Top
Best
New

Posted by eklavya 6 hours ago

iOS allows alternative browser engines in Japan(developer.apple.com)
236 points | 153 comments
GaryBluto 1 hour ago|
I'm surprised Apple haven't thrown in the towel and opened things up worldwide yet. It's only a matter of time until it becomes too confusing and problematic to try and run the same system relatively openly in one country and walled in another.
overfeed 1 hour ago||
> It's only a matter of time until it becomes too confusing and problematic to try and run the same system relatively openly in one country and walled in another

They will continue to do so for as long as it remains profitable. Navigating the complexities of multiple jurisdictions is the bread and butter of MNCs - it's the price of admission into the multinational club. Apple is guaranteed to have lawyers, admins, and executives already on the payroll for this task.

valleyer 34 minutes ago||
Lawyers, admins, and executives, sure. But what about the complexity on the engineers who now have to maintain an exploding matrix of modes? I can definitely see that becoming burdensome.
davnicwil 12 minutes ago|||
much has been written about the deteriorating quality of iOS.

There's bluntly not strong external evidence that software quality is a driving priority at Apple in recent years, so it most probably follows that concerns about maintainability aren't either.

theplatman 16 minutes ago||||
Engineers say they want to work on hard problems then complain that they can’t solve something because it’s too complex
MrMetric 13 minutes ago||
The difference is this isn't an inherently hard problem. It's just stupidity. The difficulty is not inherently interesting, because it's all made up.
SheinhardtWigCo 28 minutes ago||||
$500k+ TC makes many burdens worth shouldering
abacadaba 14 minutes ago|||
sounds like a problem for claude to worry about
hypeatei 1 hour ago|||
I've always thought the same. Obviously there isn't much of a technical hurdle since they have the engineering talent. But, keeping track of all these cross-region rules and training your staff+customers on it has to be quite costly in multiple respects (time, energy, mental models, etc.)

My personal opinion is that keeping the browser engine locked down isn't much of a profit generator, unlike maintaining full reign over the app store would be.

bloppe 52 minutes ago||
Hobbling browser engines is a key pillar of app store control. Decent PWA support would be a massive blow to Apple's bottom line.
gjsman-1000 51 minutes ago||
This is the conspiratorial version.

The more likely explanation is that when every app can bundle their own browser engine, we will not see a competition explosion. Instead, Electron apps will come to mobile, with every app shipping its own browser stack.

You can’t tell me Gecko, which has already failed on desktop, will suddenly be popular on mobile. You can easily tell me every app shipping their own Chromium would be very popular with developers.

wolvoleo 8 minutes ago|||
Firefox is really good now on android. It's my go to browser now for everything. It just needed full addon support but when that was finally there it was great.
kelthuzad 27 minutes ago||||
>This is the conspiratorial version.

Everything that's inconvenient for your preferred narrative can just be dismissed as conspiratorial thinking, makes the world so much easier - doesnt it? I've compiled some of the evidences that makes clear how one of the Gatekeepers (Apple) has a tremendous conflict of interest, which manifested itself in systematic sabotaging of PWAs over the years: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45534316

bloppe 48 minutes ago||||
a browser is essentially an app store with no 30% cut for Apple. If you can ship a browser, you don't need to pay the Apple tax
gjsman-1000 47 minutes ago||
Has PWA become popular on unencumbered platforms like Android or Windows?

No.

Even if unencumbered on iOS, it will still fail, because PWA is an intrinsically confusing technology. The pitch to non-technical users is terrible. Just like passkeys, which has also been terrible.

kelthuzad 31 minutes ago||
>Has PWA become popular on unencumbered platforms like Android or Windows? No.

Obviously. When a major Gatekeeper systematically holds it back to prevent it from challenging its taxation funnel, then it has no chance of competing and will thus not be chosen on competing platforms either, which will prevent its adoption and any investment in it.

>Even if unencumbered on iOS, it will still fail, because PWA is an intrinsically confusing technology.

PWA is not an "intrinsically confusing technology" and making such an absurd statement without proper elaboration reeks of pure bias.

wizzwizz4 47 minutes ago|||
Every app shipping its own Chromium isn't currently forbidden, as I understand it. They're just not allowed to use their own engines for webviews.
chuckadams 20 minutes ago|||
Technically you can even write your own webview, but you can't make it the default, nor will it be able to JIT-compile JS, since that requires an entitlement that Apple never grants. Having no JIT is murder on both performance and battery life.
bloppe 45 minutes ago|||
https://www.macobserver.com/news/15-months-later-iphone-user...
WD-42 54 minutes ago|||
Good. The sooner I can run Firefox with the legit uBlock origin the better.
steelbrain 52 minutes ago||
While its not Firefox, you can run uBlock origin with the Orion browser from the Kagi people.
Imustaskforhelp 1 minute ago|||
Okay now that we have come to the topic, How is Orion browser on App store whereas all others aren't?

is there a way to make more innovation in this area and maybe an extension or two developed adding more perms etc or forking Orion or the know-how behind it and replicating it could finally allow PWA on apple iphones?

