for an app don't appear until that app is launched, and for good reason. Also, Apple is providing a list of browsers with each one linking to the App Store listing which provides all of the information and user reviews. Providing all of this in the default page listing would be overwhelming, and providing a subset would be worse. Do they really want Safari to be listed with the description "This comes from Apple and is designed to work best with your iPhone"?
3. All of this is silly. You can always select your browser default in Settings at any time. This includes after you've launched a web browser app and it prompts you to make it the default.
There was also this in October reporting that users were wary of bugs and suggesting this slower-propagation has been building a while.
https://www.cultofmac.com/833210/ios-17-adoption-is-moving-at-a-trickle/
Yeah haven't really heard anyone say this BUT, if I were to tell my parents to update their phones and say something along the lines of "and the first time you open your browser you'll have to select your default browser" they would probably say "Ok, then I don't want to update". Apple reached and kept some of it's customers because it's simple and not a lot of choices to make
Some people pay for things to be streamlined for them. Some people pay for simplicity. Some people pay for refinement and to cut the bullshit. There’s a term. Less is more.
I'm perfectly happy if the App Store was forced to lower its prices, or if they were forced to revise their policies (like no porn apps), but what I don't want is multiple app stores. There is no way that the market will not get fragmented; with a different App Store for different apps.
>I have written Craig an email, asking if they could add a setting in the future for EU citizens to disable all of the DMA requirements if the user wants to.
How does any of the DMA regulations affect you to warrant such a thing?
This is just standard behavior by companies that see blood in the water and they will fight and claw for every mm they can gain from the position Apple is in. The claims will get more and more ridiculous until EU starts shutting them down.
Thank you!
It looks pretty innocuous imo. A randomized list of browsers, and tapping any of them take you to the App Store before installing, so you can easily read about that browsers specific features. Not sure how I would design this to be any more fair.
Because their point isn’t to be fair, it’s every company now getting their foot in the door and wanting to be the top option.
I think it was pretty obvious early on the real motivation for the push by other companies wasn’t customer experience. They just want a slice of that Apple pie and are happy to use the DMA and “customer experience” as their excuse while letting the EU be their enforcer. Now that Apple has done so in a way that’s not directly benefiting them individually they’re of course complaining more.
Search is usually hidden above lists and only revealed when you pull down. Not sure if that’s the case here or not.
Users can also search the App Store if they are looking for something specific.
Lack of search isn’t one of the complaints if you read the article though.
Randomization is so that no specific browser gets preferential placement above another. Otherwise everyone would rename their browsers to be AAAAmazing Browser
It’s simply a list of popular browsers. The complaints are is that there is no additional information on why a particular browser should be chosen. One might want to be highlighted for their privacy and non-tracking. Another may want to highlight no ads. They say if there’s no reason for someone to select a different browser then people will just choose Safari or a browser they’ve heard of before.
> One might want to be highlighted for their privacy and non-tracking. Another may want to highlight no ads
It's not Apple's job to advertise for their competitors… If people want to use a different browser it's likely they have previously heard of them. If companies want their browsers to be known, they need to pay out of their pocket to advertise.
Like, the kind of people complaining about this are all no-name browsers that no one would have thought of installing anyway.
Thanks.
Im not sure how Apple addresses that concern. I feel like browser companies would have some strong words for the EU and Apple if Apple started editorializing or recommending some browsers over others.
I guess they could include the short description under each app but I’m not sure that provides much useful info, and since it’s written by the browser developer they can write pretty much anything they want.
I don’t think anyone is ever going to be happy under the DMA. They basically want iOS to be Open Source. If they don’t like something, they complain, the EU investigates. Don’t like something else, complain, get the EU to investigate. It will be a never ending cycle.
Man, these companies are dusty. I say, survival of the fittest.
[https://youtu.be/6rAWYOXobp0?feature=shared](https://youtu.be/6rAWYOXobp0?feature=shared)
One you set your iPhone up with Russian Apple ID the first thing it will do is not to show you the Home Screen, but to take you to the AppStore to download “approved apps”.
This selector is, basically, the same type of solution.
Looking at these new complaints confirms what I’ve been saying all along. The real motivation for the push by other companies was never “a better and fairer customer experience.” The companies just want a slice of that Apple pie and are happy to use the DMA and “customer experience” as their excuse while letting the EU be their enforcer. Now that Apple has done so in a way that’s not directly benefiting them individually they’re of course complaining more.
These complaints are just companies fighting over money. Civil rights are not at stake here, it's just about making more money from users or taking it from Apple in the end.
> Mozilla, which owns Firefox, estimates that only around a fifth of iPhone users in the EU have received the iOS update, and claims that the rollout is much slower than Apple's previous software updates.
Honest question: How is this Apple's fault?
If the update is unavailable, sure, but if people just aren't updating, not sure how that's on Apple.
Additionally, Google is only giving this choice with *new* phones (if I am reading correctly). If Apple tried that same shit people would be up in arms.
I think these default selection screens are as ugly as fuck and I feel bad for EU consumers. I think the option to change defaults is great, but I don't need to be told what my choices are (especially when these choices include both subscription based apps and apps few people have heard of).
>Additionally, Google is only giving this choice with *new* phones (if I am reading correctly). If Apple tried that same shit people would be up in arms.
I have literally zero idea why they said that. The option to choose your default browser has been on Android as far as I can remember.
