Rival coders must have Europe-based staff to build and test non-WebKit surfing

The Register has learned from those involved in the browser trade that Apple has limited the development and testing of third-party browser engines to devices physically located in the EU. That requirement adds an additional barrier to anyone planning to develop and support a browser with an alternative engine in the EU.

It effectively geofences the development team. Browser-makers whose dev teams are located in the US will only be able to work on simulators. While some testing can be done in a simulator, there’s no substitute for testing on device – which means developers will have to work within Apple’s prescribed geographical boundary.

… as Mozilla put it – to make it “as painful as possible for others to provide competitive alternatives to Safari.”

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    4·
    6 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    Apple’s designation under Europe’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) as a gatekeeper for the App Store, iOS, Safari, and just recently iPadOS forced Cupertino to make concessions.

    Parisa Tabriz, VP of engineering and general manager of Chrome at Google, dismissed Apple’s rule changes earlier this year.

    When Apple announced its plan to make changes in response to DMA in January, developers expressed concern that supporting a separate EU browser might be a problem.

    “The contract terms are bonkers and almost no vendor I’m aware of will agree to them,” lamented one industry veteran familiar with the making of browsers in response to an inquiry from The Register.

    In March, the European Commission opened an investigation into Apple based on concerns that Cupertino’s “steering” rules and browser choice screen fell short of DMA requirements.

    Asked about Apple’s geofencing of devices for development, an Opera spokesperson replied that it hadn’t heard about the issue – but that’s not surprising given that the organization is headquartered in the EU.

    The original article contains 817 words, the summary contains 165 words. Saved 80%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!