Don't know what to tell ya, I never have had issue. And others stated the same.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Browser Companies Criticize Apple's EU Choice Screen in iOS 17.4
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I understand how cookies work, but you seem to be completely oblivious to how the internet was a few years back.
It didn’t matter what browser you had as the website would store cookies or information about you irrespective of what your opinion was.
It more shows it doesn’t matter unless the law enforces your privacy as a right.
If you think cookies are data stored on the websites servers you don't even know what a cookie is.
You may want to read again, as at no point was it said that cookies are data stored on website servers
There are many ways of tracking users, regardless of using 'private' browsing. The key is that they are no longer allowed to do that without consent, although I must say that I find a lot of, especially US based companies, don't quite understand that, and people working for companies even less so.
"the website would store cookies or information about you"You may want to read again, as at no point was it said that cookies are data stored on website servers
There are many ways of tracking users, regardless of using 'private' browsing. The key is that they are no longer allowed to do that without consent, although I must say that I find a lot of, especially US based companies, don't quite understand that, and people working for companies even less so.
Yes the software as served by a website would do that. And how the technology work is that they are stored in the browser you use to access it. If you website didn’t make such requests the browser wouldn’t do it
And that's what I'm saying since the beginning?Yes the software as served by a website would do that. And how the technology work is that they are stored in the browser you use to access it. If you website didn’t make such requests the browser wouldn’t do it
I'm being said that cookies are always stored even if I don't want them. Quote "irrespective of what your opinion was"
That's false. If you don't want cookies, you can disable them in the browser.
My recollection of what was said and what the context was, was different. Just like now you seem to misunderstand what was being said.
The important part I would suggest is that cookies alone aren’t necessary to track. And the right to privacy and not to track isn’t just about cookies either. Just because you may have used specific browser settings or mode doesn’t mean you can’t be tracked.
I was only referring to cookie popups that are only about cookies and not other methods of tracking, which are different topics. I'm only talking about what is referred as "cookie consent".
Sure, I get that. But they are part of the same legislation...
I recommend you read what GDPR actually requires. It being called the cookie banner law is very reductive in what it does
The General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679, abbreviated GDPR) is a European Union regulation on information privacy in the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area (EEA). The GDPR is an important component of EU privacy law and human rights law, in particular Article 8(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. It also governs the transfer of personal data outside the EU and EEA. The GDPR's goals are to enhance individuals' control and rights over their personal information and to simplify the regulations for international business
Article 6 states that the lawful purposes are:
- (a) If the data subject has given consent to the processing of his or her personal data;
- (b) To fulfill contractual obligations with a data subject, or for tasks at the request of a data subject who is in the process of entering into a contract;
- (c) To comply with a data controller's legal obligations;
- (d) To protect the vital interests of a data subject or another individual;
- (e) To perform a task in the public interest or in official authority;
- (f) For the legitimate interests of a data controller or a third party, unless these interests are overridden by interests of the data subject or her or his rights according to the Charter of Fundamental Rights (especially in the case of children).
Data subjects must be allowed to withdraw this consent at any time, and the process of doing so must not be harder than it was to opt in.
Some common misconceptions about GDPR include:
- All processing of personal data requires consent of the data subject
- In fact, data can be processed without consent if one of the other five lawful bases for processing applies, and obtaining consent may often be inappropriate
- GDPR applies to anyone processing personal data of EU citizens anywhere in the world
- In fact, it applies to non-EU established organizations only where they are processing data of data subjects located in the EU (irrespective of their citizenship) and then only when supplying goods or services to them, or monitoring their behaviou
No I didn't. Re-read the headline and reread what you highlighted.
If you still don't get it, it's really not my problem.
I only talked about the cookie banner part of the law in my original post and you took it like I was rejecting the whole idea behind GDPR.
Opinions don't always have to be either an extreme side or the other extreme.
One way or another, the user must choose a browser. The EU made that quite clear.
It would seem to me that bothering the user with an extra step at setup time is far less annoying than bothering the user after they thought their phone was already set up, and now they just want to find a pancake recipe or whatever.
It's the same amount of work regardless, but one gets that work out of the way all at once, and the other interrupts your flow when you have a specific goal in mind.
Last edited:
There’s no such thing in the law. The cookie banner is a direct consequence of the law. It doesn’t say anything about cookies.
You know those modal screens that interrupt your groove when you are surfing?
There are no laws forcing websites to use them.
They use them because they choose to.
So basically, we tell companies the same thing we tell young boys: if it's getting private, you need consent.
You'll notice the words "cookie" or "banner" appear nowhere in this paragraph. That's because they are not the focus of the law.
The only thing that matters is that if an entity wants to track people, they have to let them know in a way that is clear and request their approval.
Last edited:
You can't even use Google Analytics without having to display a banner. Most of my clients just renounce to use analytics data because they don't want to bother with that and they're afraid of not doing it right and risking fines. They miss out on precious analytics data and it can hurt growth. And then we wonder why the GDP is stagnant here.
That’s the cost of respecting privacy. If your clients are losing money because they can’t abuse their customers then I can’t say I’m sympathetic to them.
