>> if we hadn't turned everything into a fucking web-app

> Could you elaborate?

I run a web browser with JS turned off and the web is mostly unusable for me, even things that should be plain documents like news reports try to choke down a dozen or so megabytes of obfuscated garbage that it insists must run on my CPU doing goodness knows what to render a document in common markdown.

So, despite being "free" you just run any old garbage you happen to come across on the internet and hope the "Fantastically optimised awesomely sandboxed" runtime that is definitely not too complicated to have issues (despite being one of the most complicated interpreters in history), definitely has no security bugs and will protect you.

I'm not pro apple here. I'm anti the enshittification of everything because some arsehat decided it was necessary for me to run whatever arbitrary shite they managed to vomit onto a web-server.

That Apple makes it hard for you? Fine. Enemy of my enemy.

Also: fuck Chromes monopoly.

> I'm not pro apple here. I'm anti the enshittification of everything

That's a highly contradictory stance. Accepting one brand of enshittification to solve another, less-significant problem is an indefensible position. You can't ignore Apple's arbitrary shite while complaining about the prevalence of other arbitrary decisions, it's a go-nowhere fallacy. There is no point; you are just promoting something that you think can help you, and then refusing to rationalize it in the greater context beyond browsers.

There's no reason to paint this as an "enemy of my enemy" situation, either. You either think browser clients are a powerful tool that deserves better scrutiny, or you think the status quo is fine. Nobody is putting on armor and picking up a sword to go to war for their favorite corporate-sponsored browser. If anyone has you believe that, they're probably manipulating you.

Whatever you're selling, I am not buying it.

Apple doing shitty things is irrelevant because ultimately that applies to people who buy apple products and people who want to sell products that work on apple devices.

What Web Developers are doing affects me daily.

Apple pisses off web developers who want to turn a browser into an OS with crap like WebUSB? Not seeing a problem.

Apple actively prevents the monopoly position of v8/blink/Chrome? Not seeing a problem.

Apple has my support in-so-far as its the only company that seems to tell web developers "no".

Enemy of my enemy applies; No other company, especially one with any actual leverage, is preventing the lurch of web crap.

> Apple pisses off web developers who want to turn a browser into an OS with crap like WebUSB? Not seeing a problem.

See, this is the problem. If Apple is going to charge you 30% to use a serialized data cable, they're going to get annihilated legislatively. That's not a choice the market gets to make, it's one market regulators decide on. As we've seen in multiple European countries, Apple doing shitty things is not irrelevant because they get fined for participating in said markets.

Thank god for the Digital Markets Act. Apple can take their performance art and sell it somewhere with proper authoritarianism, like China. Oh wait...

What makes you think Apple wouldn't consider HTML or CSS to be "source code" as well, if they see browser dominance as an advantage?

Apple had a pretty clear definition of interpreted code which boiled down to: "Does your interpreted download allow the user to write infinite loops or recursion?"

So, HTML: no but CSS: yes?