sortiwa
Recap: After Apple began allowing alternate iOS browser engines in compliance with new European regulations, the United Kingdom began arranging the framework for similar action, much to the Cupertino giant’s chagrin. A proposed stipulation regarding updates to Apple’s WebKit engine is particularly noteworthy.
Apple continues to fight the UK Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) efforts to regulate the iOS web browser market. The iPhone maker responded to the agency’s proposed remedies with the usual claims concerning security and user comfort.
Regulators in numerous countries have long criticized Apple’s policies, which force iOS web browser developers to use WebKit, the same engine as Safari. The CMA’s findings on the matter concur with complaints from third-party developers that the stipulation prevents them from building advanced mobile websites or improving progressive web apps. Many suspect that Apple deliberately restricts iOS web functionality to push developers toward the App Store, where the company takes a commission on downloads and purchases.
Apple reversed the policy for iPhone owners in the European Union after regulators there enacted the Digital Markets Act (DMA) – a new set of rules targeting dominant market players. The CMA, attempting to repeat the process in the UK, declared late last year that Apple’s browser policies stifle innovation at British users’ expense. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act – a UK counterpart to the DMA, has since come into force.
In addition to recommending that Apple extend its EU browser policies to the UK, the CMA proposed that the company grant third parties free access to the latest WebKit updates. In response, Cupertino claimed that the concession would stunt Safari’s ability to compete with third-party browsers.
Apple also stated that allowing alternate engines, like Google’s Chromium, would introduce security risks as the company controls engine updates only for WebKit. Furthermore, Apple used the results of a survey from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to claim that most third-party developers can’t or won’t maintain up-to-date security for browsers, suggesting that it alone can ensure a safe backend.
The company also reiterated its claim that the App Store review process ensures user safety, justifying the revenue cut. In contrast, Apple believes that home screen web apps are inherently riskier.
If the CMA wins its legal battle, the company stressed that any changes would be restricted to the UK, similar to how its earlier concessions only apply to EU users. Apple considers releasing browser or app restrictions globally to be prohibitively expensive.
Source link