WD-42 46 minutes ago|||
That’s what I’m currently doing - it’s barely functional. I’m sure it’ll get there eventually but it misses a ton of stuff the desktop version blocks.
browningstreet 40 minutes ago||
I'm running 1Blocker on iOS Safari, what am I not getting?
nvr219 34 minutes ago||
I'm using wipr and it's great. using vinegar/baking soda for video adblocks.
apples_oranges 1 hour ago|||
FeatureToggles.swift
travisgriggs 1 hour ago||
This. It’s computation. Computation doesn’t really “get” geopolitical borders.

I’m so sick of the ever increasing variances between the different “store” offerings in different regions of the world. Seems like every time I push an update (every month or so), I have to answer updated questions and declarations, often relative to different parts of the world.

gjsman-1000 37 minutes ago||
This is a poorly thought through argument, as there is nothing that “gets” geopolitical borders.
Wowfunhappy 3 hours ago||
I know this isn't new for Japan, but this requirement caught my eye:

> Use memory-safe programming languages, or features that improve memory safety within other languages, within the alternative web browser engine at a minimum for all code that processes web content

Would Apple themselves meet this requirement? Isn't WebKit C++? Of course, I'm not sure what would be considered "features that improve memory safety within other languages," that's kind of vague.

giancarlostoro 59 minutes ago||
I do wonder how long before Apple either replaces WebKit with something built in Swift, or starts slowly converting their browser engine to Swift.
rafram 3 hours ago||
https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/wiki/Safer-CPP-Guidelines
hu3 3 hours ago||
Documentation to guide devs on safe usage of C++ is enough?

So any language should be allowed as long as they instruct developers to be careful.

creato 3 hours ago||
I don't know if they do this, but those conventions could be enforced by a tool.
JimmyBiscuit 2 hours ago|||
Theres C++ in military airplanes, they just cut out 90% of the features: https://www.stroustrup.com/JSF-AV-rules.pdf

And heres a nice video about it: https://youtu.be/Gv4sDL9Ljww?si=Z4riPMKAKcIKaU0s

jjmarr 20 minutes ago||||
My work bans raw new and delete, so we only use unique_ptr. It's not as memory safe as Rust's borrow checker but I've never seen a segfault.
dmazzoni 1 hour ago||||
Yes, in WebKit, SaferCPP guidelines are enforced by a static analysis tool.
concinds 2 hours ago|||
Yes, they do this, and it's really not an unreasonable requirement.
arcanemachiner 2 hours ago||
Of course. It's just a coincidence that they're placing onerous restrictions on competi- I mean alternative browser engines. Restrictions which, of course, they're not obliged to follow themselves.

I am sure that Apple will make no other efforts to impede others from unwalling the garden. That would be completely ridiculous, and frankly, un-Apple-esque.

concinds 2 hours ago||
Both Chrome and Firefox are already compliant, so I don't see it as onerous, but the full context of the list is indeed an extremely loud and clear "FUCK YOU, WE OWN YOU" to regulators and other browser vendors.
rorylawless 2 hours ago||
My hope for laws such as the ones Japan and the EU enacted was that companies would see the writing on the wall and change their practices worldwide, if only for cost reasons (it presumably being more expensive to maintain multiple sets of rules.) However, these companies are now so large that they can choose to absorb any inefficiencies on a country-by-country basis.
OptionOfT 1 hour ago||
At a hardware level it seemed to work. Looking at USB-C on iPhones for example.

Software wise? Fail. EEA gets to disable start search in Windows 11. RoW does not. Interestingly EEA membership is decided at install time based on your selection, and is not changeable afterwards.

iPhones on the other hand have a daemon running that checks your location. It's not based on where you set up the phone. So traveling from Europe to somewhere else can actually prevent you from updating apps that you got via an alt-store:

https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/06/alternative-ios-app-sto...

ryandrake 1 hour ago||
Yea, unfortunately with software, using enough granular feature flags, they can make their software "maximally bad" for each given region. They lose a battle in the EU and are forced to make the software better? They will make it better only in the EU. Lose another one in Japan over a different issue? Just make a "japan" flag and only make it narrowly better for that use case in that region. Lose further battles in other regions, just add more flags.

