You must log in or register to comment.
Immagine if Chrome wasn’t just a rinky dink Safari emulator!
Wow, can’t wait to not only have my data harvested by Apple but also Google!
FFS, stop cumming for Chrome and start using Firefox!
There’s no Firefox engine for iOS and Mozilla says it doesn’t make financial sense to port it.
Did they say that? Cause it looks like there is at least some work being done on this:
There’s been talk about exploring porting the engine to iOS at the beginning of 2023 but AFAIK the current state of things was that it’s a significant undertaking and probably not worth it just for the EU market.
What exactly is there to port anyway?
The rendering engine.
Currently Firefox on iOS is “just” a skin around the iOS provided renderer.
I don’t give a mousefuck about the rendering engine. I want extensions
I want extensions
Sounds like you do care about the rendering engine as that would basically give you a true mobile Firefox experience and access to all the extensions.
Gecko, the browser engine?
GeckoView more specifically in this case. But yes.
But they do have mobile arm builds already don’t they? Of course iOS is very different from Android but it’s not like they’d have to do complete port. And it targets the same architecture that’s in macs and they have builds for it obviously.
By the time the masses move it will be an enshittified fork of chrome.
Edge?
Opera?
Wasn’t Firefox starting to implement some bullshit too?
What do you believe Mozilla was implementing?
Thanks. I know you’re not OP, but I’ll take this opportunity to answer anyway.
…is not as bad as many people think.
The best argument that I believe still has merit is this:
All websites on the internet—including ad networks!—are guests on our computers, and the content they provide are merely suggestions for a user agent to interpret and show us how it chooses.
If you agree with this—and I kinda do—then yeah, PPA shouldn’t exist. You’re probably a staunch user of uBlock (or uMatrix) and don’t want your browser engaging in any privacy-preserving attribution shenanigans.
But here’s the kicker: if you use uBlock, PPA won’t do anything. It can’t, even when left enabled. For the API to be called, ads need to get to your browser first, and uBlock doesn’t allow them to get that far. The only people really affected by PPA are people not using adblocking, i.e. the people being tracked all over the web, who would likely benefit from PPA.
As I said in a previous comment: if PPA works and is widely adopted, I can see the argument for how it’d be better—unfortunately, most people still browse the internet without uBlock. That doesn’t mean I’ll stop installing it on every device I can; I’m simply accepting that’ll never be every device on earth.
And for all that Mozilla is implementing “bullshit,” they’re also the only ones keeping uBlock 100% functional by maintaining manifest V2. They spend time and resources protecting the very thing that trumps their supposed bullshit. That feels not like enshittification to me, but a group trying its best, even while stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Always has been.
deleted by creator
It’s really not, Safari does a pretty good job keeping up with standards and whatnot.
In two years time Apple, and every other smartphone manufacturer on the EU market for that matter, will be forced to make the battery user replaceable and that one will most likely benefit everyone; unless Apple wants to release two versions of every iPhone to comply with EU regulations which they won’t.
Just like with USB-C, which the EU regulated and now the iPad and IPhone have.
the stupidest thing is iPad had USB-C since 2018! and yet on iPhones they latched on to lightning for another 6 years before EU forced them to standardize
That’s because they’ve been pushing the iPad as a sort of Mac Lite, but they can’t do that unless you can plug peripherals or a thumb drive into it. You can 100% plug a USB-C laptop dock into an iPad, and it’ll work. You can even use a mouse with it if you really want to.
But they wanted to keep Lightning around as long as possible, because they made a commission on every single lighting cable that was sold; Companies had to license the rights to use the connector, and had to pay Apple for every one they used. That’s why Lightning cables were always a few bucks more expensive than a comparable USB-C cable. That extra few bucks was going straight into Apple’s pocket. It was a huge source of passive income for the company, which they were reluctant to let go of.
They were keeping their promise of 10 years of Lightning ecosystem support. Dropping the old iPod connector was highly controversial.
They were earning millions from lightning royalities
And they promised to do so for at least 10 years.
we promise we’ll use the inferior, proprietary connector
we promise we’ll use the inferior, proprietary connector
Honestly Lightning wasn’t inferior when it launched in 2012, two years before the design of USB-C was even published. And in some ways I actually prefer it physically (though obviously I would much rather all my devices use USB-C now as it is a much superior connector).
Lightning was reversible where Micro-USB was not, and Lightning’s female port is entirely a hole that the entirely-a-prong male plug goes into, whereas with USB (like with most connectors) the female side has something sticking up inside it that slots into the male plug. This means Lightning is much easier to clean, which becomes necessary because phones in people’s pockets collect lint.
