Post by SailfishPost by nospamPost by SailfishPost by nospamPost by SailfishPost by ChrisPost by SailfishWhat I suspect is that they will make significant
infrastructure changes that will put everything behind a pay wall, just
like Apple, disallowing sideloading of non- Windows Store software.
Apple haven't done anything like the sort.
Yes, they have with iOS devices.
no they haven't.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-claims-sideloading-apps-would-destro
y-s
ecurity-and-privacy-of-ios/
[excerpt quote=\"
Tim Cook has claimed in an interview with Brut that if Apple was forced
to allow sideloading of apps, as Android does, it would destroy security
and privacy of iOS.
\" /]
once again, you don't understand the context.
And, oddly, you refused to refute my legitimate response with
clarification. Instead, simply skirting away.
i explained it already. you even mentioned enterprise distribution
before i did. there are also other options.
you're also ignoring that also in that interview, tim said that android
has 47 times as much malware as ios. while the exact amount is
debatable, it's clear that sideloading on ios would cause a drastic
increase in malware.
customers don't want malware.
Post by SailfishPost by nospamnobody is forcing anyone, and the privacy issues are outside of webkit
anyway.
Wrong. If they disallow direct web access, they are forcing anyone and
everyone.
who is disallowing direct web access??
Post by SailfishAlso, they who control the data that is being transfered on
the web control the competition.
who does that?
Post by SailfishDo you think the developers of Brave or
Firefox or even Edge wouldn't prefer to use a fork of the same webkit
for their browsers?
brave and edge are chromium-based, aka blink, a fork of webkit.
firefox is gecko.
edge was originally trident, but microsoft quickly learned that writing
their own rendering engine was not worth the trouble, so they switched
to chromium. there's no reason to reinvent the wheel when there's a
very good wheel available for free.
Post by SailfishPost by nospamwebkit is open source, add/remove whatever you want.
Not on iOS it isn't.
webkit is open source. full stop.
<https://webkit.org>
A fast, open source web browser engine
Post by Sailfishhttps://www.wired.com/story/firefox-launched-a-new-android-app-to-lure-users-f
rom-chrome/
[excerpt quote=\"
Apple¹s closed ecosystem requires that all browsers, including Chrome,
use WebKit as their underlying engines.
\" /]
that's about ios, not webkit.
what you're ignoring is that ios has *significantly* less malware than
android. this is a good thing.
ios browsers are limited to webkit for security and performance
reasons. not only is apple's webkit more secure, but it is also highly
optimized for their own hardware.
other rendering engines would be slower, less secure and drain the
battery more rapidly. customers don't find that to be a benefit.
Post by SailfishPost by nospamwebkit is also very good, which is why so many companies use it.
It is very good and the main reason Google fork'd it for their use.
Mainly so they could move Blink in a more competitive way to meet their
needs.
yep.
Post by SailfishOf course, they could do that since, well, they also created their own
smartphone by reverse-engineering Apple's Java modules but keeping
compatibility the modules argument lists.
the iphone doesn't have any java modules.
ios is fully native. it's os x running on a pocket-size device.
android uses a virtual machine (dalvik, now art) with apps originally
written in java, now mostly kotlin.
Post by SailfishThe simple fact is that Apple AND Alphabet have an iron-fist hold on the
competition with their stores, guaranteeing that they'll always get 30%
of every sale. This is obviously detrimental to consumers since the
competitors will simply pass most of that 30% tax onto the hapless
consumers.
it's not a tax, no matter how many times you claim it is, nor is it an
iron-fist hold.
there is a significant benefit to developers for the 30% cut, including
internet hosting, download bandwidth, discoverability, payment
processing, local and international taxes, currency conversions,
handling fraud and chargeback, accounting and quite a bit more.
for an indie developer to do all of that on their own, it would cost
much more than 30% of their revenue. web hosting and credit card fees
are not free. creating a good web site is very much not free.
when software was sold in computer stores, the cut was 50-70%. this is
*less*. much less.
end users are also *far* more likely to buy an app from a microsoft,
apple or google store than some random website, where they have to
enter in their payment information (additional hassle) and hope it
isn't just collecting card numbers (legitimate fear). there are also
gift cards for those who don't want to use a credit card or don't have
one at all, which are also great for kids.
Post by SailfishPost by nospamnothing prevents writing something else, which microsoft tried and
failed.
Yes, there is. Microsoft failed for a number of reasons, not the least
being their fumbling attempts at Win8 and Windows Phone which almost
completely eroded their trustworthiness to consumers but, more
importantly, to their enterprise accounts.
that had nothing to do with edge failing.
windows phone was too little, too late, along with orphaning windows
mobile 6 users and developers and then again with windows phone 7. it
offered no benefit over ios or android, so it fizzled and failed.
Post by SailfishThey won't enter those waters again anytime soon. However, they are
wealthy enough that they can plan another line of attack at some point.
Most others aren't ... maybe Amazon, maybe Facebook???
both of those companies tried releasing a smartphone and both of those
failed *hard*.
facebook is supposedly coming out with a smartwatch next year, and
based on rumours so far, is another guaranteed fail.
on the other hand, alexa devices are quite popular.
Post by SailfishPost by nospamthere are chromium-based browsers (aka blink, a webkit fork) with the
google-bits stripped out, for example.
No one without an established platform would even bother. There will
need to be a technology paradigm change. One that separates the service
from the devices.
what service?
quite a few companies have released their own chromium-based browsers,
some of which are very good.
