UK Looks to Trigger Regulation Process to Target Apple's Cloud Gaming and Browser Engine Restrictions

[visualseed]

If you mean cookie preferences, this was not the intention of the EU and websites have deliberately implemented to be compliant but still get their way (ie. "encourage" to accept all cookies). The EU didn't anticipate this but is working on an update to resolve this to make it better for the consumer.

They can, but now 20 other countries have also passed GDPR style-laws because they all thought it was a good idea and if they don't update them or allow flexibility in compliance, you end up with a patchwork of jurisdictions that now require you to play by a different set of rules. This is fine when dealing with local transactions and physical business presence, but the web doesn't really work that way and the same reason the EU thought they would get global compliance is the same reason this will devolve into a cluster-f.

 

[jlc1978]

Cookie pop-ups weren't mandated by the EU. It was companies' underhanded way of getting around EU directives. Everyone gets them because websites are global, so leaving the EU won't make a blind bit of difference to UK people.

Of course, every regulation spawns a response designed to minimize impact. Another fallout is some websites simply block those coming from the EU.

 

[visualseed]

You aren't even arguing in good faith anymore. It is pretty common knowledge that, for all intents and purposes, the browser engine is the browser, and installing an alternate browser on a desktop OS means installing the alternate browser engine. You are ignoring important context to try to make a point.

Then why does Microsoft have to go out of their way to explain that Edge is just as good as Chrome because they use the same rendering engine. Most people have no clue. I'm willing to bet that more people choose a browser because they like the design of the tabs or how it manages bookmarks than because of the rendering engine it uses.

 

[somnolentsurfer]

Not exactly. It perfectly lines up with the rules of Apple’s platform. It would allow software to execute without an approval process. Unless people want Apple to start playing favorites - Microsoft can do it but I can’t.

Cloud gaming? But it doesn’t allow software to execute on device. Literally the only difference between that and either Remote Desktop apps or media streaming app, both of which they do allow, is that it’s gaming.

 

[Pezimak]

It is actually law because of PECR: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2426/pdfs/uksi_20032426_en.pdf

It is a U.K. only law now, which means the government can change it at will and ditch the cookie pop ups. It’s is not bound under any EU law now for it.

Data protection 'shake-up' takes aim at cookie pop-ups

A new head has been appointed to the UK data regulator amid a plan to drive the economy using data.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Pezimak]

Cookie pop-ups weren't mandated by the EU. It was companies' underhanded way of getting around EU directives. Everyone gets them because websites are global, so leaving the EU won't make a blind bit of difference to UK people.

Yes, leaving the EU does make the difference, it was an EU requirement, not U.K.

Data protection 'shake-up' takes aim at cookie pop-ups

A new head has been appointed to the UK data regulator amid a plan to drive the economy using data.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Pezimak]

Cloud gaming on iOS is purely supplemental for the AAA market. Microsoft isn't really focused on selling Windows/Xbox games to iOS users. Windows/Xbox comes first. That's why MS never ported any of their 1st party franchise titles to iOS in the past.

Microsft is focussed on offering games as a service on Game Pass, and that includes cloud gaming and iOS users, Game Pass is Xbox now. They have repeatedly stated publicly that they don’t care where you or on what you game, just as long as it’s on their games service. Game Pass was planned since Phil Spencer took over Xbox last generation.

 

[AppliedMicro]

LOL...the conventional wisdom back in 2007 when the iPhone originally launched was that Apple wouldn't really be competitive with the goliaths of the cell phone market like Nokia, Blackberry, Ericsson etc.

We're not living in 2007 anymore, where phones were bought mostly on design, feel and tech specs.
We're living today, where phones are primarily bought by availability of apps. Can I get Google Maps, Instagram, TikTok, my bank's banking app, and the local public transit app. Any platform that doesn't deliver on that today is immediately out of the question for 90% or more of buyers in developed markets.

That leaves two operating systems (you know which ones) and 2, at most 3 mobile app stores per country (you know which ones).

How is this different than Nintendo or Xbox, both closed systems?

You may have noticed (and I already mentioned examples above) how phones are used for much more every-day transaction and life than gaming consoles.

