Google is all alone with its proposed advertising technology -- FLoC-- to replace third-party cookies. Every major browser that uses the open source Chromium project has declined to use it, and it's unclear what that will mean for the future of advertising on the web. Firefox, Safari, Microsoft Edge, Vivaldi, and Brave have said they are not implementing Google's FLoC into their browsers.

Last year, NetMarketShare showed that Edge's 7.59% desktop market share pushed it past Firefox in March last year. Now, StatCounter reports that Edge has been adding users over the last few months as Firefox's userbase shrinks. TechSpot reports: While the data doesn't prove Firefox users have been leaving for Edge, we see that Microsoft's browser has seen its market share jump from 7.81% to 8.03% this year, while Mozilla's product declined from 8.1% to 7.95%. That's an all-time high for Edge, according to StatCounter. Edge's gain in users hasn't secured it the second position. That honor goes to Safari, which now has a 10.11% share, though its numbers have been falling since December, so Edge could overtake it soon enough.

Like Windows 7, it seems some people are having trouble letting go of the now-discontinued Internet Explorer. It has a 1.7% share that is declining very slowly. The data is only for the desktop market. Looking at all platforms -- desktop, tablet, and mobile -- iPhones and iPads make Safari's second spot more secure with a 19.03% share, while Firefox moves ahead of Edge, albeit by just 0.23%.

This week the lead consumer technology writer for The New York Times urged readers to switch their browser from Chrome, Safari, or Microsoft Edge to a private browser.

"For about a week, I tested three of the most popular options — DuckDuckGo, Brave and Firefox Focus. Even I was surprised that I eventually switched to Brave as the default browser on my iPhone." Firefox Focus, available only for mobile devices like iPhones and Android smartphones, is bare-bones. You punch in a web address and, when done browsing, hit the trash icon to erase the session. Quitting the app automatically purges the history. When you load a website, the browser relies on a database of trackers to determine which to block.

The DuckDuckGo browser, also available only for mobile devices, is more like a traditional browser. That means you can bookmark your favorite sites and open multiple browser tabs. When you use the search bar, the browser returns results from the DuckDuckGo search engine, which the company says is more focused on privacy because its ads do not track people's online behavior. DuckDuckGo also prevents ad trackers from loading. When done browsing, you can hit the flame icon at the bottom to erase the session.

Brave is also more like a traditional web browser, with anti-tracking technology and features like bookmarks and tabs. It includes a private mode that must be turned on if you don't want people scrutinizing your web history. Brave is also so aggressive about blocking trackers that in the process, it almost always blocks ads entirely. The other private browsers blocked ads less frequently....

In the end, though, you probably would be happy using any of the private browsers... For me, Brave won by a hair. My favorite websites loaded flawlessly, and I enjoyed the clean look of ad-free sites, along with the flexibility of opting in to see ads whenever I felt like it. Brendan Eich, the chief executive of Brave, said the company's browser blocked tracking cookies "without mercy."

"If everybody used Brave, it would wipe out the tracking-based ad economy," he said.

Count me in.

With the News Media Bargaining Code out of the way, the Australian government has moved its tech giant battle to the browser scene, keeping Google in its crosshairs while putting Apple under the microscope. From a report: Led by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), the new battle is focused on "choice and competition in internet search and web browsers." The consumer watchdog on Thursday put out a call for submissions, with a number of questions posed in a discussion paper , centred on internet browser defaults. It claimed Apple's Safari is the most common browser used in Australia for smartphones and tablets, accounting for 51% of use. This is followed by Chrome with 39%, Samsung Internet with 7%, and with less than 1%, Mozilla Firefox. This shifts on desktop, with Chrome being the most used browser with 62% market share, followed by Safari with 18%, Edge 9%, and Mozilla 6%.

The ACCC said it's concerned with the impact of pre-installation and default settings on consumer choice and competition, particularly in relation to online search and browsers. It's also seeking views on supplier behaviour and trends in search services, browsers, and operating systems, and device ecosystems that may impact the supply of search and browsers to Australian consumers. It wants views also on the extent to which existing consumer harm can arise from the design of defaults and other arrangements.