They will never deploy the "better" feature worldwide if they have the opportunity to limit the better code to a particular region.

1: And of course, by "better" I am always referring to "better for the user" not "better for Apple."

gjsman-1000 34 minutes ago||
Even in a hardware level, this is easily obtainable, and Apple already does it.

Chinese iPhones? They have 2 physical SIM card slots and no eSIM.

EU iPhones? 1 SIM card slot, and 1 eSIM.

US iPhones? 2 eSIM card slots and no physical SIM. US iPhones also have mmWave when other countries do not.

If Apple wanted to, keeping a Lightning US iPhone was easily on the cards. The EU’s role in forcing the issue in the US is exaggerated.

bsimpson 10 minutes ago|||
My dad got his phone stolen on day 1 of a monthlong trip. He went without a phone the whole trip, in part because he was nervous he wouldn't have the right radios if he brought a euro phone home.
wolvoleo 6 minutes ago||
That's true they are different. It'll still work, but the bands aren't exactly the same so it may lead to coverage issues depending on the network.
mod50ack 11 minutes ago||||
There are different levels to these things. The number of SIM card slots or bands varying from model to model isn't that unusual. The average user just needs it to work. In fact, the SIM and band configuration differences have nothing to do with regional legal mimina — they have more to do with the standard practice and available systems in each region (for example, mmWave isn't widely deployed outside the US). The configurations aren't really "worse" in the same way as locking down browser access is worse. Phones have had regional variants going back ~forever for pretty mundane and benign reasons.

More importantly, if a user travels from one region to another, as long as they can use their phone in the place they arrive, having slightly non-optimal bands or a different SIM configuration doesn't matter. The fact that your phone is slightly different from the local model is not really a problem.

But having your charger vary across regions? That's a recipe for disaster. Not only is that another level of variance in your external casing, it impacts day-to-day use. When an American user travels to, say, France, or vice versa, and wants to buy a charger, or share one with someone else, having the same model of iPhone be incompatible would be a major frustration. It would be stupid to engineer a lightning AND USB-C version of the same device for each market.

ryandrake 21 minutes ago|||
You make an excellent point. I would guess that it is orders of magnitude more expensive for Apple to create a new hardware configuration than it is for them to add software feature flags, though. But, assuming the cost of making the hardware change worldwide exceeds the cost of reconfiguring their factories for new hardware, you're right that they would not choose to make the hardware change worldwide.

Almost certainly someone (or an entire team) carefully crunched the numbers and deliberately decided not to keep a Lightning US iPhone.

viktorcode 1 hour ago|||
And what's your opinion if the law would oblige the companies to remove features their products have like tracking transparency popups? Two countries' courts already fined Apple for enforcing a popup that warns users about tracking across third party apps (a feature Apple themselves do not use)?
rorylawless 13 minutes ago||
My prior POV was that Apple would jettison the feature globally, but the discussion elsewhere in this thread suggests that salami slicing at the software-level is a cost larger companies are willing to bear.
crazygringo 2 hours ago||
There are many things Apple does that have anticompetitive motivations, but the browser engine doesn't seem like one of them. It's genuinely about security and battery life and standardization. So if cost was never the reason in the first place, cost is not going to be the reason to change.
greiskul 2 hours ago|||
It is literally done for strategic reasons to put a stranglehold on innovations on the web, so that there is no risk of web app technology developing to a point to threaten the dominance of native apps and the app store.

Anybody that thinks otherwise is hopeless naive, Steve Jobs himself envisioned a web app future as the future of technology; before Apple found out the gold mine that the app store became.

avar 1 hour ago|||

    > Steve Jobs himself envisioned a
    > web app future as the future of[...]
I'm not putting cynical motivations past Apple, but you're reading too much (or too little?) into what Jobs said at the time.

His remarks at the time of the initial iPhone release (with the benefit of hindsight) were clearly because they weren't ready to expose any sort of native API's.

Pissing on you and telling you it's raining was typical Jobs reality distortion field marketing, and not an indication that he actually believed it was raining.

crazygringo 1 hour ago||||
> to put a stranglehold on innovations on the web

I think that's the hypothetical part, it's not reality. Safari continues to be a fully modern browser. It doesn't release new features quite as fast as Chrome, but it does generally adopt them.

If Apple were attempting to put a "stranglehold on innovations on the web", Safari's feature set would look very different. But that's not what's happening.

