No it's not. The percentage of people who actually can use alt stores is so small that nobody will really dedicate money to make browser build for iOS. Why would they when Apple would just make the work impossible anyway.
It's pure malicious compliance from Apple. Anybody defending Apple on this is simply delusional.
Browsers with alternative engines can be offered in regular AppStore. That's why I wonder why isn't this a thing. At the end of the day, browser makers probably want to reduce confusion and complexity of maintaining two vastly different applications under the same name. This most likely isn't a case of malicious compliance, you got yourself carried away here I think.
I think the main technological limitation is that other browsers cannot just-in-time compile (JIT) JavaScript or any other embedded language. Except in the EU.
ETA: your link includes JIT; I’m pointing out that that’s why they don’t exist outside of the EU. Non-JIT browsers would just not be very performant.
Now it's straight up protectionism from USA. You touch our tech margins, we won't do business with you. So yeah the regulators are unable, even if they wanted to something.
Doctorow is right when he keeps saying that countries should make it legal to jailbreak devices. The problem is that first country that tries that will get hammer from the almighty POTUS.
In my mind, "yolo ai" application (throwaway code on one hand, unrestrained assistants on the other) -
is a little like better spreadsheets and smart documents were in the 90s; just run macros! Everywhere! No need for developers - just Word an macros!
Then came macro viri - and practically - everyone cut back hard on distributing code via Word and Excel (in favour of web apps and we got the dot.com bubble).
It works on Linux, Windows, macOS, and BSD. It's not locked to Apple's ecosystem. You can back up directly to local storage, SFTP, S3, Backblaze B2, Azure, Google Cloud, and more. Time Machine is largely limited to local drives or network shares. Restic deduplicates at the chunk level across all snapshots, often achieving better space efficiency than Time Machine's hardlink-based approach. All data is encrypted client-side before leaving your machine. Time Machine encryption is optional. Restic supports append-only mode for protection against ransomware or accidental deletion. It also has a built-in check command to check integrity.
Time Machine has a reputation for silent failures and corruption issues that have frustrated users for years. Network backups (to NAS devices) use sparse bundle disk images that are notoriously fragile. A dropped connection mid-backup can corrupt the entire backup history, not just the current snapshot. https://www.google.com/search?q=time+machine+corruption+spar...
Time Machine sometimes decides a backup is corrupted and demands you start fresh, losing all history. Backups can stop working without obvious notification, leaving users thinking they're protected when they're not. https://www.reddit.com/r/synology/comments/11cod08/apple_tim...
Restic is fantastic. And restic is complicated for someone who is not technical.
So there is a need to have something that works, even not in an optimal way, that saves people data.
Are you saying that Time Machine doe snot backup data correctly? But then there are other services that do.
Restic is not for the everyday Joe.
And to your point about "ignorant people" - it is as I was saying that you are an ignorant person because you do not create your own medicine, or produce your own electricity, or paint your own paintings, or build your own car. For a biochemist specializing in pharma (or Walt in Breaking Bad :)) you are an ignorant person unable to do the basic stuff: synthetizing paracetamol. It is a piece of cake.
In everyday life I am a plodding and practical programmer who has learned the hard way that any working code base has numerous “fences” in the Chesterton sense.
I think, though, that for small systems and small parts of systems LLMs do move the repair-replace line in the replace direction, especially if the tests are good.
Exactly. I simply don't trust Microsoft enough anymore to choose them as my computers operating system provider.
Windows just doesn't feel like something you should do private stuff with due to all that telemetry/data collecting.
If I remember correctly most of the 600s compatibility issues could be worked around by adjusting settings via _early startup control system_.
Eg by switching off newer hardware features.
Your statement is true only outside of EU countries.
reply