After downloading Microsoft's Edge, "Technically Incorrect" columnist Chris Matyszczyk "was then subject to constant pestering from Microsoft to, well, download the new Edge. Which was an entirely new dimension of irritation."

But occasionally browsing with Edge triggered other responses... Initially, this annoyed Google. When the misguided logged into their Gmail accounts from Edge, Google sent them a helpful message telling them that Chrome was better. You know, fast, simple, and secure. Supposedly. As the months rolled on, things seem to calm down. Google and Microsoft came to a rapprochement. Edge is now the second most popular browser — it does help that it descends upon all Windows users like manna from Seattle.

Perhaps it's Edge's swift rise that has finally made Apple shriek in public. Last week, I opened Edge, only to get a big surprise. In the top right-hand corner of my MacBook Air, there appeared a message. From Apple. "TRY THE NEW SAFARI," shouted the headline. The text added: "Fast, energy efficient and with a beautiful design."

I gasped in wonder. I stared and then, naturally, took a screenshot.

The notifications in the top right-hand corner of my screen are usually confined to declarations of a pending update, or a nag about my last backup. But never actually selling. I've never seen an Apple ad appear there. I don't think I've ever seen Apple instantly react to my opening any rival's product on my MacBook Air.

It's not as if, every time I open Microsoft Word, Apple taps me on the shoulder and aggressively suggests I use Pages.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from ZDNet: Google has announced Flutter 2, a major upgrade to its framework for building user interfaces for mobile, the web and desktop. Flutter promises to allow developers to use the same codebase to build native apps for iOS, Android, Windows 10, macOS, and Linux and for the web on browsers including Chrome, Firefox, Safari or Edge. It can also be embedded in an IoT device with a screen, such as cars, TVs, and home appliances.

The move to Flutter 2 promises to benefit the over 150,000 Flutter Android apps already available on the Play Store. Every app will get a free upgrade with Flutter 2 allowing developers to target desktop and web without rewriting them. Google apps now built with Flutter include Google Pay, Stadia and Google Nest Hub among others. Flutter 2 also brings production quality support for the web, with a focus on progressive web apps (PWAs) that behave like desktop apps, single page apps, and mobile apps on the web. Google has added a new CanvasKit-powered rendering engine built with WebAssembly. For mobile web apps, in recent months it's added autofill, control over address bar URLs and routing, and PWA manifests.

For desktop browsers, it has added interactive scrollbars and keyboard shortcuts, increased the default content density in desktop modes, and added screen reader support for accessibility on Windows, macOS and ChromeOS. Google has been working with Ubuntu maker Canonical to bring Flutter to the desktop. Canonical will make Flutter the default choice for future desktop and mobile apps it creates. Microsoft is also releasing contributions to the Flutter engine that supports foldable Android devices, such as the Microsoft Surface Duo.

John Gruber, writing at DaringFireball: In my piece yesterday about email tracking images ("spy pixels" or "spy trackers"), I complained about the fact that Apple -- a company that rightfully prides itself for its numerous features protecting user privacy -- offers no built-in defenses for email tracking. A slew of readers wrote to argue that Apple Mail does offer such a feature: the option not to load any remote resources at all. It's a setting for Mail on both Mac and iOS, and I know about it -- I've had it enabled for years. But this is a throwing-the-baby-out-with-bath-water approach. What Hey offers -- by default -- is the ability to load regular images automatically, so your messages look "right", but block all known images from tracking sources (which are generally 1 x 1 px invisible GIFs).

Typical users are never going to enable Mail's option not to load remote content. It renders nearly all marketing messages and newsletters as weird-looking at best, unreadable at worst. And when you get a message whose images you do want to see, when you tell Mail to load them, it loads all of them -- including trackers. Apple Mail has no knowledge of spy trackers at all, just an all-or-nothing ability to turn off all remote images and load them manually. Mail's "Load remote content in messages" option is a great solution to bandwidth problems -- remember to turn it on the next time you're using Wi-Fi on an airplane, for example. It's a terrible solution to tracking. No one would call it a good solution to tracking if Safari's only defense were an option not to load any images at all until you manually click a button in each tab to load them all. But that's exactly what Apple offers with Mail. "Don't get me started on how predictable this entire privacy disaster was, once we lost the war over whether email messages should be plain text only or could contain embedded HTML. Effectively all email clients are web browsers now, yet don't have any of the privacy protection features actual browsers do," he adds.