Like I said, Apple does lots of anticompetitive things. I'm not blind to what they do with the app store. I just don't think that the single browser engine policy is motivated by this, or has much effect on it, given how Apple does keep maintaining Safari as a modern browser.

leptons 1 hour ago|||
It absolutely is reality. Safari is the worst browser by far, it's been compared to Microsoft's old Internet Explorer browser. But don't take my word for it, lots of people have written about it...

https://www.google.com/search?q=safari+is+the+new+ie

And Apple purposely will never implement lots of APIs that only their native apps allow (which other browsers implement), specifically to force many developers to create a native app to use these APIs, so that Apple can force the developer to give them a percentage of any purchases made through the app. They can't force a developer to give them a cut of purchases made through a web browser, which is why they purposely hobble the Safari browser engine and then force all other browsers to use this engine. If you can't see how bad this is, then you've been taken over by the reality distortion field.

It's spelled out in the DOJ lawsuit against apple, among many other anti-competitive practices.

Microsoft got sued and lost in an antitrust suit for bundling IE with Windows. Apple bundles Safari with iOS but forbids any other browser engine but their Safari engine. Can you imagine if Microsoft forbade any other browser from being installed on Windows? It's time Apple was brought to justice over their abusive anti-competitive practices.

Here's the whole DOJ suit against Apple:

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

ChadNauseam 28 minutes ago|||
I suspect it might have been motivated by antitrust concerns, but safari is really not that bad. Check out Interop 2025: https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025

They generally are pretty caught up on features. They have webgpu, they support the web notifications API (once a PWA is installed), lots of stuff. My main gripe is that they make it too hard to install PWAs, but we're still waiting for an actual API for that. (Maybe in 2027? [0])

> And Apple purposely will never implement lots of APIs that only their native apps allow (which other browsers implement)

Can you give an example?

[0]: https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2025/11/24/the-web-insta...

givinguflac 33 minutes ago|||
You seriously just link to a google search of people who agree with you?? Solid investigation. Hard disagree on safari being even in the same ballpark as IE; what’s your alternative, Google owns the entirety of the browser space?
aryonoco 1 hour ago|||
Safari is the modern IE. the fact that PWAs didn’t take off in the last decade js purely due to Safari.

The only reason Apple has banned alternative engines and continues to hold back on major web technologies is anticompetitive behaviour.

ryandrake 1 hour ago|||
No, I think Chrome is the modern IE. It has huge market share, to the point where developers often just ignore the other browsers or at best treat them as P2. Just like they did when IE was dominant.

I'm torn on this honestly. Safari (particularly mobile Safari) is literally the only thing keeping the web from becoming Chrome-only. While I would love to see Safari-alternative engines on the iPhone, I fear that the "open web" in terms of browser compatibility is cooked the day that happens: Commercial web developers are supremely lazy and their product managers are, too. They will consider the web Chrome-only from that day forward and simply refuse to lift a finger for other browsers.

I think when IE6 died, on one hand it was a relief for web developers, who (very quickly) deleted all the code needed to maintain compatibility, but on the other hand, it made the web worse by bringing us closer to browser monopoly.

crazygringo 1 hour ago|||
> Safari is the modern IE.

That's not true. It's not even available on most computers. IE was about Microsoft not following web standards and abusing its monopoly position; Safari is a minor browser by overall market share and is broadly standards-compliant.

> the fact that PWAs didn’t take off in the last decade js purely due to Safari.

So then why aren't PWA's super-popular on Windows and on Android? Since Safari doesn't affect those?

realusername 36 minutes ago||
> Safari is a minor browser by overall market share and is broadly standards-compliant.

It's officially compliant but in practice there's a lot of buggy implementations in Safari and you'll spend lots of time on workarounds and debugging.

It's also the last non-evergreen browser being tied to the OS so it's the slowest to update, compounding that effect.

> So then why aren't PWA's super-popular on Windows and on Android? Since Safari doesn't affect those?

Personally I think that's because it's still not that convenient even on Android even if better.

otterley 1 hour ago|||
> Anybody that thinks otherwise is hopeless naive

This is inappropriate. People can reasonably disagree without being insulting to each other.

If you have concrete evidence that Apple is deliberately withholding some essential advancement in Safari or its support for Web standards so that it can sell more apps, by all means, cite it.

greiskul 39 minutes ago||
https://www.google.com/search?q=safari+is+the+new+ie

Just read the summary that Gemini provides for a good quick understanding, and follow up the multiple articles about it. Then please don't come back and say that there is nothing concrete about this evidence, that is just people speculating about a behavior that Apple has been engaging repeatedly and continuously for over a decade.

otterley 30 minutes ago|||
It is you that needs to cite the evidence, not some LLM, and with hard facts coupled with evidence of intent, not just referring to mere opinions.