I’m thrilled that iPhone has moved to USB-C, but people forget how much better Lightning was than both the 30-pin iPod connector AND Micro-USB.
The two are not mutually exclusive. The downvote button is not an “I don’t like this” button.
Phones used to have a round charger socket, a USB socket that could also be used to charge, plus the headphone socket and SD card slot. I’m sure they could have found room for both USB C and Lightning, with all the other things that were removed.
“We promise to keep increasing our profit by overcharging customers for awful cables they can’t get anywhere else”
What a dumb promise
no no no, that was just Apple being brave /s
IPhone 16, with 30% more courage
When they do come to it. I hope its the easily swappable like the ones in Nokia 3310. Otherwise its pointless imo.
AFAIK, the EU defines “user replaceable” as literally that; you open a hatch, pull the battery out and stick a new one in.
Fuck, let’s hope they at least allow screws. Click-in latches are prone to breaking and wearing out
How many often are you planning on replacing the battery in your phone that it would wear out the panel?
The ware would most likely come from someone that has a spare battery that is ready to go. Think of your phone burning 80% of the juice and you’re about to hop on a flight that you’re barely going to make (no time to charge). Slap that stand by battery in and off you go. That’s what I did with my old Nokia or blackberry back in the day. Oh and for my HTC aria.
Sounds stupid, arent there charging ports on planes?
And other than plane where external battery is an issue, i just have a small brick that connect to my phone by the magnets on the back and wireless charges it, this is only really needed if you are doing something all day on the phone, like going around a city, taking pictures
Yup, I confirm, I’ve been on a plane with charging ports once. They exist.
True there are places to charge on a plane or bus. My example is just what I could come with in terms of just needing instant juice. I like having the option to have power for my phone. Multiple ways to skin a cat. :)
Yeah, I just bring a battery bank on longer trips. My battery easily lasts a full day, often two, and my battery bank can recharge my phone like 4 times. So on trips, I put my battery bank in my backpack, so if I ever need to charge, I can.
With my N900 I used to travel with 6 to 10 charged batteries to have a few days of runtime. Things got better now with powerbanks - but for something like hiking just carrying a few spares would still be smaller and lighter.
Honestly for hiking I’d suggest a power bank with solar charge capability. One thing to charge them all.
The space used by the smallest solar charger I’ve seen on Amazon seems to be similar to 6 or more batteries in the format the N900 was taking - so if you look at space, slow charging from solar charger, and reliance on sun conditions taking individual batteries seems to be the better option for a few days hike. It’s also easier to stow individual batteries to wherever you still have space left.
Hust make sure, that you can detach the solar panel. Batteries don’t like the heat and the solar panel most likely lives longer than the power bank, so you want them to be replaceable individually.
The n900 was truly the best phone ever to exist and I’m deeply upset about it not having a modern equivalent
Replacing the battery is pretty expensive, so I prefer to optimize my charging patterns so I never ever have to get it replaced. However, if I could do it myself, I might abuse the battery much more. I might even leave my devices plugged in overnight.
Is it though? Batteries themselves are something like $20-60 (e.g. Pixel 8 battery for $43, ebay listing for <$20). The battery is honestly not that expensive, the expensive part is the labor because taking modern phones apart is a massive pain.
It’s about 80-130 € depending on phone model, and that includes work and the battery. If I could just buy a battery online and replace it myself, the prices should be more reasonable. Apparently one day that will actually happen.
Every time I’m on a longer trip and want to replace a battery with a charged one? Every time I want to be offline but carry a phone for emergencies?
Meh, most iPhones live in a case, it’ll be fine
I have a Phone with a click-in latch and nothing wore our over the last 5 years
They should do, although I can’t really imagine manufacturers incorporating plastic tabs into their sleek glass-metal sandwiches…
Yeah I don’t miss dripping a HTC phone and watching the pieces scatter.
Unfortunately, they do not define it that way.
And there are exceptions based on capacity and how long you guarantee the battery capacity will be good for. IIRC, if it still has 70% capacity by 3 years time, it doesn’t have to be replaceable at all.
Can you really guarantee that? I mean, it’s pretty much dependent on individual usage.
Sure you can. Car manufacturers do it today.
You will have to define “3 years” as well. It can’t be a blanket 3 calendar year thing, it would have to be X number of cycles which the average user would realistically hit with 3 years of usage. Not someone glued to their phone playing games all day that need to charge three times a day.
Yup, probably one charge from 20% to 80% every day or something like that.