Seems ripe for disruption from another innovator. Someone(s) should try and harder. Maybe they will succeed. Maybe they should follow all these new rules and regulations and will be more successful for it.

Chicken and egg.
Anyone who doesn't offer the most popular apps today is immediately out of the race.

 

[kiranmk2]

What you're talking about isn't even remotely a reality today. Mobile cloud gaming is limited to 720p resolution. That was an Xbox 360 standard from three generations ago. Windows/Xbox gaming is supposed to be about the bleeding edge of technology (4K! Raytracing!), not traveling back to 2005. And the game libraries ARE predominantly older titles. MS has no real intent to make iPhone/iPad the equivalent game access as Windows/Xbox.

You are out of date on this. XBox Cloud gaming is now at 1080p60 thanks to the servers being upgraded from XBox One S-based systems to XBox Series X-based systems: https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/7/22714067/xbox-cloud-gaming-custom-xbox-series-x-hardware-upgrade

No reason this couldn't go to 4k HDR in the future - it's just about scaling the server equipment

 

[ian87w]

Microsoft got punished for pre installing IE on Windows. But I haven’t seen any actions against Google for pre installing and requiring Chrome on Android for certification. Yet the focus is on Apple? So weird.

If you argue that you can use different browser engines on Android, you can install other browsers on Windows as well, but Microsoft still got punished. Why Google is given a free pass? Very peculiar.

 

[webkit]

Microsoft got punished for pre installing IE on Windows.

That was part of it. Another (bigger) part of it was Microsoft restricting, or attempting to restrict/discourage, computer makers from pre-installing other browsers on Windows-based machines they sold.

But I haven’t seen any actions against Google for pre installing and requiring Chrome on Android for certification. Yet the focus is on Apple? So weird.

Google, including the Chrome browser, has been the target of plenty of regulatory investigations too.

If you argue that you can use different browser engines on Android, you can install other browsers on Windows as well, but Microsoft still got punished. Why Google is given a free pass? Very peculiar.

I don't see this particular situation as Google getting a pass. The issue here with Apple is that they don't allow non-Webkit browser engines on iOS, not about having Safari pre-installed. Google doesn't prevent non-Chromium browsers on Android.

 

[ian87w]

I don't see this particular situation as Google getting a pass. The issue here with Apple is that they don't allow non-Webkit browser engines on iOS, not about having Safari pre-installed. Google doesn't prevent non-Chromium browsers on Android.

Google is getting a free pass. You can freely install other browsers on Windows as well, yet Microsoft still got a punishment. For an Android OEM to receive Google Play certification, they have to pre-install Google chrome and a slew of other Google bloatware. Yet Google gets a free-pass.

 

[svish]

Looks like more troubles are heading Apples way. iOS will definitely change if these regulations are enforced.

 

[Philip_S]

Here in the EU we have the worst possibile web experience due to these endless, stupid nag screens.

They should start anticipating things, or they'd prove more and more that they're not qualified to make these decisions for tech users.

Those nag screens are mostly non-compliant with the GDPR: the reject all button must be no less prominent than the accept all button, and clicking “x” or similar should reject all. What the commission didn’t anticipate was that no one (neither the national authorities given an unfunded mandate to enforce the rules, nor the commission itself) would bother to find violators.

There’s also sites that use them when not required (though they may be required by similar laws from other places) such as when they only have strictly necessary cookies, and sites that complain about the poor UI but don’t want to get rid of their unnecessary cookies.

Nobody is compelled to buy an iPhone so why is it considered a monopoly?

In some cases, it’s because Apple and Android are sufficiently similar as to be not actually competing, in others it’s just because a duopoly isn’t enough to be really competitive, and sometimes it’s because of the effective lock-in that investing in either of the 2.5 major ecosystems has.

It is not the governments job regulate the free market where new comers are favored.

It’s the government’s job to regulate the free market in whatever way the voters want. It’s all too often the government’s practice to regulate it to favour the interests of donors or companies that think they can threaten their host’s economy.

companies like Epic have twisted themselves into a pretzel trying to claim that the console model is somehow anticompetitive if the hardware makes a profit and has general computing applications. That, of course, ignores the fact that consoles do make a profit in many cases and certainly could support general computing applications IF the company making them allowed it.