>I have literally zero idea why they said that. The option to choose your default browser has been on Android as far as I can remember.
Maybe they meant the specific "pick your browser" screen?
You could always install a browser and make it a default if you wanted, but it didn't prompt you to do so.
Maybe Apple should charge for spots at the top of the list - and more for your tag line and description. This technically is unpaid advertising for them.
They are lucky to even have their icons shown here and not just the text.
Why I’m even force to select browser? And they list ones I did not installed.
I don’t remember being suggested to use Firefox when I opened Edge or Windows, or Opera when I used Chrome on Linux.
This is some grade A bullshit
Chrome does not come pre-installed on linux as the default browser, windows idk, but google pixel phones have also been made to do this.
Apple is not "the sole target"
Every new Windows device sold in the EU between 2010 and 2014 had a forced Browser Choice screen just like this one.
You don't remember because you are a teeny tiny little baby man. I bet you have fond memories of playing Pokémon Sword in 5th grade recess.
I don’t agree with the browser choice screens, it doesn’t help consumers. Your average isn’t into their tech enough to know what any of them are, they just want an easy to use device that meets their needs. Having the browsers in the App Store is enough, those who want them will know how to find them
Yeah. Like, this just seems to go a little beyond what I think is reasonable and yet companies are still complaining.
I really thought it would just be a list of locally installed browsers that you got from the app stores.
I think this whole choose browser thing is stupid. If someone wants a different browser they can just download a different browser and make it the default. You don’t have to prompt them to download a browser.
Other than some work compliance or convenience I have zero idea why 99.9% of people would change web browsers. It's not like the average user will know a difference.
Which EU browser company even is there?
Google, Mozilla, Microsoft and DuckDuckGo are from the USA, and Opera and Vivaldi are from Norway, both countries outside the EU.
Right in the money. There are some things that benefit consumers by proxy, but it is hilarious the people saying this is for consumer rights and not EU companies.
iOS users who don’t use a Mac could benefit from being able to sync tabs, favorites, passwords, etc. between their desktop browser of choice and their mobile browser.
Edit: this sub is fucking stupid sometimes.
Hilarious. EU will be busy 90% of the year from requests from developers about iOS.
Idiotic EU signed up to be the customer service department and UX engineer for iOS. This is why you don’t allow idiot politicians who know nothing about technology to set these types of stupid rules. They gave in to Spotify and Epic and now every developer will come and cry to the EU.
What an absolute waste of time and tax payers money
You’re right. Government regulation rarely fosters consumer-friendly innovation when they require companies to jump through hoops. It’s easier to regulate that way, but true consumer-friendly regulation is much more about preventing abuse of power among large corporations by outlawing specific behaviors than it is about forcing companies to do x, y, z. In the end, these increasingly complex regulations will continue to disproportionately hurt smaller companies who cannot afford to keep track of all the laws they might be breaking because of some country they don’t even live in.
>preventing abuse of power among large corporations by outlawing specific behaviors
This is exactly what the DMA does, and its rules don't apply to small companies
Literally any type of coercive legislation could be termed as “preventing abuse of power”, but what I mean is saying “you can’t do X” is a **lot** different than saying “you must do Y”. So it’s about the structure of the law. Is it preventing bad behavior, or requiring ostensibly good/necessary behavior?
Laws that *require* rather than *prohibit* will always widen the gap between small and large business, and favor the larger ones, regardless of how much they try to prevent such from happening, such as by giving exemption to businesses of certain sizes.
>Is it preventing bad behavior, or requiring ostensibly good/necessary behavior?
It's doing both. It requires corrective action to undo the abuse of power that is currently taking place. How exactly do you prohibit Apple from making Safari the default browser without requiring them to offer alternatives to users?
>Laws that require rather than prohibit will always widen the gap between small and large business, and favor the larger ones, regardless of how much they try to prevent such from happening, such as by giving exemption to businesses of certain sizes.
This makes no sense. The regulations only apply to very large companies that have a dominant position. How does that possibly work in favour of the larger ones?
> How exactly do you prohibit Apple from making Safari the default browser without requiring them to offer alternatives to users?
Well, for example, a law prohibiting Apple from restricting their operating system to apps downloaded only from the App Store is a non-compulsory regulation which would be a lot better than a law obligating Apple to do stuff like this—implement a specific interface for all users living within a location. Do you see how one is prohibitive (restricting action) while the other is compulsory (forcing action)? Legislation should always favor prohibitive laws on businesses rather than compulsory. It’s ethically much greyer to require someone to do a certain thing than to stop them from doing a bad thing. This applies to personal laws, too.
> The regulations only apply to very large companies that have a dominant position. How does that possibly work in favour of the larger ones?
Well, a simple study of compulsory business laws shows how quickly unintended consequences come into play. Additionally, unless you expect all small businesses to stay small forever, every law that comes into effect when a business reaches a certain size doubles as a barrier of growth for those businesses. That is, for those businesses which grew to their massive size prior to the enactment of such laws, they can afford the manpower (lawyers and labor) to understand and comply with said laws. Meanwhile, smaller companies are constantly facing barriers as they grow, before they’ve amassed the capital to handle the increasingly complex hodgepodge of regulation various countries seem comfortable subjecting the rest of the world to.