MacRumors writes: Under normal and lightweight web browsing, Google Chrome uses 10x more RAM than Safari on macOS Big Sur, according to a test conducted by Flotato creator Morten Just (via iMore).

In a blog post, Morten Just outlines that he put both browsers to the test in two scenarios on the latest version of macOS. The first test was conducted on a virtual machine, and the second on a 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM. In the first round of testing, Just simulated a typical browsing pattern of opening Twitter, scrolling around, and then opening a new tab with Gmail and composing an email.

Under that test, Just found that Chrome reached 1GB of RAM usage, while Safari used only 80MB of RAM.

The two-tab test was only the start, however. With 54 tabs open, Just found that Google Chrome used 24x more RAM per tab compared to Safari. Both browsers, according to Just, were free of any extensions, and this specific test was conducted on his actual MacBook Pro, not a virtual machine. Per his findings, Chrome used 290MB of RAM per open tab, while Safari only used 12MB of RAM per open tab.

Apple's upcoming iOS 14.5 release will ship with a feature that will re-route all Safari's Safe Browsing traffic through Apple-controlled proxy servers as a workaround to preserve user privacy and prevent Google from learning the IP addresses of iOS users. From a report: The new feature will work only when users activate the "Fraudulent Website Warning" option in the iOS Safari app settings. This enables support for Google's Safe Browsing technology in Safari. The Safe Browsing technology works by taking an URL the user is trying to access, sending the URL in an anonymized state to Google's Safe Browsing servers, where Google accesses the site and scans for threats. If malware, phishing forms, or other threats are found on the site, Google tells the user's Safari browser to block access to the site and show a fullscreen red warning. While years ago, when Google launched the Safe Browsing API, the company knew what sites a user was accessing; in recent years, Google has taken several steps to anonymize data sent from user's devices via the Safe Browsing feature. But while Google has anonymized URL strings, by sending the link in a cropped and hashed state, Google still sees the IP address from where a Safe Browsing check comes through. Apple's new feature basically takes all these Safe Browsing checks and passes them through an Apple-owned proxy server, making all requests appear as coming from the same IP address.

PCWorld reviews Intel's recently-released benchmarks claiming Apple's M1 isn't faster than their 11th gen Core i7-1185G7 processor, among other things. Here are the claims Intel makes (visit the article to read PCWorld's "take" on each claim): MacBook M1 is slower than Core i7: Intel says in the WebXPRT 3 test, using the same version of Chrome for both the Core i7 system as well as the Arm-native MacBook, Intel takes the lead. The Intel chip was largely ahead in WebXPRT 3, and the x86 chip was nearly three times faster in finishing the photo enhancement test. Intel doesn't just use WebXPRT 3, though. It also shows the Core i7 pummeling the M1 in a PowerPoint-to-PDF export, and in multiple Excel macros by a factor of 2.3x. And yes, Intel used the Arm-native versions of Office for its tests.

Core i7 Crushes M1 in AI: For content creation tasks, Intel showed the Core i7 to be about 1.12x faster than the M1 in performing a 4K AVC-to-HEVC/H.265 file conversion. In this benchmark, they had the MacBook using the M1-native version of Handbrake. But the real destruction happens once you get to Topaz Lab's Gigapixel AI and Denoise AI, with the Intel Core chip crushing the M1 in AI-based noise removal and enlargement. Or maybe "crushing" is too nice a term, as it's more like the Core i7 outpaces the M1 by so much, the M1 wishes it had never been designed.