Part of the reason the console model was tolerated was because the consoles were sold at a loss, so if a developer dared to take on a console company (or a customer could afford to) that might well be corrected.

What’s cute is the Robin Hood principle government operates under.

It happens rarely enough, and should be encouraged when it does.

Lets all assume that they will abuse the power they have and punish them before they get to do it.

Their job is to maximise shareholder value, and while there’s scope for long term thinking there has been a concerted push (mostly from the “law and economics movement”) to ban directors from worrying about broader harms (eg our dividends were great for 5 years and then we caused a global recession). Not abusing their power to somewhere close to the legal limits without a rather good reason would attract a lawsuit.

 

[troublador]

Yes, leaving the EU does make the difference, it was an EU requirement, not U.K.

Data protection 'shake-up' takes aim at cookie pop-ups

A new head has been appointed to the UK data regulator amid a plan to drive the economy using data.

www.bbc.co.uk

You've completely ignored what I stated, but OK. How has leaving the EU made a difference to cookie pop-ups for people using the Internet in the UK? The answer is it hasn't made any difference!

 

[Philip_S]

If your argument is that there was a lack of regulation to combat the effects of the previous regulation then I would agree. For example: The current GSL crisis was caused by (a) more people need to go to university since that leads to higher income but (b) university is expensive and many cannot afford it so (c) banks will offer student loans so that students can attend but (d) some students/families do not have sufficient creditworthiness to get student loans and thus cannot attend university therefore (e) the Federal government will need to guarantee those loans so that banks will give the loans thus (f) due to the guaranteed backing of these loans (regulation also disallowed GSL debt elimination due to bankruptcy), banks will offer GSLs to nearly anyone [ii] universities can increase their fees since there is no concern about not getting paid.

That’s a problem of insufficient regulation, where they didn’t cap student fees or cap maximum repayments (which effectively caps fees based on anticipated repayments), or limit the guarantees to those degrees where the earnings were adequate, or capped the numbers in each degree based on employment demand (which at that time was still common in other countries), or require student fees to be spent solely on teaching with separate totally optional fees for sports teams, gyms, etc..

 

[Pezimak]

You've completely ignored what I stated, but OK. How has leaving the EU made a difference to cookie pop-ups for people using the Internet in the UK? The answer is it hasn't made any difference!

You didn’t read the article I linked to either. It explained it all.

It was a requirement under EU GDPR laws to have the pop ups, as detailed here:

GDPR Cookie Consent - GDPR Compliance - Cookiebot™

Achieve GDPR compliance for your website's use of cookies with Cookiebot. Our CMP makes it easy to manage cookie consent and help ensure that you're compliant.

www.cookiebot.com

A website must allow users to control cookies, that’s what the pop ups do.

 

[troublador]

You didn’t read the article I linked to either. It explained it all.

It was a requirement under EU GDPR laws to have the pop ups, as detailed here:

GDPR Cookie Consent - GDPR Compliance - Cookiebot™

Achieve GDPR compliance for your website's use of cookies with Cookiebot. Our CMP makes it easy to manage cookie consent and help ensure that you're compliant.

www.cookiebot.com

A website must allow users to control cookies, that’s what the pop ups do.

So how has leaving the EU made a difference to cookie pop-ups for people using the Internet in the UK? I mean a real-world difference, not an abstract difference.

 

[211]

It is a U.K. only law now, which means the government can change it at will and ditch the cookie pop ups. It’s is not bound under any EU law now for it.

Data protection 'shake-up' takes aim at cookie pop-ups

A new head has been appointed to the UK data regulator amid a plan to drive the economy using data.

www.bbc.co.uk

Yes, but that’s not what you said. You said “But I'll add, here in the U.K. we lost any legal responsibility for these coockie pop ups when we left the EU, but as usual the government has done nothing about it and we still have them. So we are worst, we don't even require or need the damn things yet still get them endlessly on every website.” There is a legal responsibility as it is part of UK law.

