Or could it be that the reason Chrome “enjoys” a monopoly is because Apple doesn’t care about “winning” the browser war? Why should it? That was last decades battle. Not even MS cares about the browser enough anymore to invest in its own engine.
This is the difference between companies trying to sell products and companies trying to sell attention. Apple doesn't benefit at all from people using Safari, because Safari is not a surveillance tool. Therefore, "marketing" Safari is at best, an afterthought.
Chrome on the other hand... well, it's Google, one of the largest purveyors of advertising. If you don't think Chrome is watching you, I've got a bridge to sell you.
If they didn't care then we would have alternative rendering engine along with safari. They know that allowing competition is a threat to their business model.
So Apple “is afraid of competition” on an app it makes no money off, but allows the Kindle book store, Spotify, plenty of streaming services, Google Maps, two popular Office alternatives to iWork, has built in extensibility points to allow alternative storage providers to iCloud, alternate podcast providers, it basically built a feature into iOS just for alternative password managers, etc.
Maybe it’s telling the truth when it says there are security concerns?
Those are installed using apple approved app store. Which requires a subscription and payment of 30%. You can give behind security but the truth is they are afraid.
If they allow alternate app store or browsers then yes apple is bold. Until then they need to consider their bottomline which requires sometimes bowing to China as well!
That’s also not true. You don’t have to go through Apple to run a subscription service. You can have people subscribe/buy content outside of the store and let them use it within the store. Netflix, Spotify, Amazon (Kindle, Audible, etc.), AT&T Now, Sling, LinuxAcademy, and countless others make you pay for subscriptions/content outside of the store.