You claim to know something with certainty, so one can reasonably expect you have the expertise and data to prove it. If you come to the kitchen claiming to be a chef, you’d better come with sharp knives, not photos of them.

givinguflac 31 minutes ago|||
Seriously, you expect people to click a Google search link for people who agree with you- and then read what the LLM has to say?? When did HN become a garbage dump where people don’t do their own research and/or thinking?
otterley 21 minutes ago||
About 10 years ago, by my reckoning. The less people know about a subject, the more strongly opinionated and certain they are about it. It’s not just HN, though; it’s a very human condition.
toast0 1 hour ago||||
If browser F is worse at battery life than browser S, people will figure that out and adapt for themselves. If it's a big difference, it's self-evident; and small differences should show up in the battery life tool and computer press.

Security-wise, the sandbox should limit damage to within the browser, and if it doesn't that's not the browser's fault. Maybe restrict access to password filling and such though / figure out how to offer an API to reduce the impact.

Standardization, eh? Forcing Safari on iOS and not making it available on the mass market platforms (Android and Windows) makes it a pretty wonky standard. I guess there's a claim to be made for the embedded browsing engine, but IMHO, that should be an app developer choice.

n8cpdx 38 minutes ago|||
Safari exclusivity is the only reason we aren’t living in a 100% “this site built for chrome” world. I think folks must forget the IE days and how bad that was.

There is zero percent chance developers are wasting a second making sure their sites actually work cross platform if not for iOS (and iOS more moneyed user base).

michaelt 53 minutes ago||||
> If browser F is worse at battery life than browser S, people will figure that out and adapt for themselves.

Unfortunately, the makers of a certain browser also control several major web properties, and regularly make 'mistakes' that break compatibility with competing browsers, while releasing a set of apps that 'forget' users' browser selections on a monthly basis.

Personally, I'd much prefer apple allowed a browser engine with proper ad blocking support. But I do worry that the moment they do so, the almost-monopoly browser market would become a total monopoly.

Tagbert 1 hour ago||||
Safari has long been better for battery than Chrome but people still install Chrome on their MacBooks.
crazygringo 1 hour ago|||
> people will figure that out and adapt for themselves

No they won't. People on HN will. Not the average person.

> Security-wise, the sandbox should limit damage to within the browser

The problem is, arbitrary code execution vastly expands the risks. Your "should" is doing all the work there.

> Standardization, eh? Forcing Safari on iOS and not making it available on the mass market platforms

Huh? Apple follows web standards. Why the heck should it make Safari available on Android and Windows? Safari isn't a standard, web standards are.

leptons 1 hour ago||
>> people will figure that out and adapt for themselves

>No they won't. People on HN will. Not the average person.

Yes they will, Apple has made it very easy to see.

To check iOS app power usage, go to Settings > Battery, where you'll see a breakdown of battery consumption by app for the last 24 hours or 10 days, showing usage time and background activity, allowing you to identify power-hungry apps and manage settings like Background App Refresh to improve battery life.

So yeah, it's easy to see which app is taking the most power, and users can do this easily, unless you think Apple's UX is so bad that users won't know how to read it?

>The problem is, arbitrary code execution vastly expands the risks. Your "should" is doing all the work there.

If that's a problem for web browsers, then it's a problem for every single app in the app store. There's nothing really unique about a web browser app that makes it more risky than any other app. Javascript is already very much sandboxed. And there have been plenty of exploits that already target Safari. So saying other browsers are the problem is like blaming the victim (of Apple's anti-competitive practices).

>Huh? Apple follows web standards. Why the heck should it make Safari available on Android and Windows? Safari isn't a standard, web standards are.

If web standards are standards, then let other web browsers on iOS.

The real reason Apple disallows other browser engines on Safari is so they can force developers to create native apps where they can get a cut of any purchase made through the app. The problems with Apple's anti-competitive practices have been spelled out in the DOJ lawsuit against them:

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

swiftcoder 46 seconds ago|||
> So yeah, it's easy to see which app is taking the most power, and users can do this easily, unless you think Apple's UX is so bad that users won't know how to read it?

It's easy to see, but seeing doesn't mean the user will do anything about it. I guarantee that for the average user, their list goes something like Instagram/TikTok/FaceBook/Twitter, and they haven't uninstalled any of those yet due to battery drain...

crazygringo 1 hour ago|||
> go to Settings > Battery, where you'll see a breakdown of battery consumption by app

And what percentage of users do you think ever check that, or even know it's there to check?

> If that's a problem for web browsers, then it's a problem for every single app in the app store.

No it's not, the app store disallows arbitrary code execution.

> There's nothing really unique about a web browser app that makes it more risky than any other app.

