They are forcing many developers to create native apps instead by locking down iOS and not allowing any decent web engines. Why? Then all payments would have to go through Apple so they can take a cut. Developers must also purchase hardware from Apple to create and test it.

Apple is a real asshole! "We have users, and if you want to make an app for our users then you have to purchase a MacBook, an iPhone, license to publish and allow us to take x% of all income."

And those who does this helps apple sell more hardware and make the problem bigger.

Sure, this might not be the reason even though it adds a lot of income to Apple.

The only other possible reason is that the people working on the web engine for iOS are useless people compared to all other teams working on browsers.

Long ago we had messages to those who used IE6. What we need now are messages that tell people to throw their iPhone in the thrash, cause it's not like they can use a proper browser...

WebKit is a core part of iOS; lots of APIs use it for lots of things. You just can't swap it out for something else without breaking things.

Lets not forget the security and power usage issues as well; the last thing iPhone users would want is a rendering engine that wasn't optimized for the hardware and software draining their batteries.

WebKit is used by several Apple apps—Mail, iTunes, App Store, Calendar, etc—and thousands of 3rd party apps.

Microsoft ended up with 'n' version of xp, which had all shortcuts to IE hidden, and a prompt asking you which browser you want to install and use after installation.

You must be new around here. ;-)

Microsoft used their natural monopoly in operating systems (Windows has 95% marketshare) to force OEMs (HP, Compaq, etc.) to bundle IE with their machines and not Netscape Navigator. Microsoft threaten to cancel their Windows licenses.

And later, it decided, against its decent decree with the US government, to bundle IE with Windows, claiming Windows wouldn't function without IE, which was a lie.

Perhaps you're not aware that natural monopolies are themselves not illegal; it's using that monopoly to force the market to do things it ordinarily wouldn't in some other area.

So… no, there are no antitrust issues regarding web engines on iOS. And of course, Google, Mozilla and others have browsers on the App Store that use WebKit anyway, so it would be hard to make the case they're being harmed…

Though, afaik, Apple does not stoop to the levels of Amazon, who removed the Twitch app from Roku platform for absolutely no reason other than to line their pockets with more cash.

1) the free market doesn’t work because it is too hard for competition to enter an existing market or for existing competition to dethrone a market leader.

_and_

2) the big player(s) take (too much) advantage of their position by engaging in ‘anti-consumer’ practices.

Given the existence of Android, Apple isn’t in position 1. So, do you think (2) alone is sufficient for taking legal action? The common thinking is that the market will take care of it by by bankrupting the company doing it.

Apple has a monopoly on OSes that run iOS apps, OSes that run on iPhones, phones that run iOS and on App Stores that can install iOS apps.

They abuse all of them (e.g. the Webkit-only issue for iOS, monopoly pricing on iPhones, censorship in App Store).

Conversely e.g. Google has none of these monopolies except for the monopoly in running perfectly apps that require Google Play Services.

You could also say that Samsung has a monopoly of smartphones with "SAMSUNG" printed on them.

http://www.cordcuttersnews.com/amazon-pulls-twitch-channel-r...

2) Apple has legitimate technical reasons for not allowing other browser engines (well specifically the JS part). Intent matters.

Oh please... source?

Apple can negate this almost entirely by controlling JavascriptCore and WebKit and ensuring that their security models e.g. sandbox are tight and well tested. Leaving that up to third parties who may not be so vigilant compromises the security of the entire device.

2) Apple’s App Store policies disallow the user from executing arbitrary code

I think you can figure this out yourself.

Its quality really went downhill. I really loved the "it just works" stuff of Apple Past. And I loved the intuitive, skeumorphic interfaces.

Now it's all crap and HIDDEN MODES - something Apple always spoke against in its UX manuals. It's sad day that Google and Microsoft have better design than Apple now, and Apple copied them.

Steve Jobs would have never let this happen. He would have a whole department funded with several billion dollars just to make Apple products the most user friendly on the planet. And he would have Siri be a Star-Trek-like voice platform by now.

And the worst: Endless "back" button/swiping on the News app.

Apple's problem is simpler as they own the code, and bugs are likely to come from understaffed engineering.

I am curious about the qualities an operating system needs to be deemed "modern".

Off the top of my head -

A. Slow development cycles on Safari (they're getting better, but still) while simultaneously blocking competitors on iOS

B. A number of embarrassing security failures on macOS recently

C. A lack of focus on macOS (Probably the cause of B)

Do we really need to discuss exact m/s before you're willing to push harder on the frickin gas?

I agree that iOS home screen apps are in a pretty bad state, but Google is also discontinuing Chrome Apps and that doesn't make Chrome a worse HTML renderer.

I think users would be expecting Apple to curtail your ability to crash or hang the browser.

What I really hate is that when safari shits itself the message to the user is “there was a problem with the web page so it was reloaded” so we get old iphone users complaining to us when their lame browser crashed.

That and iframes getting resized to full height ignoring css directives completely... we have a lot of our codebase that are workaround just for ios

Not least most of what you mention (other than the 300ms delay) is OS level anyhow.

When IE6 came out it was kind of a breath of fresh air... it allowed for a lot of things, and the v4 browsers finally fell off the map. IE 5.0.0 had some hideous bugs on stamped CDs (Office 2000, Windows 2000) that I had to work around for a couple years. IE6 corrected many of them.

Now as things progressed, IE6 became a boat anchor for a long time.. and IE7/8/9 though relatively current at release fell behind very quickly. IE10-11 were also rans in my opinion, and I'm glad most people get to ignore them now.

Nothing compares to dealing with IE4 + NN4 issues... it was truly painful and I'll take what we have today over either. Most people aren't dealing with most of the newer browser features... but for those that are, it can be bad. Safari is the worst actor in the bunch, and they are emphatically not rock solid on that front.

At least the early IE vs NN stuff was fast to change and interesting. IE6 issues were the exact opposite :(

It was entirely due to MS’s negligence, not just XP.