this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
444 points (99.6% liked)

Europe

8485 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It has now emerged that after being informed that Safari was likely to fall under the DMA's regulations, Apple filed formal a response to the European Union claiming that Safari is, in fact, "three distinct web browsers." The company's claim is based on the argument that Safari for iOS, iPadOS, and macOS are entirely different and serve different purposes.

On example cited by Apple is Safari's sidebar feature on iPadOS and macOS, allowing users to see opened tabs, tab groups, bookmarks, and browsing history. Since this feature is unavailable in the version of Safari for iOS, Apple claimed that it is a distinctly different browser. The company added that each version of Safari serves different purposes for users depending on the device upon which it is accessed.

The European Commission went on to point out that Safari's functionality and underlying technologies are near-identical across platforms. The Commission even highlights Apple's own marketing materials for its Continuity feature, which appear to contradict the company's claims, touting the tag line "Same Safari. Different device." As a result, the Commission rejected Apple's claim and insists that "Safari qualifies as a single web browser, irrespective of the device through which that service is accessed."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 133 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Good! What an absolutely ridiculous argument. Glad it got booted right away.

[โ€“] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago

" Same Safari. Different device "

[โ€“] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago

It reminds me when it tried to patent a tap as a 0-length swipe. Scummy.

[โ€“] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm glad that the EC countered the argument of Apple strongly. Because you'd assume that the legal team of Apple consists of some capable lawyers, possibly even old members of the EC? At some point I'm scared that even the EC would be outmatched but we're not there, it seems.

[โ€“] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It was a pretty crap arguement given the European commission were able to counter the arguement using Apple's own marketing.