back to article Apple complains UK watchdog wants to make iOS a 'clone' of Android

The UK competition watchdog's proposed iOS remedies in a probe of its "substantial and entrenched market power" in the mobile ecosystem "would effectively turn Apple into a clone of Android," the iPhone maker told the CMA. The reason for its unhappiness? The UK Competition and Markets Authority's (CMA) key fix is to kill Apple …

  1. redpawn


    I like slow incompatible browsing with only the most perfect of failings.

    1. DS999 Silver badge

      Re: But...

      Not sure if it is still true but as of a year or two ago Safari was the fastest browser going.

      True it isn't keeping up with the latest standards as well, but some of that is deliberate - not implementing "standards" that Google pushed through that allow the browser to access bluetooth, USB, NFC etc. that it has no business accessing.

      When a site works on Chrome but doesn't work on Safari I'll bet 99% of the time it has nothing to do with Safari being behind in standards. It is instead the exact same reason why IE 6.0 worked and Netscape didn't 20 years ago - web designers are designing and testing Chrome and don't care about testing or fixing for other browsers. So if you want a web monoculture controlled by Google where everyone is forced to use Chrome because web designers will just tell people on iPhone "use Chrome if you want this site to work" then you'll have your wish before if Apple allows a "full" Chrome browser in the app store.

      1. esque

        Re: But...

        "True it isn't keeping up with the latest standards as well, but some of that is deliberate - not implementing "standards" that Google pushed through that allow the browser to access bluetooth, USB, NFC etc. that it has no business accessing."

        So you don't like Webauthn?

        1. DS999 Silver badge

          Re: But...

          That should be implemented with a specific API in the OS that is secured and limited for a specific purpose, not by giving browsers carte blanche access to every possible method of authentication device.

      2. localzuk Silver badge

        Re: But...

        If a standard has been agreed by W3C, and a browser doesn't implement them, and developers therefore don't test against that browser, that is hardly the fault of the other browser(s) for implementing them...

        We don't want to end up in a situation where you MUST test sites in a bunch of browsers because they implement things so differently that there's no point in standards in the first place. That way leads us back to IE6 era nonsense.

        1. Fred Daggy Silver badge

          Re: But...


          But not testing them at ALL, that is the problem. The IE 6 problem came about as developers only ever wanted to do one test and "screw the rest".

          There will always, and i mean until the heat death of the universe, be subtle differences in the interpretation and implementation of standards.

      3. DuncanLarge Silver badge

        Re: But...

        > web designers are designing and testing Chrome and don't care about testing or fixing for other browsers

        If your browser is standards compliant then that is a non-issue.

        The days of developing for a specific browser are supposed to be long gone.

        <blink>Remember me?</blink>

        1. DS999 Silver badge

          Re: But...

          You're assuming Chrome is bug free. If you implement something and it works in Chrome thanks to some bugs, but doesn't display correctly on something without the same set of bugs, whose fault is it? And if you don't even test on other browsers as more and more web devs are now doing, you won't even know.

          This is exactly what happened with IE 6, which had its own set of bugs and non standard behaviors that web devs coded to, and even when Netscape implemented standards correctly pages didn't display right and other than a stubborn few of us almost everyone moved to IE 6 believing all other browsers "sucked".

          1. Roland6 Silver badge

            Re: But...

            > If you implement something and it works in Chrome thanks to some bugs, but doesn't display correctly on something without the same set of bugs, whose fault is it

            The browsers…

            Had this problem a couple of years back with Foxit PDF reader, it didn’t correctly render a page that Adobe did. Foxit provided an easy to access feedback menu option that allowed me to report it and in a subsequent update was fixed.

            Fundamentally the problem comes down to the maintenance of a common test suite, accessible to all developers, which basically means a market commitment to openness and fair competition.

  2. ParlezVousFranglais

    Given it's been nearly 15 years since MS was forced to unbundle IE from Windows, I'd say this is long overdue

    If I want to screw up my phone or tablet by installing random homebrew shite then I should be able to do exactly that, without jailbreaking the device. If I need to factory reset afterwards to fix everything, or if all my credentials get posted to el dark interwebs because I was stupid and didn't know what I was doing, then so be it.