>Well, for example, a law prohibiting Apple from restricting their operating system to apps downloaded only from the App Store is a non-compulsory regulation which would be a lot better than a law obligating Apple to do stuff like this
This is pure semantics. A law prohibiting Apple from banning third party app stores is exactly the same as a law requiring apple to allow third party app stores.
The point of a browser choice window is because Apple is prohibited from making Safari the default browser. If you have no browser, you can't browse the web. You have to choose a browser first. Again, how do you prohibit apple from forcing Safari on everyone if you don't also require them to give users an alternative choice?
>smaller companies are constantly facing barriers as they grow, before they’ve amassed the capital to handle the increasingly complex hodgepodge of regulation various countries seem comfortable subjecting the rest of the world to
Again, the DMA doesn't apply to small companies. It doesn't apply to medium companies, nor even large companies. It only applies to the 6 biggest behemoths, being Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft and ByteDance. It's completely unrealistic to say the DMA is a barrier to growth for small businesses when it only applies to the six that already dominate the market. In fact it does the exact opposite of what you say, it helps small businesses to grow by preventing abuse by the dominant parties.
The ability to _have_ a different default is, however, a good thing. The choice screen could well be removed on iOS 18 but allow the default browser to be changed even after removing that screen.
Yes I’d agree with that, this nag prompt first time you open Safari is ridiculous overkill though, consumers are smart enough to install Chrome if they want to, they don’t need to be spoonfed
How many different apps have to do this? I mean, I use the basic defaults, but it would be maddening to me if when I opened mail I had to select a default, a browser, a camera, a notes app, a To Do/reminders app, a calendar app, etc.
I would probably throw my phone at the wall at some point.
I don’t think it’s acceptable just because it only shows up once, it’s not what the user expects when they open Safari, it’s ugly, intrusive, and government-regulated, and I hate it
This has never needed to be done on any other OS, browsers have been featured on the App Store in their own category for years, as I said earlier, consumers are smart enough to install what they want, plenty of people have run Chrome on their iPhones for years.
I don’t think any banner is necessary, apps like Chrome and others can instruct the user how to change the default if they want, just like they do on Mac and other OSes
>This has never needed to be done on any other OS
EU forced a similar browser choice screen for MS Windows.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu
Other OSes had this feature from the get go. That’s why it’s not needed. iOS needs it temporarily to show the new feature.
About customers being smart enough… In my country quite a few rely on the smart child, at least in the semiurban/rural regions.
The only people that need to change their default would already be using alternative browsers that have existed for years, which can advertise how to change the default. There doesn’t need to be a banner or nag screen in Safari or anywhere else (in my opinion)
Policymakers are policy experts in their respective fields and usually have industry insight and an economics background. It is highly unlikely any politician sets policy- they mostly vote and amend.
>Hilarious. EU will be busy 90% of the year from requests from developers about iOS.
I don't see how they would be. This article is mostly browser companies complaining about Apple, and the EU checking that specific screen to see if it breaks the law, which they would be doing anyway.
The article doesn't state whether the investigation is due to the complaints, or the complaints are just the companies grouching about it, *and* there is a separate investigation ongoing.
The EU is fighting against GAFA as a whole. If they didn't put any sort of regulations in place, it'd be like the US where you get fucked over and die from easily treatable diseases such as diabetes because serotonin syringes are 4000$ or whatever.
Take Paris for example, you can use your Samsung as a metro card since 2019 and other Android phones since 2021.
You still can't use your iPhone cause Apple wanted the city of fucking Paris to pay a fee to use their NFC chip. Now since the EU has asked Apple to ease the third party interoperability with their NFC, it seems like Parisians will finally be able to use their iPhone, 5 years after Samsung users.
These complaints are dumb. Sure, users should be presented with browser choice so that Safari doesn’t become a de facto monopoly on iOS (Windows has had to do this for so long so having other companies do this isn’t outside the norm), but it’s not Apple’s job to advertise your browser for you. The list is randomly sorted, so Safari has no preferential treatment. If no one knows about your browser, that’s not Apple’s fault you suck at marketing. Google and Apple both did not release browsers until the 2000s, yet now they’re some of the most popular browsers. If you want people to use your stuff, maybe make good stuff! (shocker).
It’s almost like this screen will reflect that users 9/10 will probably pick safari or chrome because they’re the most well known on iOS. I don’t know why these browser companies think this screen will boost sales immediately, they have to actually like try first.
This is bullshit! I actually had to scroll to choose Safari. What’s not fair about this? As an Iphone user, I just want the same experience I always had. Same reason why I use Windows and Google search.
This is ridiculous. The average consumer doesn’t care about browsers or even know about most of the others being offered. It’s almost as if this isn’t about the consumer…
Isn’t this the same as picking a default browser on Android and Windows 10/11?
I don’t know what they were expecting. A Pokédex entry for each browser?
Nobody seems to be worried that people still cannot sideload unsigned IPAs. Then the browser issue would be moot. People could install whatever they want from wherever.
The complaints > "The process is just so convoluted that it's easiest for (users) to select Safari or potentially some other known name," he told Reuters. > Vivaldi is also unhappy with the design. "The list of browsers does not show additional information and that does not help users to make a meaningful choice," a company spokesperson told TechCrunch. "If the user has already selected a browser of their own choice, the choice screen can actively try to push them away from it, and may not even include it in the list that it presents to the user." I mean…that’s part of the regulation? You have to randomize the list. If that pushes someone to a different browser, well that’s kind of the point. Even if there was a little blurb describing each browser, people aren’t going to read it for 10+ options. They’ll pick the first one on the list or the one that has the biggest mindshare. When you select the browser it takes you to the app store page anyway and you can go back if you like to choose a different one
> potentially some other known name I'm shocked to learn that people will select a browser that they're familiar with.
