I don't get the point of 3rd party browsers on iOS. When Apple doesn't allow vendors to use their own engines. I think Apple should be taken to court over that matter. Safari on iOS is the same as IE on Windows in the early noughts. If Apple could grant Uber privileged API access, i'm sure they can give Mozilla and Google the same permissions to build independent browsers on iOS.
The rendering engine is, to most non-geek users, the least important part of the browser. Third party browsers can do many things differently, including a different UI (say address bar at bottom), different interactions like gestures, different privacy enhancements (like the very article you're commenting on), different management of credentials and cookies, synchronization of open tabs and bookmarks with desktop browsers, feature addons like integrated RSS. Even among geeks who care about the implementation details there can still be differences in parts other than the rendering engine, such as the network stack (Chrome on iOS uses a different TLS stack for example).
> I think Apple should be taken to court over that matter. Safari on iOS is the same as IE on Windows in the early noughts.
The law you’re referring to is “using a monopoly in one area to gain an advantage in another.” Crucial word being: monopoly. iOS is not a monopoly in the mobile market. Windows had 300 000% of the market, iOS has around… 20% worldwide? Let’s be generous and double it to 40%: still a far cry from a monopoly.
Whether iOS is a legal monopoly does not depend on market share in a common descriptive market segment, but instead in whether it in fact has market (pricing) power; that is, an antitrust market is in effect defined by where substitution actually occurs with price changes, not on how media/analysts describe markets based on product characteristics.
> Although in this particular case: seems like it would still not qualify iOS as a monopoly?
Maybe. Market / pricing power is not sinple to assess, and I'm not sure if device / OS side or the application distribution side is most relevant to the browser bundling decision. I'd say it' seems to me more likely that the Apple has pricing power in the App Store that in iOS devices (it doesn't sell iOS as such, so that's probably not the thing to look at), and either device or app store market power, if it exists, could be leveraged against competing browsers with the policies restricting them.)
IANAL, but: iOS is not a monopoly, but it has a dominant position, especially in US (over or close to 50% market share). For tablets their market share is even bigger than that. That should be enough to at least consider some actions, on some level, by someone. Google and Mozilla could sue, I guess? On the other hand, Apple making it a security issue could be a solid defense in court, maybe that's why no one bothers.
I think you're missing the point. As web apps get more and more powerful (and more difficult to distinguish from native apps), they become more of a serious challenge Apple's cash cow of their App Store.
If you click on a web app and tip the creator $5 or buy the pro version unlock / etc, they don't get to siphon any of your money away from the content creator like they do on their App Store. THIS is why they block 3rd party browser engines (along with console / arcade emulators, Amazon / HumbleBundle app stores / etc). Anything that competes with their app store is bad.
If you don't like it, vote with your wallet and come on over to Android (like 8.8/10 phones sold today)!
If they would allow 3rd party engines, everyone would switch to Chrome and Safari would die because many sites wouldn't be adapted for Safari. And Apple likes to control their system, so they want Safari to stay relevant. Now iPhone has large enough user base, so developers forced to test their sites in Safari and it helps desktop Safari too.
It's so they can do exactly this sort of thing. Firefox has their won chrome wrapper on the engine, you can sign in with their sync account and it has inbuilt Pocket, tracking protection etc.
I use iCabMobile browser on iPad for several reasons.
Easy Font size changing, zoom enabled for all sites, desktop user agent, I hate mobile version websites on iPad, especially Google search results and Wikipedia.
Completely customizable UI for buttons such as Fontsize, nice full screen mode with floating buttons.
Its a bit slower than Safari but worth the tradeoff.
It amazes me that Safari desktop has Fontsize control but mobile (where you need it more) does not.
I know there are hacks using bookmarked JS to get this but they are not as convenient as iCabMobile.