    There's nothing to stop the manufacturers putting a big tick box up that says "we REALLY recommend you don't do this, but if you want to plough on, then on your head be it" - and job done, user notified that if the device does something weird, their only option is nuke back to defaults

    Fact is that closed-shop consumer products are done for - the biggest loser on the surface of it will be Apple as it's literally their entire business model, but the simple fact is that 99% of Apple users won't actually make use of any new-found freedom, because 99% of all users DON'T CARE - they just use what's put in front of them anyway.

    So Apple should stop throwing a hissy fit, and just concentrate on the key message which is that staying inside their own curated bubble is going to cost you more, but it's also safer and more reliable

    Next on the list will be the games consoles...

    1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      If that's what you want to do, buy an Android device. Don't screw up the only alternative.

      I'm with you on personal preferences, but with Apple's market share on bugger-all and their product clearly catering for that market's desire for a fully curated experience, I'm with Apple on their fight with the competition authorities.

      Apple's product *is* the curated experience, not the rounded corners. There would be literally no point to an iPhone if it was as wide-open as Android. Other people do hardware that is just as good, for less.

      1. MrDamage Silver badge

        For 90% of iPhone owners, the facts that it is an iPhone is reason enough to own it. They don't care about anything other than the fact they have the same, or better iThing as their friends.

        1. Law

          I don't think that's the case, and as somebody who's flipped between winphone, android and iOS over the decade here's why:

          - For a long time I switched to android because the new usability features were always on android first. But iOS caught up by creating some of their own features, and stealing others from android.

          - Android is hit or miss for support after 18 months, my "premium" Pixel C tablet became slow and barely useable after 12 months of updates, even after a reset it was slow - then stopped receiving updates after 2 years, even security ones... so now it's a security risk. My base model iPad is the same age and still getting updates, app store apps still work for it.

          - Consistent level of bloat... I won't call iOS bloat free (it's definitely not), but I don't have bloat installed that competes with the OS features. When I tried Samsung, I kept having to disable new samsung apps that replicated google play features baked into android (because play apps were a requirement at one point to license Android, not sure if that's still the case)

          - Many people on iPhones that I know aren't on the latest and greatest... they wait several iterations to upgrade. Android, not so much (although they're usualy half the cost so why not?)

          - People use Macs, Apple TVs etc, things like the built in password management features make it pretty easy to move from one to the other. Same with photos and files.

          - Parental controls - it's so damn easy to control screen time for my kids iPads, and what they install. That's baked in, on Android I tried several parental apps (paid for!) and they never worked right on any of the various phones / tablets in the house.

          Anyway, I'm currently on an iPhone 11 but I didn't buy it, it was gifted to me. I won't be upgrading until this one dies or stops getting updates. I also won't just be buying an iPhone as a replacement, I'll look around.

          Edit: I should mention I agree with being able to have different web engines on iOS - I'm a firefox user, I'm not a fan of the kneecapped browser on iOS.

          1. MJI Silver badge

            Non standard phones

            Yes I have seen this with Samsung, I hate them, they remove features built into most Android phones to replace them with their own applications.

            My boss gets them free with his folding one so that is how I ended up with it, luckily a work policy change will be moving to subsidised, so that will be replaced by a Motorola or similar pretty soon, that said I do like the style of some of the recent Sony phones.

            Some of the software is viral in its action, unable to even stop it loading.

            I had to replace a lot of their junk with more standard software, even the camera software is more limited.

            And why was Google Lens NOT on it, whereas all the other phones in the family have it?

            I have a sideloaded Firefox from just before they broke the mobile UI.

          2. MrDamage Silver badge

            And anyone who has read the stories of the puerile iThing users hating on those "dreaded green bubble people" in their iMessage chat because they've gone with a proprietary messaging system instead of one that is open to all platforms, knows that a fair amount of peer pressure is involved in the decision to buy an iThing, and not features.

            1. Joel 1
              Big Brother

              Only if you have the same views about WhatsApp. The difference between blue bubble and green bubble is what can be shared over the internet, and what has to go via SMS (and subject to contract charges). People have asked me how they can share a photo for free, rather than paying MMS charges. I pointed out that as was "blue bubble" the photos/videos shared for free anyway (standard internet data costs notwithstanding). It is easy to explain to people.

