iPadOS Identified as Digital 'Gatekeeper' Under New EU Tech Rules

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Browser Control on iPadOS (Safari vs Chrome)

  • Many argue Apple “cripples” iPadOS by blocking full Chrome/Blink and other browser engines, making iPads worse than cheap Chromebooks for web apps and extensions.
  • Strong split on Safari: some call it junk and point to missing APIs, poor compatibility, and slow update cadence tied to OS upgrades; others praise its speed, battery life, resource efficiency, and privacy.
  • Chrome is repeatedly criticized as a resource hog and “spyware,” with UI “enshittification” (dark patterns, Google account nags, Pay/Lens integrations).
  • Debate over web APIs: some see Chromium’s rapid API additions as privacy‑hostile; others view Safari/Firefox as intentionally cautious.
  • Several see Chrome as the new IE and worry that weakening Apple’s control will just cement a Chrome web monopoly.

EU DMA, Gatekeeper Status, and Thresholds

  • Many think iPadOS clearly functions like iOS and should have been covered from the start; Apple is seen as having used a contrived platform split to delay compliance.
  • Some criticize the EU for stretching its own quantitative thresholds (treating “near 45M users” as sufficient), calling it arbitrary and bad for rule of law.
  • Others point to DMA language about “foreseeable” entrenched positions and argue the EU is acting within the law’s intent.
  • There’s disagreement over whether the EU is unfairly targeting Apple or simply addressing uniquely restrictive app-install policies compared to Android.

Web vs Native, User Choice, and Power Dynamics

  • One camp wants powerful web apps and full browsers to bypass App Store control, enable richer SaaS, and avoid “install our app” pressure.
  • Another camp dislikes web/electron apps, push notifications, and hardware-access APIs, preferring native apps and a simpler web.
  • Some argue current debates are driven more by corporate interests (Apple vs Google/Meta vs developers) than by what end users actually want.

Longevity, E‑Waste, and Lock‑In

  • Older iPads that can’t run new apps (e.g., Zoom) are cited as wasteful compared to old Macs that can run Linux.
  • There is disagreement over how much Apple “forces” developers to drop old devices versus tooling/SDK incentives making backward support impractical.
  • Several see opening mobile platforms (side‑loading, alternative OSes) as both a competition and e‑waste issue.

iPad Hardware vs Software Limitations

  • iPad Pro hardware is widely praised, but many feel iPadOS arbitrarily limits “real work,” forcing users to keep a Mac as well.
  • Wishes range from dual‑booting macOS to simply having a real CLI and fewer artificial restrictions.