Apple tweaking how default browsers are selected in EU
Apple is responding to EU criticism about alternative browser choices by simplifying selection, and in addition it's adding more options over user control of other default apps.
As well as updating default browser choices, EU users will have more control over default apps such as Messages, Photos, and Camera
In response to the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA), which also led to third-party app stores, Apple is increasing the options it gives users over default apps. Users in the region are already prompted to choose a default browser, although developers of alternative browsers still found reason to complain.
As before, the first time a user opens Safari on their iPhone or iPad, they will be shown a list of the most popular browsers in their region, and can select any of them. Also as before, the list will be presented in a random order, and will not favor Safari.
What's new is that as well as the title of the browser, Apple's list will show the app's subtitle from the App Store. Plus instead of having to tap to go into a browser listing and select it there, selection is now a tap on that first list.
However, the user will have to scroll through the whole list before they can make their selection.
Assuming that they do not choose Safari, once they have made their selection, Apple will download the new browser if it isn't already installed. Users will see the download progress right in the list of default browsers, and when installed, it will open.
Plus, if Safari is currently in either the Dock or the first page of the user's home screen, it will be automatically replaced by their new choice.
Safari users will be prompted again
Apple is also changing when users will get prompted to consider an alternative browser. As well as the first time they launch Safari on, say, their iPhone, users will be prompted again the first time they open it on their iPad.
If a user in the EU has already gone through the list and chosen Safari, then after the update that adds the new features, they will be prompted again.
Similarly, if they migrate from one iPhone or iPad to another. If Safari was the default on the original machine, then the next time the user opens it on the new device, they will be prompted once more.
Improving all default apps
"For users in the EU, iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 will also include a new Default Apps section in Settings that lists defaults available to each user," says Apple in its updated developer documentation. "In future software updates, users will get new default settings for dialing phone numbers, sending messages, translating text, navigation, managing passwords, keyboards, and call spam filters."
The option to change the default translation and navigation apps will not be available until an update in 2025.
Apple has not said precisely when the rest of these features will be released, but it is to be in an iOS update later in 2024. And alongside more options for choosing default apps, there will also be the ability to delete more of the stock Apple ones.
Specifically, users in the EU will be able to entirely delete:
- App Store
- Messages
- Camera
- Photos
- Safari
Should a user change their mind, all but one of these apps can be redownloaded from the App Store. The exception is the App Store itself, which will have to be reinstalled via Settings.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_13_196
Same thing with Whatsapp, Messenger? Should that even be on the list for messaging apps? What about MS Office?
It's not important for her to understand exactly why the selection box is required but it is important that the choice itself is presented.
Apple shouldn't be choosing for anyone. Neither should Google, Huawei, Samsung et al but being a gatekeeper brings more requirements.
With a little luck AI assistants will be implemented eventually for helping out with explaining what certain dialogs mean and in a conversational manner. That would be a perfect fit for some groups.
Like having someone hand-hold people through things like setup but without the bias of a company employee.
The one thing I do wonder about is who is the EU referring to when they mention "users?" It sounds like they believe all users are the same and make choices in exactly the same manner with the same driving motivations. The EU must have created their own persona of what a "user" by their self-defined persona and applied it globally with a massively wide brush that fits their own pattern regardless of the real people involved. I am not going to pretend that I can define a better "global definition of all users" but I do think I can see at least three (3) categories of users when it comes to browser selection:
1) Users who don't care. These users who are going to use whatever browser is installed on the device they own. Bottom line, they don't care and are perfectly happy not caring and don't want to be bothered to make a choice. Nothing broken here - nothing needs fixing. I believe that this category comprises the vast majority of browser users.
2) Users who do care, know what they want, and know how to make it happen. These users have a preference for which browser to use and know how to use the currently available mechanisms to make their favorite browser the default. I'd put myself in this category. I prefer Vilvaldi for general browsing, especially when I may open multiple tabs. I really like its built-in ad blocking and hierarchical Speed Dial functionality and the fact that it works on multiple platforms including Windows and syncs my settings on all platforms. If I'm concerned about tracking or privacy for whatever reason and don't want to worry about explicitly turning in ON, as required in most browsers, I'll use Safari with Private Relay. In any case, I know how to make my preferred browser the default browser on all platforms. It works for me, so don't mess with it. No fixing required.
3) Users who do care but are unwilling or unable to accept the current mechanisms, and any potential limitations, for changing their default browser. I can imagine there are some obscure browsers out there that don't work with Apple's current model for changing the default browser. I don't know of any, but It's definitely a possibility. Some fixing may be required.
