I’m truly curious: as either a user or a developer, how are you impacted by Apple’s behavior and decisions with respect to its web browser engine policy? What is it preventing you from accomplishing?

▲

leptons 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Specifically for me, my company has a product that could use Bluetooth, but Safari will never implement the Web Bluetooth API, where Chrome has for some time on Android. So the workaround is to use Wifi instead (my product supports both bluetooth and Wifi), which drains the phone battery faster.

No, we do not want to write our own iOS app where Apple can then extort us for a percentage of any sales through the app, and we have to pay for the priviledge to develop that app, as well as buy Apple hardware to do so.

So instead we use Wifi, where we can maintain one single codebase - the web application, which works on both Android and iOS, but has to use Wifi. If Apple allowed Chrome to use its own browser engine, we would simply tell users to install Chrome to interact with our device. Then we don't have to pay Apple for anything, nor should we have to.

Apple purposely won't implement some APIs so they can force developers to create an app for their app store where they can collect money from any additional sales through the app. It's all spelled out in the DOJ suit, why won't you just read it??

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/media/1344546/dl?inline

	▲	crazygringo 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> Apple purposely won't implement some APIs so they can force developers to create an app for their app store where they can collect money from any additional sales through the app. So then why doesn't Firefox support the Web Bluetooth API either? How can you jump to the conclusion that the lack of Safari support is about apps? The reality is that the Web Bluetooth API is a draft. Not ratified. Not on the formal standards track. And Firefox doesn't even intend to implement it, due to security and privacy concerns around it and the fact that is it not ratified. But go on assuming it's all about being anticompetitive... > It's all spelled out in the DOJ suit, why won't you just read it? I just did a Ctrl+F for Bluetooth and everything relates to smartwatches, not web APIs. There are only two references to Safari, none of which say anything about standards. The phrase "web standard" appears nowhere. The document is 88 pages long, and it's not immediately obvious to me where any of what you're talking about is spelled out. I hope you'll understand I'm not going to spend my afternoon reading the whole thing.
	▲	otterley 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It’s not alleged in the complaint that Apple cripples Safari in order to incentivize developers to build apps instead. Respectfully, did you read it? Also, why would your company cut off its nose to spite its face? If using Bluetooth is a customer requirement (as opposed to merely a “nice to have”), why wouldn’t you go to the lengths to provide an app for them?