In exchange for decreasing the amount of affected users and application? Absolutely. No one would be forced to use a non-Safari browser.
A software monoculture means that a bug for one is a bug for all.
A software monoculture means that a bug for one is a bug for all.
In short, you increase the possibilities, you increase the attack vectors. There is no way around it AFAIK.
Using the app at all is in the user's control. The current state of iOS is that they don't have any control whatsoever.
Not if it is mandated by work, home, family, government, etc.
So no, it is most definitely not in the user’s control.
> So no, it is most definitely not in the user’s control.
You're comparing impulse control to hard runtime limitations. It doesn't really track; I understand your apprehension, but if none of your family members notice or care then maybe Google's hypothetical solution here worked? If that's an undesirable outcome for you, I think you should be lobbying for better alternatives instead of using it as a boogeyman to excuse iron-grip ecosystems. Two wrongs aren't going to make a right here.
That's true, but the situation is not improved by a Chromium/Blink monoculture. It's the same problem with a slightly different flavor.
So yes, iOS should be opened to third party engines, but at the same time steps should be taken to stymy Chromium's dominance.