              Others view WhatsApp in the same manner, although I deleted my WhatsApp account when it was bought by Facebook (as it was called at the time). Since then I have had people asking whether I have a WhatsApp account, as they want to share (degraded) photos through WhatsApp. I decided to exit that ecosystem, as I don't trust Meta. But it is horses for courses. You might view WhatsApp as being open to all platforms, but I view it as being part of another platform. Signal is available, but trying to get WhatsApp centred people to use that is surprisingly difficult.

          3. Roland6 Silver badge

            > Android is hit or miss for support after 18 months, my "premium" Pixel C tablet became slow and barely useable after 12 months of updates, even after a reset it was slow - then stopped receiving updates after 2 years, even security ones...

            But that is wholly down to device manufacturers. There really isn’t anything in the android model that prohibits vendors supporting android on a device for more than 12 months, it is just a commercial decision. Interestingly, I wonder when phone vendors will start offering support/refurbishment subscriptions - I’m a little surprised Huawei haven’t got into this business, their 2020 P30 still outperforms many current Samsung etc devices and it would be a way around US sanctions…

      2. cm0002

        So what you're saying is, iOS is made for boomers lol

      3. M.V. Lipvig Silver badge

        I agree. I don't like Apple products, and showed this by never buying a second one. But that's a decision I made for me. If someone else wants a phone under Apple's strict draconian control, they should be allowed to do so. Apple stays in business because a lot of people like their stuff, not because they are the only phone makers on the market. Apple only has 50 percent of the UK market vs 48 percent for Android, so hardly a monopoly there. Gotta wonder if this is less about user choice, and more about "Blimey, but those chaps at Cupertino are dragging in the bucks! Let's run some investigations on them and see if we can find something to fine them on, and help ourselves to a slice of their pie!"

        1. MJI Silver badge


          I do like Gala, and Bramley when cooked.

          But fermented definitely.

          Cornish Rattler or most of Westons product.

          1. Captain Hogwash

            Re: Apple

            Dunkerton's Black Fox, Henney's Frome Valley or Malvern Gold for me.

      4. jollyboyspecial Silver badge

        @Ken Hagan

        The problem with your argument is that you could have applied similar arguments in the Microsoft debate and not just about browser choice.

        It's an argument car manufacturers have tried time and again in order to restrict what you can do to your car. Again and again they've tried preventing the sale of pattern parts, hell some have even tried to restrict what consumables you can use in your car or who can work on your car and they have always failed. Car manufacturers have tried to restrict the sale of pattern parts even down to things like brake pads and air filters. They've tried to invalidate warranties if you have the nerve to use oil not made by their preferred manufacturer. And they have tried to claim that having your car serviced by anyone other than their franchised dealers. All this with the argument that they know what's best for you and your car and that they are only doing all of this with your best interests at heart. Luckily they have failed. Sure you can tell me what you think is best for me, but it's my money and may car and I will do what the fuck I like with both.

        The same applies to phones.

        Now maybe it would be different if Apple were to lease you a phone for a monthly cost. Then it would be their phone and they could decide what you do with it. But if I buy a phone I should be allowed to decide what I do with my own property. Nobody not Apple or self appointed legal experts like yourself should be allowed to tell me what to do with my own phone.

        1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

          Re: @Ken Hagan

          "you could have applied similar arguments in the Microsoft debate and not just about browser choice"

          No, I couldn't. Compare the market share. At the time of the browser choice case, MS had most of the market share. Right now, Apple don't have most of the market share. You can't invoke monopoly laws when there is no monopoly.

          1. doublelayer Silver badge

            Re: @Ken Hagan

            Oh yes, I can. Monopoly power doesn't just switch on when you pass a certain market share. A combination of "really big" and "not many alternative options" gets you there. In the case of Microsoft, there were plenty of other choices. Nobody made you buy a Windows box in the 90s. You could buy a Mac, from Apple or from one of the other manufacturers who made authorized clones at that time. You could buy something that ran Solaris or a few other Unix variants. There was even a new choice making waves in the technical community called Linux that would run if you got an Intel processor, and the classic BSD was out there if you wanted it. Want more support, how about BeOS or RiscOS (both were going to die, but that wasn't guaranteed yet)? Plenty of choices. That didn't stop Microsoft having a position in the market strong enough to have anticompetitive effects.