And there are exceptions based on capacity and how long you guarantee the battery capacity will be good for. IIRC, if it still has 70% capacity by 3 years time, it doesn’t have to be replaceable at all.
I do not remember reading that, the only exception I remember is for devices that are intended to be used under water, which phones are definitely not
Sounds really good to me!
They’ll make the replacement so expensive nobody will do it. And then there will be a new rule mandating it needs to be a reasonable price. Apple will say it’s reasomable because it factors in environmental costs, and so the dance continues.
Pretty sure the draft allowed “common tools” or specialised tools if they came in box.
Everyone will benefit, but have to imagine relatively few will buy tools to actually take advantage of it.
Hopefully they keep selling a phone with no user replaceable battery. Id rather have the weather proofing than a battery i need to swap out one time after owning the phone for over 4 years.
Why only 4 years? The fairphone 5 is water resistant and has a replacable battery. The Samsung Galaxy S5 was fully waterproof and had a replacable battery.
None of those phones are IP68 rating
IP68 didn’t exist when the galaxy S5 came out. The fairphone has a replaceable screen and is made by a tiny company that doesn’t have the budget for full waterproof testing. Often phones will have waterproofing but will not spend the money for the expensive testing for certification, see: Pocophone, etc.
Well then I like my phones a little bit more expensive then since they’re certified. Gives me peace of mind.
I mean, it still ultimately means nothing if it’s not covered by warranty.
The Sony Xperia phones back in the day were literally advertised as being able to “live underwater”; was there any guarantee that it wouldn’t just die in a light shower? lol no
I like how you keep getting down voted even though you have made it clear that it’s your own personal choice/bias and acknowledge it’s not for everyone.
I agree both options would be good 👍
How many times has your phone needed the weather proofing in the last 4 years? Mine is 0, at least twice. On the flip side, I have needed a new battery 2 times.
Not a good argument. This is like saying why do we need airbags because I have never used it. We need to have both the features, with water proofing being more critical.
I’m all about replacable batteries but come on. Two times I was out and came back home soaking wet because of rain. Many more times I used my phone in the kitchen or bathroom while water was splashing with no stress, which I wasn’t brave enough to do with a non-resistant phones.
That being said, I’d rather carry an extra battery or two like I used to than carry a power bank.
The soaking rain thing has happened to me with a not particularly water resistant phone and it was fine. The water ratings are more intended for direct splashes and full immersion.
My opinion is that this is a comfort we can do without, especially given the ecology and consumer rights implications (not that a phone with a user replaceable battery is necessarily porous to water, plenty of phones meet both criteria)
Ive needed the IP68 rating a handful of times. I have needed a new battery zero times on my 4 year old phone. If I need the battery replaced, Ill just take it to apple and have them swap it out.
Its still at 70% usability, which still lasts me all day.
That’s the thing though, why is apple the only ones authorized to swap out your battery? That service isn’t free, and they’re massively overcharging you for it.
It’s also not impossible to build a phone that is water resistant and has a swappable battery, but that’s besides the point. Personally I’d rather have a swappable battery.
Maintenance is never free, so im okay with a service fee every four years rather than buy new phones every time they get wet. Im not saying my particular view is right for everyone, but its what I want. I get why people want replaceable batteries. No problem with it. I just would rather not have them. So if there is an option for both models, one with, and one without that feature, this is a win for everyone. If not, and only one or the other is implemented, then its going to suck for whoever is in the party that got left out.
Aren’t you being purposefully obtuse by refusing to consider the idea of a battery swappable phone that is IP68 certified? Its almost certainly going to happen with the line of phones in Europe that will have swappable batteries and it’s not even that far into the future.
I think this post is about change moving forward, not making sure our past decisions were sound.
Im refusing to accept the idea because it doesn’t exist. Who manufactures one?
The two features are not mutually esclusive. I owned an S5 which was waterproof and had replaceable battery more than 10 years ago. It did not seems too hard to do
S5 was not IP68
I know. I was only pointing out that you can have a waterproof phone and a replaceable battery. Obviously you need to do better than the S5 but it is nothing impossible, even wanting to keep the audio jack and the USB ports.
I hope they figure it out. Sincerely.
The more they get regulated, the better their stuff becomes*. It’s wild that people are on the side of Apple for a lot of this stuff, most prominently probably with third party app stores supposedly “decreasing security”.
Sent from my MacBook :^)
* At least when it comes to consumer rights regulations. I’m still mad about China demanding they remove the option to accept AirDrop from everyone without a time limit on iPhones and Apple then implementing that restriction globally for whatever godforsaken reason.