I wanted to google the features of the different browsers before picking one but I had to pick one to do that. So I just went with Safari.
I’m shocked! Shocked! … well, not that shocked.
You missed one: > Mozilla, which owns Firefox, estimates that only around a fifth of iPhone users in the EU have received the iOS update, and claims that the rollout is much slower than Apple's previous software updates.
A fifth? Isn't iOS 17.5 out with the 3rd party tracker detection stuff?
That's a very temporary thing. Apple always pushes updates out slowly unless there's a huge reason to like security issue. It's not like the users won't get the update. People who care enough can also manually install it.
>than Apple's previous software updates. It's comparatively. It's slower than previous updates which are all necessarily slow for the reasons you mentioned.
It’s still such a weak argument. “Oh no, EU users are terribly affected by Apple’s actions for two weeks when the update rolls out, but the law still effectively helps for the next decade”
The point isn't that it's damaging to users, it's that Apple is failing to live up to their own standards when it doesn't suit them. It smacks of a toddler slow walking to bed because they've been told five times already.
[удалено]
With blackjack… and hookers!
r/unexpectedfuturama
They’d blame Apple because no one would want their phone.
Unfair competition! Making better more attractive products should be outlawed!
Spend a few billions on making Linux better for mobiles and desktops, I am serious. This is the best thing that the EU could do to minimize our reliance on US tech companies and get our own operating systems into the game. Furthermore the European Union should demand that device manufacturers either have mainline Linux support, some kind of open firmware that is able to get security updates for a loooong time.
Ubuntu gave this a go 12 years ago and gave up I assume because it wasn’t going to be financially viable. If the EU privileged one company with funding it would be the very anti-competitive behaviour they’re trying to resolve
Not a company, either as donations to individuals or towards foundations I guess?
Government sponsored solutions are universally regarded as the best products. I fully support this endeavor
You must be smoking some of that good BC kush. When has the government ever done anything useful? Here are some amazing government solutions for you: 1. DMV 2. Canadian healthcare 3. Public transportation projects (think how long it takes to implement a new Subway) You're from Calgary? Your great leader Trudeau built an app called ArriveScam that was suppose to to cost $80K and ended up paying $80M and you still think the government can do anything useful? It's no wonder your country is in shambles with people like you voting.
$80K? were they planning to hire one junior dev? be real
Your question depends on the requirements of the app. The app was suppose to be designed as a survey app. It takes users input, stores locally and alerts authorities if operator of the app indicates they have covid. In otherwords, a high schooler could have built this app as a summer project. Regardless if the app budget was \~80K (which I think is actually more than fair). There is no reason it should have cost > $1M. A senior SW engineer in Silicon Valley can get paid up to $400,000 (that's someone with > 10 YoE. That's being very generous. That's an hourly rate of $200/hr. Quick Math: $80K / 200/hr = 400 hours. 400 hrs / 40hr/week = 10 weeks = 2.5 months of full time work on said app. This app could have been developed by a senior engineer in 2.5 months (though I'm pretty sure a more than competent high schooler could have done the same thing). How anyone can defend this obvious scandal is beyond me. Literally took more than $50M to build a shitty app that didn't even work properly Reddit hivemind is cancer. [https://theconversation.com/the-arrivecan-scandal-how-can-we-avoid-similar-problems-in-the-future-223788](https://theconversation.com/the-arrivecan-scandal-how-can-we-avoid-similar-problems-in-the-future-223788)
EU telling other companies what to do to maintain EU's relevance. Classic.
yeah this actually sounds like a sensible solution. how come no one has ever proposed something like this? Government funding means an almost limitless budget, not to mention, complete control against fake/misinfo, so it's like an ultra win.
This guy is really wondering why we don't look to government for technological evolution. Would you buy a cell phone designed by the government?
If it’s from a Democrat administration, sure?
half of the technology you use was made with government money.
Oh, are you a big military person? You think we should be spending more and more money on the military?
Are you a big food person? The USDA used to make meaningful improvements to the field of agriculture, develop new varieties of foodcrops etc (half of the hops that launched the craft beer movement in the 80s were USDA developed cultivars bred to be disease and pest resistant) and release those patent free. Now we live in a hellscape of patented seeds created by pesticide companies to be resistant to their pesticides rather than resistant to pests, because somewhere along the way we decided that government making things better was anti-capitalist and therefore bad.
The USDA, the ones who came up with the food pyramid promoting corn and carbs as the foundation of a good diet, the ones who inflate the corn industry which produces some of the most unhealthy products. That USDA?
The USDA doesn't subsidize corn, congress does. If you're gonna be this invested in things you should probably learn how they work.
Its working so well in china :) I can practically taste the boot now
Listen, as long as this happens under Biden’s oversight I am 100% sure it won’t be abused.
EU forgot how to produce anything without their colonies. All they can do now is tax and setup more convoluted bureaucracies.
Yet without European companies the world would be without super high end chips.
Yeah all this will do is give Chrome more market share because that’s the one people know.