            Apple is in a stronger position in the mobile market. Its market share is lower, but it's not tiny. In developed countries, Apple's market share ranges between 63% (Japan) and 29% (Germany). In some countries that host a lot of readers that is 47% (UK), 49% (Canada), 59% (US) and 41% (Australia). In the market, there's basically one alternative, which is also being investigated. Oligopolies, especially one with the chance of tacit collusion, can have similar effects to complete monopolies. The laws that deal with them, unsurprisingly, allow market regulators to pursue them as well.

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I have an iphone just so I can't spend all day changing settings etc which I used to do when I was on Android, I just can't be bothered any more. I just want a phone which runs some apps without having to choose between several different app stores, and apps which do the same job. For instance, photos. On my iphone they are in the Photo app. On my wife's Android they could be in Gallery or Google Photos, or somewhere else, all I know is that she is forever complaining whe can't find the photo she just downloaded.

      6. Ideasource Bronze badge

        The curated loyalists are not endangered.

        Offering the choice to graduate the kindergarten to utilize your hardware as you see fit, does not remove any utility from the curated loyalists who would never dare flip the unknown sources switch.

        I think this is more about avoiding the embarrassment of the less wealthy tinkerers having cooler stuff on their iPhone by applying themselves directly, then what person could purchase with money from the curator.

        It's all about maintaining the illusion that the premium crumbs the company offers are better than anything else a person could put their mind to.

        It's easy to look like the best when all else is oppressed.

      7. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I don't get this fight either!

        What exactly is it that people want from Apple, but not from Apple hahaha!

    2. G.Y.

      You could ALWAYS download the browser of your choice & install it on windows; I had 3-5 browsers ready to go all my time 1989-20165 at Microsoft (and later too)

      1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

        /sigh. It was never about being able to select another browser, it's about the monopolistic suppliers forcing their choice by default and making it very hard to choose a different browser. That Microsoft have repeated this with Edge is something that should be revisited, but I'd also take aim at Google paying to have their browser bundled with so many other applications that it gets side-loaded by default (and the same goes for any other pusher of software that I don't want such as crappy AV software)

        Apologist responses are the reason why getting freedom to use our computers is so hard, but also so important.

    3. Headley_Grange Silver badge

      99% er

      I appreciate that this article is just about browsers (for now), but I don't like where this is going.

      "....but the simple fact is that 99% of Apple users won't actually make use of any new-found freedom....":

      We might not have any choice. Once web-apps become practical, once apps can be loaded from other stores or sideloaded from the web then the 99% of Apple users you refer to will find that apps disappear from the Apple store as the devs take them somewhere else that's cheaper - Android store, web download, web-app, a bloke with a backpack full of apps down the pub on a Friday night. Sure, Apple could charge less, but they won't. When I first got a Mac over ten years ago all my apps came from the App store - and it was great. I was happy to pay and have the Mac manage all my updates and watch it automatically populate a new Mac. Now many of those apps aren't available on the App store and I have to download from the web and manage them manually. They aren't any cheaper - the devs certainly aren't passing on the savings to the customers. Most importantly, whatever one thinks of Apple's store, it's probably more secure than trusting web downloads.

      Even if they don't have to accept other app stores, changing the webkit could just let devs avoid the Apple store completely and run their apps on the web. A lot of apps are already little more than shonky front ends for websites; you see this in the laggy, draggy loading and running. All they need is a couple of kilobytes of downloaded data (train times, film times, weather) to work, but many of them take 5-10 seconds to open and run even when on a 50MB data connection. I stare at a blank screen while they download the page formats, graphics, etc. It's a shit experience and it seems pointless having the fastest processor in the universe if everything is really being processed online via a slow data link. I appreciate that a better webkit could make better use of processing power but many places where I work and play get data measured in kb/s and web-apps will be a nightmare. Think of all the places where your phone says there's 5 bars of signal but there's not enough data to use Google maps - that's what all apps could be like and no amount of dicking around with homebrew shite on your phone will make a ha'porth of difference. The apps won't be any cheaper, either.

      "...the biggest loser on the surface of it will be Apple..": On the surface, yes, but I think that biggest losers will be old codgers like me who just want a set of reliable, secure, integrated and managed apps and rarely open a browser on their phones.

