5 ms·

I use uBlock Origin on Firefox on Android with "Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool" added but am weirdly conflicted on this news. If a user opts to kneecap

I use uBlock Origin on Firefox on Android with "Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool" added but am weirdly conflicted on this news. If a user opts to kneecap advertising, that is soundly within their rights. If a company does the same against another company's advertising as a part of their normal business, I feel like the user becomes a pawn in some corporate warfare strategy. Maybe it's because I think Apple is slowly building a parallel advertising ecosystem that is slightly less intrusive for users but massively more lucrative for themselves.

bamfly 3y ago
Nah. This is like popup blocking: it should be standard and on by default in every browser, with an option to turn it off if you don't want it.
wernercd 3y ago
"I feel like the user becomes a pawn" A company that makes a 30% cut on apps using customers as a pawn to make a worse browser experience pushing people into using app store apps? Nothing is "less intrusive"... it's simply Apple making sure they get a larger cut of a larger market. It's also why they enforce a shitty Safari unto their customers instead of allowing real browser choice. They are the new MS bundling shitty software to harm competitors and limit consumer choice.
- can16358p 3y ago
  Shitty is subjective. I'd personally pick Safari hands down over Chrome or Firefox or anything else. Also many other companies follow a similar pattern, if not worse.
- notaustinpowers 3y ago
  Google also takes a 30% cut on apps. Microsoft takes 15% on Windows apps. Would that mean that Google and Microsoft are doing the same thing? And while Apple does require Google and Microsoft to use WebKit for their iOS browser apps, it's a rendering engine. And you can set Chrome/Edge as defaults on both iOS and macOS. Tell me how this limits real browser choice.
  - cma 3y ago
    > Tell me how this limits real browser choice. How does Mozilla implement extensions on iOS >_<? It is much more than the rendering engine they are forced to use.
    - notaustinpowers 3y ago
      Chrome doesn't even let you install extensions on Android. And for Firefox on Android it's a buggy workaround that doesn't even work half the time. This isn't just an Apple thing.
      - yesbabyyes 3y ago
        Wait, how is Firefox for Android a buggy workaround? I use it exclusively, with uBlock Origin, and it works great,every single time.
        notaustinpowers 3y ago
        That's one extension, there are thousands that may or may not work. It was buggy the way Firefox used to handle extensions. The current Firefox extensions are ones that are made specifically for Firefox on Android, they're not direct extensions for the Chromium browser. It's another silo'd set of extensions separate from Chrome. So iOS allows extensions only for Safari from the App Store. Android Chrome doesn't allow extensions at all. Android Firefox allows some extensions that were made for Firefox on Android.
        cma 3y ago
        Aside from extensions, try to do what Brave does on Android on iOS: you can't. The limitations are not just the renderer. On Android they can ship their own chromium.
      - cma 3y ago
        How is Mozilla limited by the platform from doing it better on Android? You simply can't do it with the mandatory WebKit stuff.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  It came out in the Epic trial that 80% of App Store revenue comes from games. They would never be in the browser anyway. Then most other apps that could just be websites don’t monetize through the App Store.
  - wernercd 3y ago