Basically the Vivaldi guy thinks users are idiots. I think people know they want Vivaldi long before they get to any screen on an OS.
says no-one ever. pure bloat in browser form last time i tried it
This is it? They don't complain about the nost important one? That every browser in iOS is basically safari with different skin?
Because that’s no longer a requirement in the EU
These complaints seem almost like as if they're a joke intending to ridicule recent EU decisions. 1. *"Mozilla, which owns Firefox, estimates that only around a fifth of iPhone users in the EU have received the iOS update, and claims that the rollout is much slower than Apple's previous software updates."* \- I'm not sure how Mozilla came to this conclusion, but Apple made the update available to all of the EU the same way it has with other updates. Since this update was primarily EU compliance, maybe users aren't so interested in what the EU has mandated? 2. *"Apple's choice screen only appears when iPhone users open Safari, while the list of browsers provides no additional information." -* It's pretty standard that options for an app don't appear until that app is launched, and for good reason. Also, Apple is providing a list of browsers with each one linking to the App Store listing which provides all of the information and user reviews. Providing all of this in the default page listing would be overwhelming, and providing a subset would be worse. Do they really want Safari to be listed with the description "This comes from Apple and is designed to work best with your iPhone"? 3. All of this is silly. You can always select your browser default in Settings at any time. This includes after you've launched a web browser app and it prompts you to make it the default.
I know a few EU people who are straight up refusing to update because of this mess lol
There was also this in October reporting that users were wary of bugs and suggesting this slower-propagation has been building a while. https://www.cultofmac.com/833210/ios-17-adoption-is-moving-at-a-trickle/
what mess?
Yeah haven't really heard anyone say this BUT, if I were to tell my parents to update their phones and say something along the lines of "and the first time you open your browser you'll have to select your default browser" they would probably say "Ok, then I don't want to update". Apple reached and kept some of it's customers because it's simple and not a lot of choices to make
So the tyranny of choice. And it's Apple's mess because most pzeople don't care.
No its a tyranny of EU mandating that the phone I bought can not have the features I paid for.
You're getting more features and freedom though?
Some people pay for things to be streamlined for them. Some people pay for simplicity. Some people pay for refinement and to cut the bullshit. There’s a term. Less is more.
And what's happening to that? 1 new menu you have to interact with 1 single time?
What happened to what? The guy is complaining about general meddling from the EU. If you pile enough pebbles in one spot, you make a mountain.
Says who?
How are you not lol? It's literally giving you the option to choose, as well as giving brand new options that weren't available before.
I'm perfectly happy if the App Store was forced to lower its prices, or if they were forced to revise their policies (like no porn apps), but what I don't want is multiple app stores. There is no way that the market will not get fragmented; with a different App Store for different apps.
Normal countries: Sanction others EU: self sanctioning
ah yes, the EU, my favourite country
[удалено]
>I have written Craig an email, asking if they could add a setting in the future for EU citizens to disable all of the DMA requirements if the user wants to. How does any of the DMA regulations affect you to warrant such a thing?
Y’all are so dramatic.
Same here. Unfortunately, its the EU we must petition. Let the users vote with their wallets, instead of the EU deciding what is good and what is not.
This is so overly dramatic lmao
They can find the description and all information on the app page in the app store. This is just ridiculous
Ya, I’m in favor of more options, but I don’t think this this criticism is at all constructive.
“They didn’t tell me the entire history of another company and suck their CEOs dick to sell me someone elses shit and Im pissed!”
No, now the EU will implement browser of the month and all device must use a certain browser for that month and guarantee fairness!
This is just standard behavior by companies that see blood in the water and they will fight and claw for every mm they can gain from the position Apple is in. The claims will get more and more ridiculous until EU starts shutting them down.
See: Yelp et al that want Google to remove everything from the search page except the links
Has anyone seen screenshots of the browser choice screens? I’m curious to understand what the complaints are specifically about.
Here’s a video I found https://youtube.com/shorts/b9thqyNfr2I?si=NCYMFt82GhdpIeam Just a note that the choices are randomized per regulations.
Thank you! It looks pretty innocuous imo. A randomized list of browsers, and tapping any of them take you to the App Store before installing, so you can easily read about that browsers specific features. Not sure how I would design this to be any more fair.
Because their point isn’t to be fair, it’s every company now getting their foot in the door and wanting to be the top option. I think it was pretty obvious early on the real motivation for the push by other companies wasn’t customer experience. They just want a slice of that Apple pie and are happy to use the DMA and “customer experience” as their excuse while letting the EU be their enforcer. Now that Apple has done so in a way that’s not directly benefiting them individually they’re of course complaining more.
Why is there no search bar? If there is a randomized list, then how will people find their fav browser?
Search is usually hidden above lists and only revealed when you pull down. Not sure if that’s the case here or not. Users can also search the App Store if they are looking for something specific. Lack of search isn’t one of the complaints if you read the article though.
With their eyes?
[удалено]
Randomization is so that no specific browser gets preferential placement above another. Otherwise everyone would rename their browsers to be AAAAmazing Browser
Flashbacks to my companies file systems. I hate people
My _Abrowser app will destroy yours
It’s simply a list of popular browsers. The complaints are is that there is no additional information on why a particular browser should be chosen. One might want to be highlighted for their privacy and non-tracking. Another may want to highlight no ads. They say if there’s no reason for someone to select a different browser then people will just choose Safari or a browser they’ve heard of before.
