Apple may let users change default apps on iPhones to satisfy trustbusters

Apple is considering allowing users to use third-party web browsers and email applications as the default app options on iPhones, iPads, and iPod touch devices.

iPhone default apps. image: Apple's Safari icon
Apple’s Safari icon
Eric Newcomer for Bloomberg News:

That could mean your iPhone could open Google Chrome any time you click a link instead of forcing you to open Safari, or Spotify could work more seamlessly with Siri and other iPhone features.

This really matters to some people. One person tweeted, “sometimes i feel my entire passion for antitrust is around just wanting spotify as my siri default.”

MacDailyNews Take: Yes, who doesn’t want to pay the same or more for 10 million fewer songs? Give these people the ability to degrade their experience, Apple! Since they can’t even do basic math, much less understand antitrust law, they won’t even comprehend that what they’re doing anyway.

Apple is currently under pressure from the Justice Department, but it hasn’t been the focus of the current surge in antitrust activity in the way Facebook and Google have been. It’s a savvy move to react to the shifting landscape before things change. Apple could end up looking like the good guy. And that’s good marketing.

MacDailyNews Take: As we wrote yesterday, “We’d endorse creating the ability to replace default apps on iPhone and iPad with one big caveat: Security and privacy must not be compromised. The vast majority of users would still use Apple’s apps, but the ability to choose to make third-party apps as defaults would not only give users more power, it would alleviate many antitrust issues for Apple.”


    1. I hate to have to agree. But I agree. Either Google owns all the good patents related to email (especially fast and accurate search of thousands of old messages) — or Apple just gave up caring many years ago.

    1. So if a year from now I can set my own app defaults on Apple devices that somehow won’t really be happening because it was too late? Your comment makes no sense. A thing can only be too late if the opportunity no longer exists because you were, you know, too late. Like missing the birth of your child or something similar. Apple can change this policy whenever they like and it is never too late. Get a grip on reality please.

      1. You have a major impediment. You’re a fan. So i will state it so you can comprehend it.

        -Of course they should change it.
        -Should never have been possible in the first place.
        -The title states that it’s to assuage the “trustbusters”
        -This does not remove the cause of the problem. It. Should. Not. Ever. Have. Been. Possible.

        1. “i will state it so you can comprehend it.”

          So sorry but none of your reply is relevant to what you said which was “Do it, but too late. Way too late.”

          I didn’t say anything about whether Apple should have allowed default apps before now. I didn’t saying anything about Apple’s motivations. I didn’t say anything about liking Apple at all.

          Who has comprehension issues? It isn’t me.

          You said it is “Way too late”. Too late for what? Please explain. By explain I mean give specifics about why Apple can no longer allow users to set their own default apps because, you know, that is what “too late” means. It means a thing can no longer be done at all because it is “too late”. It means an opportunity to do a thing has been completely missed and the thing can’t be done anymore because you know “too late”. You know what “too” and “late” mean right? Right?

            1. “They would be correcting a mistake that never should have happened.”

              So it wasn’t “too late” after all and Apple can change the policy just as I said. Thank you for agreeing with me and admitting your mistake.

            2. Fixing a behavior that never should have happen with an intent to appease trustbusters is too late. The trust has been busted.

              “Sorry your honor, I will no longer steal”

              The only thing proven in our exchange is your poor comprehension.

            3. “Fixing a behavior that never should have happen with an intent to appease trustbusters is too late. The trust has been busted.”

              Customer sat numbers with regard to Apple would disagree with your new deflection to a trust issue. So sorry. You lose again.

            4. “We don’t run anti-trust on customer satisfaction numbers.”

              Oh, so Apple is being broken up because they were “too late” in modifying policies to satisfy the trust busters who, you know, bust companies up due to anti-trust. Funny I didn’t read about that but it must be true because you said it was “too late” and you did claim to know what “too late” means. Poor Apple all busted up by the trust busters because as you said “The trust has been busted” and it is “too late”.

            5. “No they arwe backtracking on a policy because the other side has no leg to stand on. Sorry. Too late.”

              Hmm, are you having a stroke? You seem confused. Let’s pick apart your reply. “No they arwe backtracking on a policy” where “they” has to be Apple because it is Apple that is considering changing a policy. Then you go on to say “because the other side has no leg to stand on” and the only “other side” you’ve talked about is either the users or the trustbusters so you mean the opposing side to Apple does not have a valid case, “no leg to stand on”.

              The “too late” part still doesn’t make any sense because if it was “too late” Apple would be losing users in large numbers because it is, you know, “too late” or alternatively Apple would be busted up by the trustbusters because, you know, “too late”. Neither of those things are happening or are likely to happen.

              I would advise you go see a doctor ASAP.

            6. The sarcasm was too subtle for you.

              “No they are backtracking” is indeed a gesture they are making (if true) to loosen control and let users pick default Apps.

              This is where the sarcasm comes in… pay attention… “The other side has no leg to stand on”. “The other side being the trust busters.

              This whole thing (if true) would be damage control by Apple. Too late damage done. The whore can stop, but virginity is lost. Sorry.

            7. “The sarcasm was too subtle for you.”

              No you’re just a bad writer.

              “This whole thing (if true) would be damage control by Apple. Too late damage done. ”

              No you still haven’t explained what damage has been done. If it is damage on the sales or customer side that hasn’t happened. If it is damage on the antitrust side that also hasn’t happened. You have utterly failed to support your claim of “too late”.

              Remember I’m not saying Apple shouldn’t change this policy. I think they should. It is your claim of “too late” that was and still is utter nonsense. Be a man and admit your mistake.

  1. Spotify can have 10M less songs but they are a better match for my taste. More importantly Spotify makes better automatic playlists for me. I REALLY tried Apple Music and I REALLY wanted to like it but after some time I dropped my subscription.

  2. The tech Geeks working overtime, they want the great curated Apple hardware/software combo which cost money, to work the same as Windows, and Android OS, just buy Windows and Android Hardware. (Malware included)

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.