      1. esque

        Re: 99% er

        "Once web-apps become practical, once apps can be loaded from other stores or sideloaded from the web then the 99% of Apple users you refer to will find that apps disappear from the Apple store as the devs take them somewhere else that's cheaper"

        Yeah, just look to Android where third-party stores are a reality and every dev moved to cheaper stores...

        It's funny how such arguments are repeated again and again when we have a real world example that shows us that they are just untrue.

      2. Richard 12 Silver badge

        You don't appear to know what a web app is

        It's a website.

        No more, no less.

        A huge number of "apps" are simply a bare-bones web browser with a hardcoded "home page", and provide absolutely no benefit over simply opening that website in a browser.

        Apple used to discourage that kind of "app", but it seems they're fine now given how many there are.

      3. doublelayer Silver badge

        Re: 99% er

        So if I'm understanding you correctly:

        1. Developers will make shoddy web apps that you can't trust. You don't want this.

        2. If they have to list them in the App Store then they won't make shoddy apps because a reason you didn't say.

        3. Therefore the App Store makes good apps from the same developers that would make bad ones otherwise?

        If what you want is "a set of reliable, secure, integrated and managed apps", you need to only install apps that fit all those adjectives, and if one of their authors breaks that, whether they stay in the store or go to the web, you have to change it. Here's a basic example. I can download a truly massive number of navigation apps on an iPhone, some of which will work offline, some of which won't share my data, some of which use up-to-date data sources, and some of which do none of these things. It's my job to pick one that I think is best, and the store doesn't protect me from any of the poorer options. Having a mandatory Apple tax does not ensure any of your praise is or remains true.

    4. Mage Silver badge

      Also Kindle iOS crippled

      Because it only uses HTML3. azw3 and KFX need a custom HTML5 ish, though epubs on iOS seem to manage with webkit.

      Apple are being unreasonable and it won't make iOS a clone of Android.

    5. Persona Silver badge

      Fact is that closed-shop consumer products are done for - the biggest loser on the surface of it will be Apple as it's literally their entire business model

      I have never owned an iPhone as I dislike the Apple tax, so go for the seemingly better value Android. That said my next phone will be an iPhone. Android is a mess. It comes in many versions and those versions are full of manufacturer specific features. When my wife has problems on her phone I find it challenging to fix them for her because her Android 11 phone is very very different from my Android 11 phone.

      Far too many apps are pretty grim because developers don't test their apps on a wide enough sample of versions and screen sizes: they can't because there are too many of them. The entire security patching system is farcical as demonstrated by Google's advice about patching: "check with your carrier or manufacturer". I have no idea if my phone is getting the updates it needs.

      The appeal of an iPhone for me now is that it is a "stock" phone operating in a walled garden with restricted choice and guaranteed patching. If you prefer the Android model then fine, that's what competition is about. Why should the UK watchdog destroy competition by making them both work the same way?

      1. DuncanLarge Silver badge

        Go for a stock Android perhaps?

        1. doublelayer Silver badge

          And a stock Android is what? Google's devices only? I'll point out that, while Google's security and feature update record is better than average and that their phones are more likely to get support from AOSP-based solutions, there are manufacturers that provide security updates for longer than Google does. Even if Google was longest on such things, I don't consider that acceptable. After all, how would you react if Microsoft announced tomorrow that Surface users will have security bugs patched immediately, but people using a different manufacturer's devices will just get them some time, later but who knows how later, and to head off the required joke still with no guarantee they won't break something?

          I support the ending of Apple's restrictions, but it is undeniable that their software and security support record is better than any Android manufacturer, and I do mean every single one in existence with the possible exception of Fairphone, but probably not even them. I prefer my operating systems more open, and that sometimes takes precedence over support lifetimes, but I will acknowledge Apple's credentials in that area.

      2. The Sprocket

        "Why should the UK watchdog destroy competition by making them both work the same way?"


    6. katrinab Silver badge
      Thumb Up


      While you can side-load on Android, most people don't, and for that reason, not being on the Play Store is still a big barrier to adoption of your App on Android.

  3. Rich 2 Silver badge

    Embedded web content

    …claiming a removal of the WebKit requirement would "prevent uniform updates of apps rendering web content, as Android does."

    Is that a thing? Do apps render web content within them? And if they do then they can still choose to use WebKit because they know that will always be installed. Similarly, why wouldn’t apps on android use chrome (because they KNOW that will be installed) to render any web content? So why do Android apps (apparently) have problems?