M1 doesn't support all the features: Intel also gives itself the lead in Adobe Premiere Pro, using the beta M1 native version in Auto Reframe, exporting to H.264 and H.265. They're decent wins, but come on, the code is still in beta for the Mac. That said, Intel points out that important features like Content Aware Fill are outright disabled on the beta version, and that's a concern. If the native version of Photoshop comes out, and there are critical features missing from it, that's a huge problem for Apple (and Adobe).

You can't be faster if you can't run it: For gaming, we see a bit of a back and forth between the Apple M1 and Core i7 in games that actually work on the MacBook. Intel doesn't let it end there, though, and decides to embarrass Apple further by showing the numerous games where the MacBook scores a 0 because game support just doesn't exist. Intel points out that "countless more" games "don't run on the M1," and then for good measure, it rushes Apple's bench with a list 10 more games you can't play on the M1 MacBook: Overwatch, Crysis Remastered, Halo MCC, Red Dead Redemption 2, PUBG, Monster, Hunter World, Doom Eternal, Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, Apex Legends, and Rainbow Six Siege.

MacBook wouldn't win Evo certification: You know that fancy Intel Evo program that tries to improve laptop performance in key areas that annoy consumers? Well, Intel pretty much says that if Apple submitted the M1 MacBook to the same program that Asus, Dell, HP, Lenovo, MSI, Acer and others go through, it would be rejected. The reason? Intel says the M1 MacBook is too slow in doing things that anger consumers, such as "switch to Calendar" in Outlook, "start video conference Zoom" and "select picture menu" in PowerPoint.

Great battery life?: Perhaps the most shocking claim Intel showed deals with battery life. While performance tests can be cherry picked by those looking to prove an outcome, battery life usually can't be disputed. Apple's official claim gives the M1 MacBook up to 18 hours of battery life using Apple TV app to watch a 1080p video with the brightness set to "8 clicks from the bottom." Apple also claims up to 15 hours browsing 25 "popular" websites with the same "8 clicks" criteria. When Intel pitted a MacBook Air M1 against an Acer Swift 5 with a Core i7-1165G7, however, it found both basically dead even. The MacBook Air came in at 10 hours and 12 minutes, and the Acer Swift 5 lasted 10 hours and 6 minutes. The difference? Intel said it used Safari to watch a Netflix stream with tabs open with the screen set to a relatively bright 250 nits. On the Acer, Safari was subbed out for Chrome, but the brightness and Netflix remained the same. Intel did add that Apple's "8 clicks up" is about 125 nits of brightness on the MacBook Air which is pretty dim.

All kinds of things just don't work on the M1: Intel didn't just get into the performance of the M1. It also said it found the MacBook Pro had serious shortcomings, such as an inability to use more than one display with a Thunderbolt dock. And while the PC can use gaming headsets, eGPUs, a third-party finger print reader, Wacom Drawing tablet and Xbox Controller, Intel said it found the MacBook Pro simply doesn't work with eGPUs, and had multiple issues with other devices. That's just hardware incompatibility. Intel's rap battle with Apple also highlights issues with plug-ins for Ableton, Bitwig Studio, Avid Pro Tools, FL Studio, Motu and many others.

With Mozilla's release of Firefox 85 on Tuesday, Adobe's once ubiquitous Flash technology is really gone for good. The software had been widely used to expand gaming, video and animation on the web, though Adobe stopped supporting it at the end of 2020. Firefox was the last major browser to support Flash. From a report: Apple, whose late boss Steve Jobs helped sink Flash by banning it from iPhones and iPads, ditched Flash with Safari 14 in September 2020. Google Chrome, the most widely used browser, completely excised it on Jan. 19 with version 88. Microsoft's Edge 88 followed suit on Jan. 21. The schedule of removals shows just how hard it is to advance technology foundations as widely used as the web. Browser makers for years wanted to remove Flash, replacing it with more advanced standards built directly into the web. Jobs' "Thoughts on Flash" letter in 2010 solidified the opposition, and Adobe started recognizing the software's doom by scrapping the Android version of Flash in 2011. It's taken years of effort to drop Flash completely. Adobe took until 2017 to announce that Flash would be completely unsupported at the end of 2020, and still some are willing to jump through lots of hoops to keep Flash around a little longer.

