Comment by wernercd | Hacker News Reader

Comment by wernercd | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

"what's it have to do with" fastest is not best when it's the most insecure and furthest behind - to the point that it's holding back the internet like IE was back in the day. the fastest piece of shit car is still a piece of shit car.

"support" more support of an insecure, antiquated and unsafe browser is still support of a bad browser.

"same % as google" google does it because Apple did it and didn't get blocked. AKA: price fixing and market collusion. both should be blocked from it.

"it would have no effect" you are saying that alternatives wouldn't affect the price? You're full of...

competition would absolutely affect prices and alternatives would absolutely give real competition.

just because Apple supports the 5s with a shitty and limited browser that's faster but still hamstrung (your attempted points about Saint Apple and the Holy Safari) ... that doesn't change the fact that competition would lower prices as that 80% would absolutely be cut into by a massive number of companies that don't want to give the mafia a 30% cut.

Watch how those numbers change as Apple is FORCED to allow alternatives to their shitty options and their mafia tactics are countered.

https://mashable.com/article/apple-allow-third-party-app-sto...

"Apple will allow third-party app stores, because the EU is playing hardball Is this the end of the 30-percent App Store commission?"

> what's it have to do with" fastest is not best when it's the most insecure

So it’s the “most insecure” because you found two security issues that were patched? Other browsers never had security issues?

But you’re going back on your original statement that it isn’t the fastest.

> support" more support of an insecure, antiquated and unsafe browser is still support of a bad browser.

And it’s “bad” even though the competing browser on Android - Chrome - is slower, doesn’t support plug ins, and is by definition less secure since Google drops support for old phones?

> same % as google" google does it because Apple did it and didn't get blocked. AKA: price fixing and market collusion. both should be blocked from it.

Now it’s Apple’s fault that Google also charges 30% as well as the console makers?

> it would have no effect" you are saying that alternatives wouldn't affect the price? You're full of...

How would alternative browsers affect the price of apps that would never be in the browser? Another point is that there are alternatives on Android and Google still charges 30%. How did going outside of the Google Play Store workout for Epic?

> just because Apple supports the 5s with a shitty and limited browser that's faster but still hamstrung (your attempted points about Saint Apple and the Holy Safari) ... that doesn't change the fact that competition would lower prices as that 80% would absolutely be cut into by a massive number of companies that don't want to give the mafia a 30% cut.

Yet it doesn’t cause lower prices on Android…

> Apple will allow third-party app stores, because the EU is playing hardball Is this the end of the 30-percent App Store commission?"

And yet Apple didn’t announce anything at WWDC….

Reply on news.ycombinator.com