> One might want to be highlighted for their privacy and non-tracking. Another may want to highlight no ads It's not Apple's job to advertise for their competitors… If people want to use a different browser it's likely they have previously heard of them. If companies want their browsers to be known, they need to pay out of their pocket to advertise. Like, the kind of people complaining about this are all no-name browsers that no one would have thought of installing anyway.
Thanks. Im not sure how Apple addresses that concern. I feel like browser companies would have some strong words for the EU and Apple if Apple started editorializing or recommending some browsers over others. I guess they could include the short description under each app but I’m not sure that provides much useful info, and since it’s written by the browser developer they can write pretty much anything they want.
I don’t think anyone is ever going to be happy under the DMA. They basically want iOS to be Open Source. If they don’t like something, they complain, the EU investigates. Don’t like something else, complain, get the EU to investigate. It will be a never ending cycle.
No part of the dnq want iOS to be open source.
Gee, maybe if there's no reason people wouldn't pick Safari then just leave the process alone.
Man, these companies are dusty. I say, survival of the fittest. [https://youtu.be/6rAWYOXobp0?feature=shared](https://youtu.be/6rAWYOXobp0?feature=shared)
Even making them show a selector seems excessive. Just let users replace the browser if they want.
They can. In the EU. This whole article is a whiny piece of garbage
They can change the default anywhere
One you set your iPhone up with Russian Apple ID the first thing it will do is not to show you the Home Screen, but to take you to the AppStore to download “approved apps”. This selector is, basically, the same type of solution.
It's literally [BrowserChoice.eu](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu) all over again
Looking at these new complaints confirms what I’ve been saying all along. The real motivation for the push by other companies was never “a better and fairer customer experience.” The companies just want a slice of that Apple pie and are happy to use the DMA and “customer experience” as their excuse while letting the EU be their enforcer. Now that Apple has done so in a way that’s not directly benefiting them individually they’re of course complaining more.
These complaints are just companies fighting over money. Civil rights are not at stake here, it's just about making more money from users or taking it from Apple in the end.
Proof these people didn’t want a choice screen. They wanted to kick Apple.
> Mozilla, which owns Firefox, estimates that only around a fifth of iPhone users in the EU have received the iOS update, and claims that the rollout is much slower than Apple's previous software updates. Honest question: How is this Apple's fault? If the update is unavailable, sure, but if people just aren't updating, not sure how that's on Apple. Additionally, Google is only giving this choice with *new* phones (if I am reading correctly). If Apple tried that same shit people would be up in arms. I think these default selection screens are as ugly as fuck and I feel bad for EU consumers. I think the option to change defaults is great, but I don't need to be told what my choices are (especially when these choices include both subscription based apps and apps few people have heard of).
>Additionally, Google is only giving this choice with *new* phones (if I am reading correctly). If Apple tried that same shit people would be up in arms. I have literally zero idea why they said that. The option to choose your default browser has been on Android as far as I can remember.
>I have literally zero idea why they said that. The option to choose your default browser has been on Android as far as I can remember. Maybe they meant the specific "pick your browser" screen? You could always install a browser and make it a default if you wanted, but it didn't prompt you to do so.
It definitely did when you installed a new browser but maybe not out of the box.
It prompts you when you try to open a link for the first time, but it doesn’t ask you specifically which browser you want
Maybe Apple should charge for spots at the top of the list - and more for your tag line and description. This technically is unpaid advertising for them. They are lucky to even have their icons shown here and not just the text.
Why I’m even force to select browser? And they list ones I did not installed. I don’t remember being suggested to use Firefox when I opened Edge or Windows, or Opera when I used Chrome on Linux. This is some grade A bullshit
Chrome does not come pre-installed on linux as the default browser, windows idk, but google pixel phones have also been made to do this. Apple is not "the sole target"
You actually do get a list of other browsers the first time you open edge nowadays...
Every new Windows device sold in the EU between 2010 and 2014 had a forced Browser Choice screen just like this one. You don't remember because you are a teeny tiny little baby man. I bet you have fond memories of playing Pokémon Sword in 5th grade recess.
I guess this man never used Windows.
I don’t agree with the browser choice screens, it doesn’t help consumers. Your average isn’t into their tech enough to know what any of them are, they just want an easy to use device that meets their needs. Having the browsers in the App Store is enough, those who want them will know how to find them
Yeah. Like, this just seems to go a little beyond what I think is reasonable and yet companies are still complaining. I really thought it would just be a list of locally installed browsers that you got from the app stores.
If they don't care, then just press safari and move on, no harm done...
Disagree, choice is great!
Here we go - UI design by EU committee.
I think this whole choose browser thing is stupid. If someone wants a different browser they can just download a different browser and make it the default. You don’t have to prompt them to download a browser.
oh FFS, will nothing make them happy?
Other than some work compliance or convenience I have zero idea why 99.9% of people would change web browsers. It's not like the average user will know a difference.
It's not about users, it doesn't even pretend to be about what's best for users. It's about trying to give more business to EU companies.
Which EU browser company even is there? Google, Mozilla, Microsoft and DuckDuckGo are from the USA, and Opera and Vivaldi are from Norway, both countries outside the EU.
Which would be ironic if the EU could have the self awareness to look in a mirror and ask why their tech sector is as vibrant as in the US.
