The general argument is that the changes end up being annoying.
Simplest example would be 1st party apps only vs including 3rd party apps. Clearly there are implications around including 3rd party apps that would affect the operating system and thus user experience
iPhones can still come with Safari installed and used by default, no changes to anyones experience at all. But if I want to go to the app store, install a different browser engine, and set it as default, how does that affect any users that are just using the default device as supplied to them?
There is no reason at all to hinder this choice. It does not affect 1st party apps, or how the device works by default. It just allows choice for those who want to explore it.
> iPhones can still come with Safari installed and used by default, no changes to anyones experience at all.
No, this is not allowed and currently also not the case. When you're setting up a new iPhone, one of the questions during setup is which browser do you want to use.
I agree, except Windows had a massive PC monopoly back then. Apple doesnt have nearly that same monopoly today. It shares it with Google and in some markets it lags behind Googles user numbers.
Suppose there were a rule that there could be no defaults ever, and all of the apps are randomly arranged in the App Store for the sake of fairness.
Your argument would be equally true, you could just scroll and scroll until you find the app you’re looking for, but surely you’d agree the experience would be worse?
Because web sites will start using Chrome only features and stick a big box over the page insisting the user switch. Unless, of course, you want to pass complete control over web standards to Google.
See GDPR side effect of annoying banners everywhere even if I don't give a damn about my website visits information being processed, for how unintended consequences played out and made the web worse for everyone.
For DMA specifically, see Apple withholding Screen Mirroring (a feature I would enjoy tremendously) from EU for fear (IMHO quite reasonable) that the vaguely written DMA could be interpreted as requiring them to open mirroring to 3rd parties.
It's been just a few months and already DMA impacted my enjoyment of my devices, no?
the only problem with gdpr is that it didn't push far enough. If your browser provides a header with accept/reject all, a banner should not be shown. Also, GDPR does have many other interesting things, including being able to download/delete your data
Just for your info, the banners are absolutely not required and they are the band aid solution of websites who don't give a crap about their users.
If you also don't care about yourself, it's worse for you but many others now have the chance to deny providers of their scummy way to make money off unwitting users.
Parent is right, banners are not required by GDPR. These websites do not reflect the people in the organisations they represent, they are made by developers like the rest of us who are following the crowd like sheep.
3. Analytics cookies
We use these purely for internal research on how we can improve the service we provide for all our users.
The cookies simply assess how you interact with our website – as an anonymous user (they data gathered does not identify you personally).
Also, this data is not shared with any third parties or used for any other purpose. The anonymised statistics could be shared with contractors working on communication projects under contractual agreement with the European Commission.
However, you are free to refuse these types of cookies – either via the cookie banner you will see on the first page you visit or at Europa Analytics.
That appears to be things covered by the GDPR and that they need some way to inform you that you can reject them ... and that's done with a banner that allows you to reject those cookies.
Given that analytics is used, and that has cookies that track information, they're required to have that notification somehow. That page doesn't appear to be a "developers following the crowd like sheep" but rather "the requirements of the law are followed to the spirit and letter and the easiest and most accessible way to provide that functionality is with a banner."
It's interesting the views in the threads of "screw your parents if they can't figure out how to protect themselves w/o iOS/AppStore" to "we must think of the children and protect them from cookies"
Simplest example would be 1st party apps only vs including 3rd party apps. Clearly there are implications around including 3rd party apps that would affect the operating system and thus user experience