My contention/opinion is that the EU is inserting themselves, under prompting and parochial influence from companies that build their own alternative browsers, to fabricate a threat scenario based on their own personal desires, so they can jump in and "save" the vast majority of browser users, i.e., those in the "don't care" category, from some imagined evil that those "don't care" users already "don't care" about. The EU's enforcement and remediation measures are basically telling the vast number of "don't care" users that they "must care" while providing no tangible reason why they should care. They were perfectly happy in their "don't care" world and now the EU is simply adding an additional layer of complexity to how they use their devices for reasons these users still don't care about. They never asked for this, but the EU is imposing its own desires and political control over the "don't care" masses in order to project their own worldview of how businesses should compete. They answer to no one, especially the vast majority of "don't care" users who still don't care and never will.
Is she? The new EU commissioners for 2024-29 period still need to be decided
That's how representative democracy works.
(…and no, the reason her party did badly at home has zilch to do with Vestager.)
Some background for those actually interested: https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/20/eu_competition_cop_depart/
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/18/eu-vestager-is-under-fire-for-hiring-an-american-citizen.html
By being proactive rather than protective Apple lost control of their own ecosystem. The third party developers are now able to dictate their own terms with the help of heavy handed regulators. As long as Apple continues to pull in revenue without totally selling out they will obviously play along until they have nothing left to protect.
Only goes back to 2008. This is for all platforms: mobile, desktop, et al. Internet Explorer was in the 85% to 95% range of browser share from about 2002 to 2005 or so, obviously eating up all of Netscape's share. Don't know the difference between Chrome and Android with these StatCounter numbers.
Firefox's peak browser share was about 30% as you can see in the chart from about 2007 to 2010. What happened in the aughts and why did Internet Explorer usage decline? It had nothing to do with regulation. I 100% attribute IE's usage decline to security, virus, malware, etc, issues that users experienced from the 2000 to 2005. For those not old enough, web browsing on Windows with Internet Explorer was a fucking shitshow, causing users and IT teams to do wipe and reloads of their windows systems multiple times a year. The thing that Microsoft thought would lock up the market for them, to keep the market on MS platforms and code: embedding ActiveX into IE, ended up being the thing that killed Internet Explorer. Giving the world an open and direct line to do anything they wanted on Windows through an IE plug-in was a bad idea.
The browser ballet, as proposed by MS, started in 2009. It took 2 to 3 years for the EC to accept a browser ballet design from MS, and it was formalized in 2012, where IE share declined to 30 to 35%. The regulation did nothing. Chrome's usage share rise was caused by something entirely unrelated to regulation, Google's service tie-in's and web-browser ad tie-ins with the Chrome browser. Just look at that Chrome line. Wow.
The EC did diddly squat and if you were conspiratorial, you'd think they just investigated MS for the fines. They mucked about investigating MS for like 5 years on Windows Media Player with Windows. WMP! That really was a head scratcher. You could argue the only reason the investigation expanded to IE was done at the behest of Opera with the browser investigation being so late in the game and IE usage clearly declining. In 2009, the browser race was over. Google won, even with 5% Chrome share at the time, as even back then, they dominated that which makes the Web go: ads and related data.
Not sure why the EC wants to muck around with Safari on iOS. It only means Chrome's share will rise further. iOS share is only 30% of EU, and if StatCounter is right with Safari at 20% worldwide, that means Safari is about 50 to 70% of usage on iOS, with the remainder being Mac and iPad Safari. An alternative web browser on iOS means squat if all the web sites in the EU are designed for Chrome, with Chrome at 65% share.
One way to level the playing field is to make it illegal for for-profit companies to give away software for free and to force websites to use web standards. There needs to be compliance to a web standard before a web site can open. Those web standards are controlled by a web standards working body, not Google. Google doesn't get a rep on the body. No new APIs can be used unless that are ratified by the standards body.
Microsoft made IE as part of the Windows, your file browser was also your web browser in Windows ME. Taking away any purpose or option for installing an alternative browser. Also the lawsuit ended up being a slap on the wrist for MS, they continued to monopolize the OS market until Chrome hit the market.
Microsoft was initially sued over unfair monopolistic behavior, they charged a "tax" to computer manufacturers who sold Windows machines and forced them to pay for a license no matter what OS was installed on a machine. So if they wanted to sell a UNIX server they would have to pay for a Windows NT server license.