- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@lemmy.world
Mozilla is unhappy because the use of browser engines other than WebKit will be restricted to the EU, forcing them to develop two different apps.
For an independent browser like Firefox, managing two browsers is not easy, so it can be forgiven that this could be seen as almost harassment.
Also, the fact that the use of browser engines other than WebKit is limited to iOS means that the use of WebKit is still forced on iPadOS, which also increases the effort for Mozilla.
For most people, time is not regarded to be free (i.e. not a cost). As a devoted Linux user, the adage that “Linux is only free if you don’t value your time” is absolutely true.
Uhh ok install windows then?
Learning Windows is still a time cost. You’re also losing your library of Mac software and quite a few interoperability features between your other Apple products.
??? So you’re plan is to just say fuck it, and continue to be fucked over by apple? The fuck logic is that? Almost all software has a replacement in windows/Linux. I work in all 3 ecosystems, there is very little that lacks an alternative in each os. Sticking to osx/iOS is just a cop out.
No. My argument is that if Apple isn’t going to open up their ecosystem to genuine competition and genuine interoperability then they need to have their hand forced through regulation.
Telling people to just stop buying Apple products is a lazy, knee-jerk self-righteous response that ignores the realities of platform lock-in.
Good luck with that…I vote with my wallet instead of buying into fad shit.
You seem to think that regulation doesn’t work. Luckily, we have a test case set up for us in real-life.
In the United States, consumers relied on voting with their wallets. In the European Union, regulatory agencies forced Apple to take pro-consumer moves through regulation.
Now take a look at which approach produced results and which approach left consumers continuing to complain about the lack of interoperability and the lack of competition in Apple’s walled garden.
Cool, tell me again where we are? And if you think legislation will actually be brought up and passed here in the states…
Can’t do that on ARM. Windows on ARM sucks and there isn’t a good app ecosystem.
There isn’t a good app ecosystem for arm on osx either? What’s your point?
You’re incorrect. Tons of apps are native ARM on Mac now, also rosetta2 emulation is really fast. Obviously not as fast as native ARM but it surprised me.
Most might be native but tell me what apps don’t have an alternative on x86 and I’ll agree with you.
Exclusivity isn’t the point. A healthy app ecosystem is what we’re discussing, which ARM on Mac has. It wasn’t great for 6 months or so, but it’s quite good now.
??? No the whole discussion on this has been how people can’t get out of the ecosystem. Which I’ve provided multiple ways to get out of it. There is really zero point to even bring up ARM MacBooks, because as you have said the ecosystem isn’t exclusive.
Did you forget what you said? This is what I’m responding to.
macOS (not osX for many years now) has a healthy app ecosystem, unlike windows for ARM.
My point is “install Windows” isn’t a valid option for anyone with an ARM Mac, so suggesting it is silly. Mac hasn’t made an x86 computer in a couple years.
I’m not the parent commenter, but Apple Silicon has much wider app support than ARM on Windows. There’s also Rosetta, which works alright, I suppose. Not spectacularly and usually not anywhere near native performance but it’s at least okay.