Neon Zen

Apple’s Still Playing Games with Browser Competition Fifteen months after the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) forced Apple to open up iOS to rival browser engines, nothing’s really changed. Safari remains the only browser on iPhones that gets to run its own engine—everyone else is stuck using Apple’s slower, outdated WebKit tech. Apple claims they’ve “allowed” competitors like Chrome and Firefox to switch, but behind the scenes, they’ve rigged the system to make it impossible. It’s not hard to see why. Safari isn’t just another app for Apple—it’s a cash cow . By keeping it dominant, Apple protects an estimated $20 billion per year from Google’s search deal. Every percentage of market share Safari loses costs Apple $200 million. Worse, letting real browsers compete would unleash web apps as true alternatives to the App Store, threatening Apple’s 30% cut on subscriptions and downloads. So how does Apple block progress? Simple: bureaucracy and bad-faith rules . If Mozilla or ...

  The FBI recently seized a major Nintendo Switch piracy website , replacing its homepage with a seizure notice—another victory in Nintendo’s aggressive war against piracy. But while the takedown reinforces copyright law, it also reignites debates about Nintendo’s heavy-handed control over its ecosystem . For many gamers, this isn’t just about piracy—it’s about Nintendo’s controversial practices , from bricking hacked consoles to locking out subscription refunds , making them feel like the company operates with impunity. The shutdown of this site, which was already banned in multiple countries, raises questions: Is Nintendo being protected more than other companies? And at what cost to consumer rights?   The FBI Takedown: Justified or Overreach? The seized website was a hub for pirated Switch games, emulators, and hacking tools —clear violations of copyright law. Nintendo has every right to protect its intellectual property, But here’s where things get complicated: ...