    So I’m confused about the argument

    1. Richard 12 Silver badge

      Re: Embedded web content

      It's tosh.

      Almost every app uses the OS-provided renderer - except for Electron...

      The only apps that want to use something else are the actual web browsers, who want to have the same level of feature support on every platform.

      It's bad for consumers that their "Edge" on their iPhone is broken for sites that work just fine in the "Edge" on their PC. Or whatever browser they use.

      Apple are mostly scared that they'll have to put some effort into Safari in order to keep iOS users from installing something else that actually works.

    2. Tessier-Ashpool

      Re: Embedded web content

      AFAIK, Apple make extensive use of WebKit throughout iOS. Anywhere that things look a bit webby. For example, the fairly obvious HTML rendering in the Mail app.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    'Apple added that the effect of the tweaks it was asked to make would be that iOS "would be turned into another version of Android" – thus reducing consumer choice.'

    So, giving users the choice of installing software that doesn't follow The Apple Method in fact REDUCES their choices? White is black?

    1. Ptol

      You missed the point

      Depends which choice you are talking about. I choose to buy an iphone because i don't want to make hundreds of little choices about which app is going to provide my keyboard, or handle my voicemail, etc. I don't want to have that choice because i will then start tinkering, and tinkering means that sometimes something gets misconfigured, and then I have to tinker some more, just to get my phone or my banking app to start working again.

      No thank you. If these choices are important to you, buy an android phone thats designed to allow you to do this, rather than break my phone.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: You missed the point

        If you don't want to customize your phone, then you keep only the apps created by Apple.

        I don't see your point there.

        Of course, if you want to perform something that Apple doesn't offer an Apple app for, then you are out of luck.

        Are you perchance one of the fanbois that thought that the Evernote app that figured prominently in Apple ads at a time was an Apple app?

        1. Fred Daggy Silver badge

          Re: You missed the point

          I can only imaging that every damn app will want to install a new keyboard. And bundle a web browser. And ask to be the default. It will be a bombardment of questions. And stealth installs. Some may want that. I don't.

          I have an alternate and it is Andriod. I have tried it, and i didn't want it. Others might, though. I respect that the choice is theirs to make.

      2. doublelayer Silver badge

        Re: You missed the point

        Somehow requiring you not to, by your own admission, tinker with things you don't want changed is breaking your phone? All you have to do is not change the options you don't want changed. For most or all of them, if you do change them, you can change them back immediately with no lasting effects. The good news for you is that more choices for me doesn't require you to make any of the new choices I'm making.

      3. localzuk Silver badge

        Re: You missed the point

        Allowing choice does not prevent you from sticking with the defaults. That's kinda the whole point.

      4. Nick Ryan Silver badge

        Re: You missed the point

        You have missed the point by so far.

        Android users do not sit their having to make decisions as to how to use and operate their device. Android users have the option to do so if they want to. You are doing nothing more than respouting Apple originated fear mongering nonsense and pushing it as if it has any value whatsoever.

        In Android if you don't like how a particular application, even a core application works, you have the choice to try an alternative. This choice is what drives competition and improvement. If you don't have competition then you have no improvement. One attempt at using most of the core Apple iPhone apps and it's evident to see that Apple don't care about about improvement at all, nor including features that users want. It's worse because in the the locked-in walled garden of iPhone most users don't even know that their device could and should be doing so much more and better for them.

        Apple's crass lies about being forced to open up their walled garden reducing competition is a pathetic reversal of the truth. If they opened things up there would be more competition and they would have to compete.

        As a quick and simple example - the basic calendar application on an Android phone allows one to change the view of the calendar including options for a list view, daily, weekly and monthly view. All very useful. Now try the same on the basic calendar application on an iPhone and where is this fundamental functionality?

        1. Rich 2 Silver badge

          Re: You missed the point

          “… calendar including options for a list view, daily, weekly and monthly view. All very useful. Now try the same on the basic calendar application on an iPhone and where is this fundamental functionality?”

          I’m afraid you picked a bad example there. The functionality you describe is definitely available on the default iPhone calendar

          1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

            Re: You missed the point

            Possibly! I don't have one to hand (waiting for someone to bring theirs with them, due a couple of hours ago...) but when I last checked we just couldn't work out how to change the calendar view in this way. I don't think their iPhone is that old that it's stopped receiving updates yet therefore it should have the same core functionality like this as the latest device. Alternatively it could be just utterly non-intuitive as to how to change the calendar view.