 

[Pezimak]

Yes, but that’s not what you said. You said “But I'll add, here in the U.K. we lost any legal responsibility for these coockie pop ups when we left the EU, but as usual the government has done nothing about it and we still have them. So we are worst, we don't even require or need the damn things yet still get them endlessly on every website.” There is a legal responsibility as it is part of UK law.

I meant it is only part of U.K. law as we were in the EU, it was a law required by the EU, as a member state of the EU we needed to have the law, it is now not needed as we are not in the EU. Perhaps I should have said we lost any EU legal responsibility to have the pop ups?

 

[gnipgnop]

You are out of date on this. XBox Cloud gaming is now at 1080p60 thanks to the servers being upgraded from XBox One S-based systems to XBox Series X-based systems: https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/7/22714067/xbox-cloud-gaming-custom-xbox-series-x-hardware-upgrade

No reason this couldn't go to 4k HDR in the future - it's just about scaling the server equipment

FYI: the 1080p/60 fps is labelled as "up to", which means 720p is still very much in the mix. As for the server equipment, they're already saying they use customized Xbox Series X hardware...so it's not the equipment, it's the internet infrastructure. Which means a lot of what would determine the quality/viability of the service is outside of Microsoft's control.

 

[webkit]

Google is getting a free pass. You can freely install other browsers on Windows as well, yet Microsoft still got a punishment. For an Android OEM to receive Google Play certification, they have to pre-install Google chrome and a slew of other Google bloatware. Yet Google gets a free-pass.

But Google has been investigated, sued, and/or significantly fined for those sorts of things as part of antitrust claims.

 

[gnipgnop]

We're not living in 2007 anymore, where phones were bought mostly on design, feel and tech specs.
We're living today, where phones are primarily bought by availability of apps. Can I get Google Maps, Instagram, TikTok, my bank's banking app, and the local public transit app. Any platform that doesn't deliver on that today is immediately out of the question for 90% or more of buyers in developed markets.

How is that different from buying desktops/laptops or gaming consoles? Yes, people do have particular apps in mind when they purchase these kinds of products, but it's nothing unique to mobile. People talk about the duopoly in mobile operating systems, but there's also a duopoly in the desktop/laptop market.

 

[AppliedMicro]

People talk about the duopoly in mobile operating systems, but there's also a duopoly in the desktop/laptop market.

...but there's more than two digital applications download stores in the desktop market.

And neither Microsoft nor Apple are mandating that every piece of software be approved by them nor do they enforce commissions by mandating all software sales going through their own store.

Neither do they restrict cloud gaming apps and content - nor prohibit development, distribution and usage of alternative web browser engines in the desktop/laptop market.

You can literally develop your own cloud gaming app
- that includes a web-based in-app store for sales
- that os based on a non-webkit browser engine
- and offer all the gaming or content you want (within legal limits), without needing someone else's approval and
- have customers mail you banknotes in old-fashioned letters or wire money to your bank account for payment
- without being forced to use another company's (Microsoft's, Google's, Apple's or Epic's) payment system
- and without having your customers jump through hoops

How is that different from buying desktops/laptops or gaming consoles?

There isn't anywhere near the anticompetitive abuse of gatekeeping power in the desktop market.

If Microsoft (or even Apple) began to enforce the same "approved Apps and App Store only" distribution model for software applications that Apple enforces on iOS on Windows or macOS, you can bet regulators and lawmakers will see it as a problem and take action.

 

[gnipgnop]

Part of the reason the console model was tolerated was because the consoles were sold at a loss, so if a developer dared to take on a console company (or a customer could afford to) that might well be corrected.

The last console generation that involved large losses on hardware was the Xbox 360/Playstation 3 era. Sony and MS both said that they would not be designing consoles that way in future generations. They each said that the goal would be to get the launch hardware as close to break even as possible so that the hardware would generate a profit for the majority of the generation as costs fell after launch. And keep in mind that Nintendo never wants to lose money on hardware, and they actually won a major lawsuit where someone was trying to claim that their control of the software on the platform was an antitrust violation.