• No_Ones_Slick_Like_Gaston@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    3 months ago

    Oh true competition. Nice.

    It would be amazing knowing if as a tourist one can have access to a different browser in iPhone or sideload crazy apps that block ads without questioning.

    • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      If it’s anything like the EU setup, it’s based off of where your iCloud account is based out of. At least I think that was what it was last time I went looking.

      • vinnymac@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        3 months ago

        I wouldn’t call them different browsers, more like skins or “chrome”. All iOS browsers are built on Apple WebKit. This essentially makes all of them reskinned versions of Safari.

        Sure they may have some clever UI, accessibility, or platform specific functionality. But they are nothing like any of those browsers on other operating systems.

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        They still all use the safari engine though, unless something has changed and I missed it.

        • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          No, and it’s annoying because Safari’s extensions I’ll let you install ad blockers, but they won’t work on Firefox even though it’s still Safari

  • namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    3 months ago

    Cupertino has complied anyway, and said it introduced “Notarization for iOS apps, an authorization process for app marketplaces, and requirements that help protect children from inappropriate content and scams.”

    Notarization requirements mean that they still maintain total control over the operating system and what software it can run. These kinds of onerous requirements keep the bar artificially high for competitors and are only possible because they are still enforcing their monopolistic control over the platform.

    So no, they’re not complying at all actually. They’re just doing the same thing in a different way.

    • Onion@l.hostux.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      The article doesn’t go into detail about how the notarization works. I would hope that users can choose to only use notorized apps, or accept the risk.

  • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t want a device that requires the manufacturer to allow me to use it.

  • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    … and it destroyed their company right? Their entire business model broke down and it impacted the security of their customers who complained constantly about the decision. Right?

    Right?

  • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    So what alternative apps stores are there? Is there any other app store for Android that lets developers charge users for the app? Samsung’s Galaxy Store I guess? Anything for iPhone?