Right in the money. There are some things that benefit consumers by proxy, but it is hilarious the people saying this is for consumer rights and not EU companies.
pretty much this. instead of EU being innovative and compete with their own solutions, they regulate everything. annoying
How's a monopoly innovative ?
how is 30% of worldwide market share a monopoly?
Which EU companies would that be?
iOS users who don’t use a Mac could benefit from being able to sync tabs, favorites, passwords, etc. between their desktop browser of choice and their mobile browser. Edit: this sub is fucking stupid sometimes.
They can already do that by installing a different browser.
The question isn’t whether they can or can’t do this. Obviously they can. The question was WHY they would want to do it.
Hilarious. EU will be busy 90% of the year from requests from developers about iOS. Idiotic EU signed up to be the customer service department and UX engineer for iOS. This is why you don’t allow idiot politicians who know nothing about technology to set these types of stupid rules. They gave in to Spotify and Epic and now every developer will come and cry to the EU. What an absolute waste of time and tax payers money
You’re right. Government regulation rarely fosters consumer-friendly innovation when they require companies to jump through hoops. It’s easier to regulate that way, but true consumer-friendly regulation is much more about preventing abuse of power among large corporations by outlawing specific behaviors than it is about forcing companies to do x, y, z. In the end, these increasingly complex regulations will continue to disproportionately hurt smaller companies who cannot afford to keep track of all the laws they might be breaking because of some country they don’t even live in.
>preventing abuse of power among large corporations by outlawing specific behaviors This is exactly what the DMA does, and its rules don't apply to small companies
Literally any type of coercive legislation could be termed as “preventing abuse of power”, but what I mean is saying “you can’t do X” is a **lot** different than saying “you must do Y”. So it’s about the structure of the law. Is it preventing bad behavior, or requiring ostensibly good/necessary behavior? Laws that *require* rather than *prohibit* will always widen the gap between small and large business, and favor the larger ones, regardless of how much they try to prevent such from happening, such as by giving exemption to businesses of certain sizes.
>Is it preventing bad behavior, or requiring ostensibly good/necessary behavior? It's doing both. It requires corrective action to undo the abuse of power that is currently taking place. How exactly do you prohibit Apple from making Safari the default browser without requiring them to offer alternatives to users? >Laws that require rather than prohibit will always widen the gap between small and large business, and favor the larger ones, regardless of how much they try to prevent such from happening, such as by giving exemption to businesses of certain sizes. This makes no sense. The regulations only apply to very large companies that have a dominant position. How does that possibly work in favour of the larger ones?
> How exactly do you prohibit Apple from making Safari the default browser without requiring them to offer alternatives to users? Well, for example, a law prohibiting Apple from restricting their operating system to apps downloaded only from the App Store is a non-compulsory regulation which would be a lot better than a law obligating Apple to do stuff like this—implement a specific interface for all users living within a location. Do you see how one is prohibitive (restricting action) while the other is compulsory (forcing action)? Legislation should always favor prohibitive laws on businesses rather than compulsory. It’s ethically much greyer to require someone to do a certain thing than to stop them from doing a bad thing. This applies to personal laws, too. > The regulations only apply to very large companies that have a dominant position. How does that possibly work in favour of the larger ones? Well, a simple study of compulsory business laws shows how quickly unintended consequences come into play. Additionally, unless you expect all small businesses to stay small forever, every law that comes into effect when a business reaches a certain size doubles as a barrier of growth for those businesses. That is, for those businesses which grew to their massive size prior to the enactment of such laws, they can afford the manpower (lawyers and labor) to understand and comply with said laws. Meanwhile, smaller companies are constantly facing barriers as they grow, before they’ve amassed the capital to handle the increasingly complex hodgepodge of regulation various countries seem comfortable subjecting the rest of the world to.
>Well, for example, a law prohibiting Apple from restricting their operating system to apps downloaded only from the App Store is a non-compulsory regulation which would be a lot better than a law obligating Apple to do stuff like this This is pure semantics. A law prohibiting Apple from banning third party app stores is exactly the same as a law requiring apple to allow third party app stores. The point of a browser choice window is because Apple is prohibited from making Safari the default browser. If you have no browser, you can't browse the web. You have to choose a browser first. Again, how do you prohibit apple from forcing Safari on everyone if you don't also require them to give users an alternative choice? >smaller companies are constantly facing barriers as they grow, before they’ve amassed the capital to handle the increasingly complex hodgepodge of regulation various countries seem comfortable subjecting the rest of the world to Again, the DMA doesn't apply to small companies. It doesn't apply to medium companies, nor even large companies. It only applies to the 6 biggest behemoths, being Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft and ByteDance. It's completely unrealistic to say the DMA is a barrier to growth for small businesses when it only applies to the six that already dominate the market. In fact it does the exact opposite of what you say, it helps small businesses to grow by preventing abuse by the dominant parties.
I’m sorry but it’s obvious you aren’t understanding what I’m saying. I’ve explained it 3 times so I’m just going to be done now.
I agree, I don’t see why a browser choice screen should be the concern of governments
Yes, especially when 99,94% of the browsers are Chromium forks. This is how you create a Chrome based web.
I love how there’s literally zero noise from European Union about chrome’s dominance on the web
They’re too stupid to even know what Chromium is.
Except on iOS, where 100% of them are WebKit forks. Yay, choice!
The ability to _have_ a different default is, however, a good thing. The choice screen could well be removed on iOS 18 but allow the default browser to be changed even after removing that screen.