And if you can’t ask consent without being obtrusive then you should fail as a business.
And just how I think the AppStore data information form that Apple requires by every developer I want that to be a legal requirement on the EU level so we can enforce apple’s privacy standards as a minimum floor
It's not "my clients" at this point, it's the whole country that's losing money. The whole country should fail then. Well the recession is already here anyway.
Yes then the country should fail. If my country will fail if we can’t have slaves then it will suck a lot for me.
Ether we improve and adapt or we fail because we can’t stop abusing citizens
Well in reality, the abusers that dared to install a script to know for how long a visitor stayed on their site don't end up failing, they just end up moving to the US while we're here complaining that there isn't any tech company left here.
lol, we still have technology companies here, and fleeing to the USA doesn’t protect you from legal consequences impacting the EU domestic market and rights afforded to their citizens.
Chasing the rush to the bottom isn’t a game worth playing in some regards
Have you never heard of the Brussels effect?
It's not a few big players that'll change something. And in fact, the law doesn't hurt big players. GAFAMs are still getting record profits.
It's the small and midsize companies that are the most hurt, as they are the one who need advertising to grow.
These small and midsize actors make most of the GDP, that's why we're seeing recession in the biggest EU economies. It's not Spotify and ASML that'll save us.
Yeah petition the government to kick Apple out, using your vote if needed be. Once Apple is formally out, let’s see what will happen.
None of this empty talk, support it with actions.
It’s so adorable how the US thinks they matter in world politics and the global economy.
I don’t understand, I thought iPhone is not popular in Europe. Why bother on an unpopular platform? Could they be seeing trillions and think they are going to take some?![]()
Several third-party browser companies have experienced a spike in iPhone installs since Apple made major changes to iOS in order to comply with the Digital Markets Act in the European Union, but many are not happy with Apple's implementation of its default browser choice screen.
![alternative-browser-list-eu.jpg]()
In iOS 17.4, released last month, Apple no longer limits EU users to the handful of browser options that iOS currently offers as alternatives in other parts of the world. Instead, users in the EU who open Safari for the first time are presented with a choice screen that allows them to opt for a new default browser from a list of popular alternatives in their country.
The change has led to a sharp increase in third-party browser usage, based on several reports. On Wednesday, Reuters reported that users of privacy-first browser Aloha had jumped 250% in March. The jump in users largely came in France, Belgium (3x growth), Germany, The Netherlands, Spain and Sweden (2.5x growth), and Denmark, Italy and Poland (2x growth).
Aloha browser markets itself as a privacy focused alternative to browsers that earns its money through paid subscriptions rather than selling ads by tracking users. The Cyprus-based company says it has 10 million monthly average users.
"Before, EU was our number four market, right now it's number two," Aloha CEO Andrew Frost Moroz said in an interview with Reuters.
Norway's Vivaldi browser, Germany's Ecosia and U.S.-based Brave have all seen user numbers rise following the new regulation. U.S.-based DuckDuckGo, which has about 100 million users, and its more popular rival, Norway-based Opera, have also reported substantial increases.
To be eligible for consideration in the alternative browsers list, companies must have the Default Browser Entitlement that is available to developers. Apple also requires that the app has been downloaded by at least 5,000 iPhone users across all 27 EU countries in the prior calendar year. Apple selects up to 11 of these for the browser choice screen in addition to Safari, updating the list once per calendar year.
Google has also updated its Pixel software to show alternative browser choices, and says that new Android devices made by other companies will also display the choice screen in the coming months.
Despite users increasingly choosing alternative options, browser companies have criticized Apple and Google for the slow rollout of the change, and believe it is hampering the migration away from Safari and Chrome. Mozilla, which owns Firefox, estimates that only around a fifth of iPhone users in the EU have received the iOS update, and claims that the rollout is much slower than Apple's previous software updates.
Some alternative browser makers are also concerned that the design of choice screens is sub-optimal at best. For example, Vivaldi CEO Jon Stephenson von Tetzchner notes that Apple's choice screen only appears when iPhone users open Safari, while the list of browsers provides no additional information.
"The process is just so convoluted that it's easiest for (users) to select Safari or potentially some other known name," he told Reuters.
Vivaldi is also unhappy with the design. "The list of browsers does not show additional information and that does not help users to make a meaningful choice," a company spokesperson told TechCrunch. "If the user has already selected a browser of their own choice, the choice screen can actively try to push them away from it, and may not even include it in the list that it presents to the user."
Ecosia has also been critical, and says Apple's implementation involves an "overly complex installation process" and keeps Safari front and center on the user's iPhone Home screen.
The European Commission is currently investigating Apple's choice screen design for suspected noncompliance. The probe is being conducted in consultation with browser companies, who are likely to encourage regulators to push for a stronger implementation to level the competitive playing field.
Article Link: Browser Companies Criticize Apple's EU Choice Screen in iOS 17.4
The law isn’t to hurt big players, it’s to protect citizens
We are seeing a recession because some wrongly assumed Russia is a good source for gas and oil.