    "They would never be in the browser" If companies can install stuff outside of the app store to save a 30% a LARGE number of companies would absolutely do so. To say hamstringing the browser on iOS isn't a calculated choice to say "but you can install webapps* (* with shitty safari)" and then completely cock block web browser choice isn't a 100% calculated choice to limit consumer choice is a disingenuous lie. "80%" You think that Apple isn't going to hold onto the 20% come hook or crook? in any means necessary - including locking you to the App Store and the 30% cut - despite the fact that alternative payment methods are completely reasonable? and how much of that 80% is through games on the app store that REQUIRES a cut through their ham fisted and unreasonable restrictions? That's even more reason to give consumers and companies options outside of the app store and the mafia requirement for a cut.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      > If companies can install stuff outside of the app store to save a 30% a LARGE number of companies would absolutely do so. Again your banking app and even apps like Facebook and Reddit and most of the other apps that are not games, don’t monetize through the App Store. Even the large subscription streaming services like Netflix and Spotify don’t allow in-app purchases of subscriptions and haven’t for years. > payment methods are completely reasonable? and how much of that 80% is through games on the app store that REQUIRES a cut through their ham fisted and unreasonable restrictions? Your rant has absolutely nothing to do with whether if Safari was “better” would most of the revenue from the App Store - ie games - would move to the web. That same 30% is what Google charges and around the same as what console maker charges. Epic tried to move out of the Google Play store. It was an abject failure. Why do you think that Android app makers try to monetize outside of the Play Store?
glanzwulf 3y ago
> I use uBlock Origin on Firefox on Android with "Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool" added That's the problem. This is too complicated/too much trouble for the end user who just uses his iPhone via Safari. Do they the privacy and all that? Yes, will they go out of their way with all that trouble? No. While you're not wrong that it's a company A fighting company B with users as pawns, it still is a win for the normal end user.
skrowl 3y ago
[dead]
shockeychap 3y ago
> Maybe it's because I think Apple is slowly building a parallel advertising ecosystem that is slightly less intrusive for users but massively more lucrative for themselves. No. It's probably just because Apple is slowly building a parallel advertising ecosystem that is slightly less intrusive for users but massively more lucrative for themselves.
TechBro8615 3y ago
If there are two warring corporations, and one of them has a warfare strategy based on selling its customers tools to prevent the other corporation from tracking their content consumption, then sign me up for battle. I know which corporation I want to support.
- hospitalJail 3y ago
  False dichotomy
  - TechBro8615 3y ago
    Why?
    - woah 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - TechBro8615 3y ago
        Strawman
      - fooker 3y ago
        brave new world indeed
      - astrange 3y ago
        Capitalism isn't the only economic system with corporations.
    - e44858 3y ago
      Apple sells ads, so they’re financially motivated to track you just like the other ad companies. They might promise to not track us, but unless they’re audited by a 3rd party, we can’t assume they’re telling the truth.
      - 3y ago
_the_inflator 3y ago
I agree. And in the end they are manipulating links. While no advocate for ads, this has implications on the freedom of the internet.
- dev_tty01 3y ago
  No, they are allowing users to manipulate links. Also, this only happens in Private Browsing mode.
artificial 3y ago
Browsers are/were User Agents. The focus should be on maximizing that experience across the board.
matheusmoreira 3y ago
I have no problems with corporations eating each other alive as long as the end result is less surveillance capitalism.
kergonath 3y ago
> If a user opts to kneecap advertising, that is soundly within their rights. If it is a switch somewhere with the user actually getting a choice, then it is the user choosing it and Apple is just providing a mean to do it. Exactly like when the user chooses to install an extension, except that this is much easier, and therefore much more likely to be used because users hate tracking. This is well documented.
arendtio 3y ago
Is there a good reason why Firefox should not ship with uBlock Origin by default (with the option to disable it)?