    2. Fred Daggy Silver badge

      To paraphrase Hank Hill, "You're not making Android better; You're just making Apple worse".

  5. itzumee

    Apple - the anti-choice champion

    Long long overdue. Safari is the shittiest browsing experience of all, if I had a choice of non-WebKit browser on my iPhone it'd be Edge or Chrome, or maybe Firefox? Apple need to shut-up, get real and get on with it, then maybe, just maybe, Safari will be a better web browser than it is currently. But if Apple Maps is anything to go by, it probably won't.

    1. Strahd Ivarius Silver badge

      Re: Apple - the anti-choice champion

      Safari is the browser that you use for downloading Firefox, isn't it?

      1. The Sprocket

        Re: Apple - the anti-choice champion

        "Safari is the browser that you use for downloading Firefox, isn't it?"

        On a laptop, yes. But not on an iPhone/iPad. Firefox is on the App Store, and one uses the App Store app on your iPhone/iPad to download it. AND there are a few versions of Firefox there.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Apple - the anti-choice champion

      You don't seem to like the software Apple provide but still bought an iPhone despite the plethora of alternatives? Interesting.

      1. moonhaus

        Re: Apple - the anti-choice champion

        "You don't seem to like the software Apple provide but still bought an iPhone despite the plethora of alternatives?"

        Next in the line of rediculous statements from the fanbois...

        "You don't like Garageband but still bought a Mac?"

        "You don't like U2 but still bought an Ipod?"

        "You don't watch Cocomelon but still bought an Ipad?"

        1. Ideasource Bronze badge

          Re: Apple - the anti-choice champion

          Imagine if the same anti-developmental attitudes were applied to the wheel.

          A society where law enforcement and social definitions are is used to jail anyone who uses simple wheels outside of a two-wheel chariot.

          "Those degenerate criminal hackers, pirating wheel shape IP for use in diningware." That concept belongs to Apple and f*** the rest of the world!. Nobody May ever use it for food cuz we said so.

          It's a good thing when innovation is freed from the limitations of business interests. Especially in the larger scale perspective that recognizes all companies, law systems and their economic systems are temporary.

      2. itzumee

        Re: Apple - the anti-choice champion

        How'd you come to that (incorrect) conclusion?

  6. This post has been deleted by its author

  7. jollyboyspecial Silver badge

    Sauce, Goose, Gander

    It's not really that long ago that Microsoft fought long an hard against measures to open up browser competition in Windows. And Microsoft didn't have browser choice in Windows locked down nearly as hard as Apple do in iOS. Imagine the outcry if the only browsers you could use in Windows were skins wrapped around IE 6...

    Now I don't recall Apple supporting Microsoft in those particular legal arguments, quite the opposite. So their stance on this seems hypocritical at best.

    But what makes their argument even more ridiculous is their claim that opening up browser availability in iOS would make it a clone of Android. Or maybe it makes it a clone of almost every other available OS, after all most operating systems give you a real choice of browser.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Clone of Android

    Good, Safari is crap and the Apple walled garden is horseshit.

    I've used many mobile devices over the years from many different manufacturers and I have to say, every time I try iOS to see if it's improved, I can't wait to get back to Android. Is the experience smoother on iOS? it prettier?...yes...Is it functional for anything outside of consuming content?...not really...

    Also, I've built quite a few apps over the years and I have to say, even though the experience developing on Android can be clunky and really confusing at times, it is leaps and bounds ahead of Apple. For a start, I can build an Android app on anything...Windows, Linux, MacOS....but I can only build iOS apps on a Mac...this seems really dumb, short sighted and makes it a lot harder for amateur developers to get into the space.

    To get underway developing on Android, you need literally any laptop capable of running Windows or Linux, Android Studio (maybe), Cordova / Ionic and a text editor, because you can build an app out of HTML/CSS/JS which are easy to learn and there are decades worth of resources online for free. Then you're can start building something and compile it to an APK to test on any Android device you like at will. You can literally do it on a shoestring.