Yes there is -- JavaScript.

> Javascript is already very much sandboxed.

...by Safari. It wouldn't be if you allowed any developer to write their own JavaScript interpreter as part of their own browser.

> If web standards are standards, then let other web browsers on iOS.

That's a non-sequitur.

gumby271 2 hours ago||||
The web browser is the singular hole in Apple's grip over the user's device. While there are definitely arguments that can be made about security, I think it's naive to think that Apple is unaware of this and is operating on something other than protecting their app store fortune.
8note 46 minutes ago|||
why wouldnt they just drop safari and switch to firefox with ublock origin included in that case?

adtech is the big security and performance drain and allowing ads and making them hard to block is a big security and performance gap

mettamage 7 minutes ago||
I would love to have a browser that I can use my stylus to scribble with.
koolba 2 hours ago||
Does this mean we'll finally have "real" firefox with support for ublock origin on iOS?
modeless 2 hours ago||
Apple is going to (mostly) obey the letter of the law but they will continue to resist strongly in every way they can. Onerous requirements, arbitrary restrictions, overzealous enforcement, and most of all bad APIs with limited capabilities and no workarounds for bugs.

Shipping a good and complete browser engine on iOS will require more than just developers. You'll also need a team of lawyers to threaten and sue Apple to get their policy restrictions relaxed and APIs fixed.

I doubt Mozilla or Google will be willing to spend the many developer-years and lawyer-years it will take to fully port every feature of a whole engine and properly maintain it in such a hostile environment, just for the Japan market. I expect to see some hobbyist-level ports but not something worth using for a long time. Unless other countries follow suit.

arcanemachiner 2 hours ago||
> just for the Japan market

Also the EU, no?

modeless 2 hours ago||
Does the EU also require third party engines to be able to replace the web view in apps systemwide? Or does it only require that single standalone browser apps can use alternative engines?
concinds 1 hour ago||
> Does the EU also require third party engines to be able to replace the system web view in apps systemwide?

Yes.

modeless 40 minutes ago||
Hmm, actually now that I look closer at the Japan requirements, it doesn't seem to allow replacing the web view systemwide, as I thought, and as Android allows. And neither do the EU requirements. It only allows individual apps to embed an alternative engine on a per-app basis. And the Japan page includes the caveat "apps from browser engine stewards" which if interpreted zealously (and I expect Apple to) would forbid apps not from Google or Mozilla from embedding Chromium or Gecko.
Zak 2 hours ago|||
Probably not, at least not from Mozilla themselves. They cite onerous requirements and the difficulty of having to maintain different apps for different regions.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/26/24052067/mozilla-apple-io...

wolvoleo 5 minutes ago||
Yeah malicious compliance :(
nntwozz 19 minutes ago|||
There is ublock origin lite for Safari in the meantime:

https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home?tab=readme-ov-file

(it's great)

viktorcode 57 minutes ago|||
Probably not, as the same rules were applied to Apple devices in EU earlier, and no third party browser engines appeared.

But right now you can use uBlock origin lite in Safari. Or any other of multitude of other adblockers.

ckcheng 1 hour ago|||
FYI. iOS Safari already supports uBlock Origin Lite. iOS Firefox can do the same anytime but it already has some tracking and content blocking built in too.
aryonoco 1 hour ago||
As someone who has recently switched from Android to iOS, I can tell you uBlock Origin Lite on Safari on iOS is a poor man’s imitation of the real uBlock Origin on Firefox on Android.
LetsGetTechnicl 39 minutes ago|||
How does it compare to 1Blocker? I use that in Safari and also a VPN when I'm away back to my home connection so it uses my NextDNS which also blocks a lot of in-app ads.
mi_lk 56 minutes ago|||
are there major sites that don't work for you?
Longhanks 2 hours ago|||
Could’ve happened some time ago already in the EU, so there must be reasons for Firefox an Google not to ship their own engines (yet?).
__turbobrew__ 2 hours ago||
uBO lite works pretty well on ios/safari for me.
concinds 2 hours ago||
The separate-binary requirement makes it completely DOA, so they're still breaking the law. Deliberately. It bans actions that make it unlikely for browsers to adopt alternative engines. And they mandate no sharing of login-state with any other app from the same developer, despite violating that themselves (Safari sync is turned on by default, no encryption by default). Funny. And they mandate blocking third-party cookies, great but completely inappropriate for an OS to impose. The most hilarious:

> Prioritize resolving reported vulnerabilities with expedience [...] Most vulnerabilities should be resolved in 30 days, but some may be more complex and may take longer.