At WWDC last year, Apple announced it was going to support Chrome-style browser extensions (the WebExtensions API) in Safari. Months after Safari 14's release, are developers bothering with Safari? Jason Snell: The answer seems to be largely no -- at least, not yet. The Mac App Store's Safari extensions library seems to be largely populated with the same stuff that was there before Safari 14 was released, though there are some exceptions. [...] So in the end, what was the net effect of Apple's announcement of support for the WebExtensions API in Safari? It's a work in progress. A very small number of extensions have appeared in the App Store, and it seems quite likely that others will follow at their own pace. Other developers remain utterly unmoved by all the extra work moving to Safari would entail. It strikes me that Apple could rapidly drive adoption of Safari extensions if it would finally bring that technology to iOS. Targeting the Mac is nice, but if they could target iPads and iPhones, we might really have something.

When a user attempts to load a Flash game or content in a browser such as Chrome, the content now fails to load and instead displays a small banner that leads to the Flash end-of-life page on Adobe's website. While this day has long been coming, with many browsers disabling Flash by default years ago, it is officially the end of a 25-year era for Flash, first introduced by Macromedia in 1996 and acquired by Adobe in 2005. Mac Rumors reports: "Since Adobe will no longer be supporting Flash Player after December 31, 2020 and Adobe will block Flash content from running in Flash Player beginning January 12, 2021, Adobe strongly recommends all users immediately uninstall Flash Player to help protect their systems," the page reads. Adobe has instructions for uninstalling Flash on Mac, but note that Apple removed support for Flash outright in Safari 14 last year.

Adobe first announced its plans to discontinue Flash in 2017. "Open standards such as HTML5, WebGL, and WebAssembly have continually matured over the years and serve as viable alternatives for Flash content," the company explained. Adobe does not intend to issue Flash Player updates or security patches any longer, so it is recommended that users uninstall the plugin.

Browser makers Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla, have banned a root certificate that was being used by the Kazakhstan government to intercept and decrypt HTTPS traffic for residents in the country's capital, the city of Nur-Sultan (formerly Astana). From a report: The certificate had been in use since December 6, 2020, when Kazakh officials forced local internet service providers to block Nur-Sultan residents from accessing foreign sites unless they had a specific digital certificate issued by the government installed on their devices. While users were able to access most foreign-hosted sites, access was blocked to sites like Google, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Netflix, unless they had the certificate installed. Kazakh officials justified their actions claiming they were carrying out a cybersecurity training exercise for government agencies, telecoms, and private companies. Officials cited that cyberattacks targeting "Kazakhstan's segment of the internet" grew 2.7 times during the current COVID-19 pandemic as the primary reason for launching the exercise. The government's explanation did, however, make zero technical sense, as certificates can't prevent mass cyber-attacks and are usually used only for encrypting and safeguarding traffic from third-party observers. After today's ban, even if users have the certificate installed, browsers like Chrome, Edge, Mozilla, and Safari, will refuse to use them, preventing Kazakh officials from intercepting user data.

The Verge reports: Firefox's latest update brings native support for Macs that run on Apple's Arm-based silicon, Mozilla announced on Tuesday. Mozilla claims that native Apple silicon support brings significant performance improvements: the browser apparently launches 2.5 times faster and web apps are twice as responsive than they were on the previous version of Firefox, which wasn't native to Apple's chips...

Firefox's support of Apple's Arm-based processors follows Chrome, which added support for Apple's new chips shortly after the M1-equipped MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and Mac mini were released in November.
Firefox 84 will also be the very last release to support Adobe Flash, notes ZDNet, calling both developments "a reminder of the influence Apple co-founder Steve Jobs has had and continues to exert on software and hardware nine years after his death." Jobs wrote off Flash in 2010 as successful Adobe software but one that was a 'closed' product "created during the PC era — for PCs and mice" and not suitable for the then-brand-new iPad, nor any of its prior iPhones. Instead, Jobs said the future of the web was HTML5, JavaScript and CSS.