Begging iPhone to play the catch up game and just have Android’s basic features lol
Except that many Android phones also don’t have replaceable batteries anymore.
Hope it doesnt lead to smaller batteries though. It feels like it could since they have to put the battery so it’s accessible.
But it’ll also allow you to just carry 2 batteries and swap if needed. Even if you don’t want to do that, when your battery ages enough that you can’t at all go through a typical day, you can easily change it out yourself to a fresh one to refresh your phone.
Unfortunately it won’t.
This legislation isn’t for batteries that replaceable. More like “can be swapped by a technician in 5 minutes” replaceable.
Additionally, if the manufacturer guarantees (IIRC) 70% capacity after 3 years, they don’t have to do anything at all.
To be honest I prefer to use a power bank, it’s more convenient than having to swap batteries (i used to do that too) as you don’t have to power down the device. And one power bank can power many different devices, so i don’t have to buy a new one when i Change phones, and can use the same power bank to charge my earbuds, kindle, smartphone, and a variety of other devices, or lend it to someone.
Having said that, i did have my Nexus 6P battery degrade and had to be RMAd, lucky for me it was within warranty. Battery is the fastest failing component so being replaceable will go a long way in prolonging devices lifetime, but doesn’t have to be user-replaceable.
Currently batteries are replaceable, but due to their design it’s unlikely to be worth the expense. Forcing them to make it user replaceable ensures it’s easy to do, and cheap - so even if you don’t want to do it as a recharge mechanism, it is still to your advantage to have it so when your battery does inevitably deteriorate you can swap it out at your convenience.
Depends on what you mean by “replaceable”. It’s quite easy to physically replace the batteries on most modern phones. The problem is actually acquiring the batteries, as well as the new batteries actually working after installation. Apple is the only one that specifically programs their devices not to work properly if you replace the components in them yourself, and refuses to sell you OEM components.
Oh, here he is. I was worried for a second we’ve lost him.
Never lose cum.
deleted by creator
What the hell? There are literally full OS alternatives for Android phones. The comment is light on specifics and none of it rings true afaik
I switched from android to Iphone and there is nothing I miss, I certainly don’t miss how shit the the usb in-ears were on android, all of them haf issues
I feel so lucky to have never bought into the apple mobile ecosystem every time I have to test any of my web apps on iOS safari. What a shit browser (which you have no choice but to use).
Not to mention having to own several special lightning shit cables to support my test devices. 🤮 They only switched to usb-c because the EU forced them. That detail alone is enough to know what a shit line of products they are cultivating.
But yeah takes me about one second to miss my android device
I have switched straight to iphone 15, so USB C cable, not that I use it, airpods are lightning, not that I use it, since I am charging both wirelessly.
The website I work on, works for fine for me, so not sure what your issues are.
Wireless charging: because it’s always reliable, convenient, and available.
Do you support any older iOS versions? Anything that uses video, PWA or features added to other browsers >2 years ago? If yes to any of those questions, I have to think you don’t actually support/test in iOS safari. Which btw often works differently between iphone and ipad. And their simulator support only goes back a couple of versions, despite the fact that Safari does not auto-upgrade and is tied to major os releases. So if you have users with older devices, you cannot ever take for granted that your app/website will work fine for them without testing on either a simulator (excludes OS versions over like ~2 years old), or maintaining and testing on a physical library of devices with older versions that you make sure you always refuse updates on.
It’s abysmal to support safari ios unless you don’t care about lower income/education users who have 5 year old devices.
Safari and videos are a nightmare to work with, there’s always something that doesn’t work right, when Chrome and Firefox work fine.
Are you me? I feel like I never speak to anyone who knows that pain like I know it.
You are right, I don’t, because they don’t need PWA to use the website, and there is no video content, life is good, and those who can’t use it are dropped, we are not going to sacrifice developer capacity to support a very minority of users.
That’s the apple user credo. “If I can’t do it, it’s really better anyhow because I didn’t need to”.
A decent web browser isn’t deeply tied to the operating system version and isn’t 5 years behind on some features while pigheadedly refusing to ever implement others. A decent web browser doesn’t force you to use it. You choose it among other options and seek it out. A decent electronics company doesn’t force you to buy proprietary cables just to charge their devices.
Congratulations though, your website users are all wealthy westerners.
They are the farthest thing from it, lmao, you dont even know how wrong you are, but I see you stí´ possess the teenage angst of ios v android wars
If you import iphone from EU does it have these features or is it determined by the region you are using the phone from?