bamfly 3y ago

Nah. This is like popup blocking: it should be standard and on by default in every browser, with an option to turn it off if you don't want it.

wernercd 3y ago

"I feel like the user becomes a pawn" A company that makes a 30% cut on apps using customers as a pawn to make a worse browser experience pushing people into using app store apps? Nothing is "less intrusive"... it's simply Apple making sure they get a larger cut of a larger market. It's also why they enforce a shitty Safari unto their customers instead of allowing real browser choice. They are the new MS bundling shitty software to harm competitors and limit consumer choice.

can16358p 3y ago
Shitty is subjective. I'd personally pick Safari hands down over Chrome or Firefox or anything else. Also many other companies follow a similar pattern, if not worse.
notaustinpowers 3y ago
Google also takes a 30% cut on apps. Microsoft takes 15% on Windows apps. Would that mean that Google and Microsoft are doing the same thing? And while Apple does require Google and Microsoft to use WebKit for their iOS browser apps, it's a rendering engine. And you can set Chrome/Edge as defaults on both iOS and macOS. Tell me how this limits real browser choice.
- cma 3y ago
  > Tell me how this limits real browser choice. How does Mozilla implement extensions on iOS >_<? It is much more than the rendering engine they are forced to use.
  - notaustinpowers 3y ago
    Chrome doesn't even let you install extensions on Android. And for Firefox on Android it's a buggy workaround that doesn't even work half the time. This isn't just an Apple thing.
    - yesbabyyes 3y ago
      Wait, how is Firefox for Android a buggy workaround? I use it exclusively, with uBlock Origin, and it works great,every single time.
      - notaustinpowers 3y ago
        That's one extension, there are thousands that may or may not work. It was buggy the way Firefox used to handle extensions. The current Firefox extensions are ones that are made specifically for Firefox on Android, they're not direct extensions for the Chromium browser. It's another silo'd set of extensions separate from Chrome. So iOS allows extensions only for Safari from the App Store. Android Chrome doesn't allow extensions at all. Android Firefox allows some extensions that were made for Firefox on Android.
        cma 3y ago
        Aside from extensions, try to do what Brave does on Android on iOS: you can't. The limitations are not just the renderer. On Android they can ship their own chromium.
    - cma 3y ago
      How is Mozilla limited by the platform from doing it better on Android? You simply can't do it with the mandatory WebKit stuff.
scarface_74 3y ago
It came out in the Epic trial that 80% of App Store revenue comes from games. They would never be in the browser anyway. Then most other apps that could just be websites don’t monetize through the App Store.
- wernercd 3y ago
  "They would never be in the browser" If companies can install stuff outside of the app store to save a 30% a LARGE number of companies would absolutely do so. To say hamstringing the browser on iOS isn't a calculated choice to say "but you can install webapps* (* with shitty safari)" and then completely cock block web browser choice isn't a 100% calculated choice to limit consumer choice is a disingenuous lie. "80%" You think that Apple isn't going to hold onto the 20% come hook or crook? in any means necessary - including locking you to the App Store and the 30% cut - despite the fact that alternative payment methods are completely reasonable? and how much of that 80% is through games on the app store that REQUIRES a cut through their ham fisted and unreasonable restrictions? That's even more reason to give consumers and companies options outside of the app store and the mafia requirement for a cut.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    > If companies can install stuff outside of the app store to save a 30% a LARGE number of companies would absolutely do so. Again your banking app and even apps like Facebook and Reddit and most of the other apps that are not games, don’t monetize through the App Store. Even the large subscription streaming services like Netflix and Spotify don’t allow in-app purchases of subscriptions and haven’t for years. > payment methods are completely reasonable? and how much of that 80% is through games on the app store that REQUIRES a cut through their ham fisted and unreasonable restrictions? Your rant has absolutely nothing to do with whether if Safari was “better” would most of the revenue from the App Store - ie games - would move to the web. That same 30% is what Google charges and around the same as what console maker charges. Epic tried to move out of the Google Play store. It was an abject failure. Why do you think that Android app makers try to monetize outside of the Play Store?

glanzwulf 3y ago

> I use uBlock Origin on Firefox on Android with "Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool" added That's the problem. This is too complicated/too much trouble for the end user who just uses his iPhone via Safari. Do they the privacy and all that? Yes, will they go out of their way with all that trouble? No. While you're not wrong that it's a company A fighting company B with users as pawns, it still is a win for the normal end user.

skrowl 3y ago

[dead]

shockeychap 3y ago

> Maybe it's because I think Apple is slowly building a parallel advertising ecosystem that is slightly less intrusive for users but massively more lucrative for themselves. No. It's probably just because Apple is slowly building a parallel advertising ecosystem that is slightly less intrusive for users but massively more lucrative for themselves.

TechBro8615 3y ago

If there are two warring corporations, and one of them has a warfare strategy based on selling its customers tools to prevent the other corporation from tracking their content consumption, then sign me up for battle. I know which corporation I want to support.

hospitalJail 3y ago
False dichotomy
- TechBro8615 3y ago
  Why?
  - woah 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - TechBro8615 3y ago
      Strawman
    - fooker 3y ago
      brave new world indeed
    - astrange 3y ago
      Capitalism isn't the only economic system with corporations.
  - e44858 3y ago
    Apple sells ads, so they’re financially motivated to track you just like the other ad companies. They might promise to not track us, but unless they’re audited by a 3rd party, we can’t assume they’re telling the truth.
    - 3y ago

_the_inflator 3y ago

I agree. And in the end they are manipulating links. While no advocate for ads, this has implications on the freedom of the internet.

dev_tty01 3y ago
No, they are allowing users to manipulate links. Also, this only happens in Private Browsing mode.

artificial 3y ago

Browsers are/were User Agents. The focus should be on maximizing that experience across the board.

matheusmoreira 3y ago

I have no problems with corporations eating each other alive as long as the end result is less surveillance capitalism.

kergonath 3y ago

> If a user opts to kneecap advertising, that is soundly within their rights. If it is a switch somewhere with the user actually getting a choice, then it is the user choosing it and Apple is just providing a mean to do it. Exactly like when the user chooses to install an extension, except that this is much easier, and therefore much more likely to be used because users hate tracking. This is well documented.

arendtio 3y ago

Is there a good reason why Firefox should not ship with uBlock Origin by default (with the option to disable it)?