    For need to go to an Apple store, spend about £2,0000-£3,000 on a Mac (because you can't upgrade them really, so you always need to go a spec beyond what you need), you then need to install XCode which is fucking massive for reasons I can't fathom, then you need to figure out XCode and learn Swift...which isn't easy and can be very expensive.

    For anyone out there considering getting an app developed, do yourself a favour and start with Android only...yes the App Store technically has a bigger audience etc...but understand that the biggest market for the Apple App Store is China. Followed by the US. Once you remove those two markets, Android actually has a bigger market share in the countries that matter. Get your app up and running on Android to get your audience started, then, and only then...once you've got some revenue coming in, worry about need to be realistic about your goals, yes having your app exposed to an extra several million people is probably a good thing...but does casting a wider net guarantee that you catch you more fish? I don't think it does. If you would respond to that with "odds" and "chances" then you haven't done your market research and your app is doomed anyway.

    I think this is how things are starting to move in the industry, because I typically see products launching on Android first. Usually by a few months at least. People that come to me typically ask for "Android only for now"...because they know their app will probably be up and running, at least as an MVP, in a week or so...which gives them something to push out with some ads on it to test the waters with and start gathering some feedback allows them to move forward sooner essentially.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Clone of Android

      Imagine claiming to be a developer and to having never heard of Xarmarin, MAUI or Kotlin.

      You can absolutely write iOS and Mac apps from Windows or Linux.

      1. Rich 2 Silver badge

        Re: Clone of Android

        “Imagine claiming to be a developer and to having never heard of Xarmarin, MAUI or Kotlin. “

        I’ve been writing software for 35 years or so. Does that make me a “developer” because I’ve never heard of any of those things

        …and I suspect I’m happier for it

        1. doublelayer Silver badge

          Re: Clone of Android

          I didn't write nor do I entirely agree with the comment, but if you limit it to mobile developer, people who mostly write apps for Android and/or IOS will likely have heard of those things. Kotlin's a popular language for Android apps (because it uses many of the Java-based components) that can also be built for IOS. Xamarin is Microsoft's C# stack for multiplatform including mobile. MAUI is a .NET-based UI system. I don't do any mobile development and I've heard of all three. You don't have to use them and if you don't work in mobile you don't have to know about them, but not having heard of them if you work in that area is like writing backend software without knowing what Postgresql is (you may use other databases, but it's bound to have come up some time with how common it is).

          The original comment, however, is wrong. The things they listed mean that you don't have to write IOS apps in Swift or Objective C (mostly), but they don't prevent you having to use a Mac. You can write a cross-platform application, but unless you're willing to send the IOS branch in completely untested, you will need at least one Mac to use things like the IOS device simulator or to send it to an IOS device to test. You can try to hack your way around that by using others' IOS simulators, for example, but it's going to take a lot more effort and be less reliable than doing that work on a Mac would be. This is probably one reason why there are more applications written for Android than IOS.

      2. Lyndon Hills 1

        Re: Clone of Android

        Write, yes. Package for deployment? Not when I last looked, which was a few years ago, admittedly.

    2. Probie

      Re: Clone of Android

      Boo fucking hoo. As an ex long time Android user I switched to Apple because I want less shit to worry about. If that means you cannot code with apple tools, I don’t get the app I want, you don’t get the sales you want, so you either f***-off, or you learn, as it stands you are adding no value to me as a consumer.

      Your difficulties (and frankly everyone else saying the choice needs to be like Google) are not mine (the consumers) worry, and you should not be destroying my perceived value, and before you take the pejorative of “my” as personal, If the Android eco system (with choice and button twiddling and settings galore) is so great why is it less than 50% of the UK user base?

      All I see in the Android ecosystem is crap apps like facebook built their own browser into an app to take data without disclosing it, or having to honor the OS. In the face of that Apple’s stance is perfectly f****ng reasonable considering its product is “Safe, ease of use”.

      Perhaps the CMA should really be looking why it’s so hard for a new Phone OS to flourish if it is worried about competition and duopolies.

      1. Abominator

        Re: Clone of Android

        Damn fucking right.

    3. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Clone of Android

      And so the wheel goes full cycle.

      I seem to remember apple arguing that android was a ripoff clone of iOS…

  9. Abominator

    I don't want fucking Chrome on my Apple devices.

    If I wanted Chrome, I would get a shitty Chrome book or Android device. But I don't want any of that bloated shit.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like