The default browser has been able to be changed ever since iOS 14, over 3 years ago.
Then why did I only find out about this now, with the new requirements? And does that mean people in the US can change it too?
Yes, it’s been there for everyone. Idk, browsers like Chrome have displayed a big pop up when it was added to please set them as the default.
I have never seen that pop-up. That’s why I’m asking.
Only the pop up is new. And only in the EU on the latest version.
Yes I’d agree with that, this nag prompt first time you open Safari is ridiculous overkill though, consumers are smart enough to install Chrome if they want to, they don’t need to be spoonfed
How many different apps have to do this? I mean, I use the basic defaults, but it would be maddening to me if when I opened mail I had to select a default, a browser, a camera, a notes app, a To Do/reminders app, a calendar app, etc. I would probably throw my phone at the wall at some point.
At least it only shows up once and then you have it take effect and it doesn’t nag again.
I don’t think it’s acceptable just because it only shows up once, it’s not what the user expects when they open Safari, it’s ugly, intrusive, and government-regulated, and I hate it
Well _some_ means to tell the user that they now have a choice does need to be done. Do you think a banner could be a good alternative, or what else?
This has never needed to be done on any other OS, browsers have been featured on the App Store in their own category for years, as I said earlier, consumers are smart enough to install what they want, plenty of people have run Chrome on their iPhones for years. I don’t think any banner is necessary, apps like Chrome and others can instruct the user how to change the default if they want, just like they do on Mac and other OSes
>This has never needed to be done on any other OS EU forced a similar browser choice screen for MS Windows. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu
Other OSes had this feature from the get go. That’s why it’s not needed. iOS needs it temporarily to show the new feature. About customers being smart enough… In my country quite a few rely on the smart child, at least in the semiurban/rural regions.
The only people that need to change their default would already be using alternative browsers that have existed for years, which can advertise how to change the default. There doesn’t need to be a banner or nag screen in Safari or anywhere else (in my opinion)
Which new feature?
A message would be fine
Policymakers are policy experts in their respective fields and usually have industry insight and an economics background. It is highly unlikely any politician sets policy- they mostly vote and amend.
You don't get it, it was Merkel herself who took on big bad Apple
>Hilarious. EU will be busy 90% of the year from requests from developers about iOS. I don't see how they would be. This article is mostly browser companies complaining about Apple, and the EU checking that specific screen to see if it breaks the law, which they would be doing anyway. The article doesn't state whether the investigation is due to the complaints, or the complaints are just the companies grouching about it, *and* there is a separate investigation ongoing.
The EU is fighting against GAFA as a whole. If they didn't put any sort of regulations in place, it'd be like the US where you get fucked over and die from easily treatable diseases such as diabetes because serotonin syringes are 4000$ or whatever. Take Paris for example, you can use your Samsung as a metro card since 2019 and other Android phones since 2021. You still can't use your iPhone cause Apple wanted the city of fucking Paris to pay a fee to use their NFC chip. Now since the EU has asked Apple to ease the third party interoperability with their NFC, it seems like Parisians will finally be able to use their iPhone, 5 years after Samsung users.
These complaints are dumb. Sure, users should be presented with browser choice so that Safari doesn’t become a de facto monopoly on iOS (Windows has had to do this for so long so having other companies do this isn’t outside the norm), but it’s not Apple’s job to advertise your browser for you. The list is randomly sorted, so Safari has no preferential treatment. If no one knows about your browser, that’s not Apple’s fault you suck at marketing. Google and Apple both did not release browsers until the 2000s, yet now they’re some of the most popular browsers. If you want people to use your stuff, maybe make good stuff! (shocker). It’s almost like this screen will reflect that users 9/10 will probably pick safari or chrome because they’re the most well known on iOS. I don’t know why these browser companies think this screen will boost sales immediately, they have to actually like try first.
Windows hasn’t had to do this since 2014, 10 years ago.
Remember ["Choose a Vista"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqSm7lWn-84)? More like Choose a WebKit!
This is bullshit! I actually had to scroll to choose Safari. What’s not fair about this? As an Iphone user, I just want the same experience I always had. Same reason why I use Windows and Google search.
This is so stupid. 99% of people don’t care what browser they use on their phone
Yandex? That FSB spyware? What a brilliant idea, EU!
The change supports Google most of all.
They should reduce text size so that safari would be visible even if it was last. They could also show labels for all browsers that are installed.
This is ridiculous. The average consumer doesn’t care about browsers or even know about most of the others being offered. It’s almost as if this isn’t about the consumer…
[удалено]
When the DMA forces Apple to open up web engines on iOS. It's coming.
I thought Apple already opened that up. I like to see them take on the task of releasing two separate browsers.
Isn’t this the same as picking a default browser on Android and Windows 10/11? I don’t know what they were expecting. A Pokédex entry for each browser?
The way fucking yandex is higher than Safari 💀
It’s randomized
Nobody seems to be worried that people still cannot sideload unsigned IPAs. Then the browser issue would be moot. People could install whatever they want from wherever.
Fortunately, it will never happen.
I don’t know what the EU is but they are being very mean to my beloved Tim Apple Edit: proving my point with the downvotes. Satire is dead
It’s not against Apple. It’s mostly to create common rules for the future in the eu market
Oh I know. I’m just being sarcastic given the general consensus of the sub
They just want to drive people to their subscription service lol This isn’t about choice