Apple does not comply with this.

ninkendo 2 hours ago||
The fact we still can't get this in the US is atrocious. They have already paid the cost to implement this for the EU and Japan, but simply don't allow it for US users because... spite, I guess? Horrible.

It reminds me of when I asked for my account to be deleted from some online learning site (Udacity maybe?) And they're response was: "Nope, we only do that for European users." Like they went through all the effort of implementing a proper way to delete your data, but they just... don't do it if you're not in the right geographic area.

__aru 36 minutes ago|
> The fact we still can't get this in the US is atrocious.

To be honest, I suspect that Apple is purposefully doing this to make alternatives a logistical and legal nightmare vs their own App store.

By having different rules for different countries, different fee structures, etc, Apple is basically making alternatives as inconvenient and painful as legally possible

The US not getting these features is on purpose, it makes the entire idea of "alternatives on iOS" extremely inconvenient vs just using the App store.

drnick1 3 hours ago||
2026 should be the year when every tech-minded person dumps Apple (and Google) for good and either starting running either a free Android OS (Graphene, Lineage or a couple of other variants) or a Linux phone.

At this point, Apple and Google devices are nothing more than instruments of coercion and mass surveillance.

bsimpson 7 minutes ago||
So far as I can tell, Linux phones are still ass.

Linux on mobile is probably even more behind than Linux on desktop was in the 90s.

yokoprime 1 hour ago|||
Making "tech-minded persons" dump apple etc does NOTHING to move the needle in terms of what most people use.

For example I'm running a pretty sweet calibre-web automated setup with Kobo readers. Ive changed the storefront on my kobo and have seemless sync OTA of selected shelves. And even I struggle to get my wife to choose that setup over Amazon kindle. The very minute there is a single snag, normies (sorry wife dear) lose interest.

criddell 2 hours ago|||
Lectures and admonitions won’t change anything. People will move to Graphene and Linux when it’s better for them.

Coercion and surveillance problems are pretty far down the list of complaints most people have with their personal devices.

airstrike 3 hours ago|||
Unfortunately, I appreciate the deep integration between my phone and my laptop too much to drop either
drnick1 3 hours ago||
I don't have Apple devices to compare, but I think KDE Connect can closely replicate this, entirely locally. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple's "deep integrations" rely on cloud components that are privacy-violating by design (even if Apple promises not to look at the data flowing through their servers).
arzig 34 minutes ago|||
Unfortunately the integration is really quite weak with Apple. KDE Connect cannot remain active while the application is not in the foreground. It’s possibly a packaging issue but pairing from fedora is also quite flakey.

As absurd as this sounds windows -> iPhone via their phone link is actually almost as good as apples built in ecosystem to the point where I can make phone calls and send texts on my computer. It’s not quite as seamless especially the setup but that is a well done wizard and it mostly works.

cosmic_cheese 2 hours ago||||
Most cross device stuff in the Apple world actually works via P2P Bluetooth and WiFi and functions without an internet connection or even a shared WiFi network. Mac and iDevice WiFi hardware is even designed with this in mind and is capable of maintaining P2P connections to other devices and a WiFi network simultaneously without rapidly switching between the two like many commodity WiFi cards have to.
cpuguy83 36 minutes ago|||
KDE Connect with iOS, while useful, is terrible.
meindnoch 43 minutes ago|||
Unfortunately, I prefer smooth animations.
websiteapi 3 hours ago|||
UX is much worse imo on graphene compared to iOS
drnick1 3 hours ago|||
I disagree. I had an iPhone in the past and find the minimalist Graphene UI refreshing. It's like comparing KDE on Arch to Windows 11 or MacOS. Nothing gets in your way or distracts you, the OS is what an OS is supposed to be, a platform for managing and launching apps.
cosmic_cheese 2 hours ago|||
It’s definitely something that varies from person to person. I tried putting Graphene on a secondary Android device (an old Pixel 3XL) and compared to the stock ROM or more typical AOSP fork (e.g. LineageOS or Pixel Experience), I found it rather frustrating. I can’t imagine running it on my daily driver.

Similarly with Linux, the sheer number of rough edges, papercuts, and quirks is still too high (regardless of if I’m using a big name DE or hyper minimal tiling WM or somewhere in between) for them to serve as my main desktop environment.

websiteapi 3 hours ago|||
UX, not UI. perfect example is you copy something on your laptop and paste it on your phone. trivial on iDevice.
bdd8f1df777b 3 hours ago|||
Trivial as in it works well sometimes and badly in other times with no explanation for why. That’s my experience anyway.
umanwizard 1 hour ago||
It literally always works flawlessly for me unless Bluetooth is turned off.
8note 44 minutes ago||||
so you have your file on a laptop running linux, and its just easy to move the file to your iOS phone?
drnick1 3 hours ago||||
KDE connect over Bluetooth or WiFi seems ideal for this, so it's definitely possible. I am not sure how the iDevices deal with this, but I really don't want anything cloud-connected.
bigyabai 3 hours ago||||
KDE Connect is more reliable than Continuity Clipboard, in my experience.
hu3 3 hours ago||||
this doesn't work sometimes. my wife complains frequently
Larrikin 3 hours ago|||
Tailscale drop is better and works across devices.
websiteapi 3 hours ago||
tail scale drop is much more complicated than literally copying and pasting on iDevice. that's literally all you do, no setup, nothing and this is just one example for one type of action.

https://tailscale.com/kb/1106/taildrop

look at all of that, lol. iDevice is literally copy and paste any file or text. the end - you don't even have to set it up.

Larrikin 1 hour ago|||
How do I copy it from my Mac to my Android?
rendaw 2 hours ago|||
This sounds like hyperbole. I've never used tailscale, but reading that doc:

Installation: Install the tailscale client

Sharing: Click on the share menu and select tailscale

It's a beta feature so there's also a switch you have to flip for now.

websiteapi 2 hours ago|||
you don't need to believe me. I use it daily. don't know why you're so defensive lol - it's our own opinion. fyi I didn't have to do anything for this to work (clipboard laptop to phone)
umanwizard 1 hour ago|||
Meanwhile, for Apple:

Installation: nothing.

Sharing: Cmd+C/Cmd+V

IlikeKitties 3 hours ago|||
>UX is much worse imo on graphene compared to iOS

Freedom and privacy exist on graphene.

viktorcode 54 minutes ago|||
Can you please elaborate on how iPhones are instruments of mass surveillance?
drnick1 40 minutes ago||
Among others:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM

https://sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/apple-siri-lawsuit-settlement-i...

EA-3167 2 hours ago|||
This is profoundly out of touch with how almost everyone who isn’t a particularly zealous member of certain movements lives their lives.
umanwizard 1 hour ago|||
> 2026 should be the year when every tech-minded person dumps Apple (and Google) for good

Why? I am a very tech-minded person but simply don't care about running alternative browser engines on my phone. Am I "wrong" in your opinion?

bigyabai 3 hours ago||
2026 should be the last year when anyone technical-minded comes around to the realization that Google/Apple are in the Fed's pocket. If you're making the switch in 2027 or 2028, it's probably too late for you.
threethirtytwo 3 hours ago||
Why only Japan? Seems like something forced them to in Japan.
leptons 2 hours ago||
The US DOJ was attempting to sue Apple in an antitrust suit for many things, including blocking every browser engine except their own Safari browser on iOS.

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

Who knows if this will actually move forward now that "Tim Apple" gave the current leader a meaningless golden trophy.

guessmyname 1 hour ago|||
For many Hacker News readers who check the website every day, this is not news:

• (4 years ago) Japan forces Apple to slightly loosen restrictions on ‘reader’ apps — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28387094

• (3 years ago) Japan pushes for Apple and Google to allow sideloading — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36393809

• (3 years ago) Japan to open up Apple and Google app stores to competition — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36368735

• (3 years ago) Japan to open up Apple- and Google-dominated phone apps to competition — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36370398

• (3 years ago) Apple Japan hit with $98M in back taxes for missing duty-free abuses — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34156235

• (2 years ago) Japan to crack down on Apple and Google app store monopolies — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38773429

• (2 years ago) Japan forces Apple and Google to open their mobile platforms — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40666651

• (2 years ago) Japan enacts law to curb Apple, Google's app dominance — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40671162

• (5 months ago) Japan: Apple Must Lift Browser Engine Ban by December — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44810061

• (5 months ago) Japan Law Will Require Apple to Allow Non-WebKit Browsers on iPhone — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44826077

• (15 days ago) Apple Announces Changes to iOS in Japan — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46307858

• (14 days ago) Apple and Google respond to new Japan smartphone law, including reduced app fees — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46310074

… and more here: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=japan+apple

Hamuko 3 hours ago|||
It's in the EU and Japan, so basically all regions that have pushed back against Apple's anti-competitive ways.

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/en...

cubefox 3 hours ago||
Yes, there is a new Japanese law that forces them.
gumby271 1 hour ago|
It's so disappointing to be fed crumbs like this instead of seeing real consumer protection laws put in place. Let users install software on their computers outside of what the manufacturer permits, why focus on browsers and "app stores"?
aryonoco 1 hour ago|
Because capitalism.
More comments...