At the end of this year Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge and Apple Safari also drop support for Flash.

Senior Apple execs recently reflected in an interview with Om Malik what the M1 would have meant to Jobs had been alive today. "Steve used to say that we make the whole widget," Greg Joswiak, Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing told Malik.

"We've been making the whole widget for all our products, from the iPhone, to the iPads, to the watch. This was the final element to making the whole widget on the Mac."
ZDNet also notes that Firefox 84 offers WebRender, "Mozilla's faster GPU-based 2D rendering engine" for MacOS Big Sur, Windows devices with Intel Gen 6 GPUs, and Intel laptops running Windows 7 and 8. "Mozilla promises it will ship an accelerated rendering pipeline for Linux/GNOME/X11 users for the first time."

Firefox now also uses "more modern techniques for allocating shared memory on Linux," writes Mozilla, "improving performance and increasing compatibility with Docker."

And Firefox 85 will include a new network partitioning feature to make it harder for companies to track your web surfing.

Google's Stadia game-streaming service, which has been limited to Android phones, computers and TVs, will launch for the iPhone in the coming weeks. The Verge reports: Google on Thursday announced iOS support for its Stadia cloud gaming service, following in the footsteps of Microsoft in turning to the mobile web to circumvent Apple's App Store restrictions. Google says it has been building a progressive web app version of Stadia that will run in the mobile version of Apple's Safari browser, similar to how Microsoft intends to deliver its competing xCloud service on iOS sometime next year. But Google intends to beat Microsoft to the punch with public testing of its version in the coming weeks. Nvidia also announced today that it a beta web app version of its GeForce Now cloud gaming service on iOS is available today.

Apple in late August clarified its rules around cloud gaming, telling providers like Google and Microsoft that their apps were not allowed on the App Store due to restrictions Apple imposes on software that streams games to the iPhone and iPad. Apple eventually loosened its restrictions after public criticism from Microsoft and others, but the App Store still requires companies to submit individual games for App Store review. Microsoft called the compromise a "bad experience for consumers" before deciding it would develop a web app version of xCloud for iOS instead. Now, Google is doing the same.

GeForce NOW, NVIDIA's streaming gaming service, today announced the launch of Safari integration, which will bring Fortnite and other games to Apple's iOS devices through the Safari browser. From a report: The new Safari integration is available in a beta capacity, and NVIDIA says that many games in the GeForce NOW library can be played on iOS devices. Using GeForce NOW on an iOS device requires a gamepad, and keyboard and mouse-only games are not available. NVIDIA has a list of recommended gamepads. NVIDIA is working alongside Epic Games on a touch-friendly version of Fortnite that will run on iOS devices through Safari, so Fortnite is not launching today, but it will be coming soon. Rumors earlier this month suggested that Fortnite would return to Apple's devices through a partnership with NVIDIA, and when the game launches on the GeForce NOW service, it will be the first time Fortnite has been accessible on iOS devices since the Apple vs. âOEEpic GamesâOE dispute kicked off in August.

A Slashdot reader shared this report from the Register: Google on Thursday was sued for allegedly stealing Android users' cellular data allowances though unapproved, undisclosed transmissions to the web giant's servers...

The complaint contends that Google is using Android users' limited cellular data allowances without permission to transmit information about those individuals that's unrelated to their use of Google services... What concerns the plaintiffs is data sent to Google's servers that isn't the result of deliberate interaction with a mobile device — we're talking passive or background data transfers via cell network, here. "Google designed and implemented its Android operating system and apps to extract and transmit large volumes of information between Plaintiffs' cellular devices and Google using Plaintiffs' cellular data allowances," the complaint claims...

Android users have to accept four agreements to participate in the Google ecosystem: Terms of Service; the Privacy Policy; the Managed Google Play Agreement; and the Google Play Terms of Service. None of these, the court filing contends, disclose that Google spends users' cellular data allowances for these background transfers. To support the allegations, the plaintiff's counsel tested a new Samsung Galaxy S7 phone running Android, with a signed-in Google Account and default setting, and found that when left idle, without a Wi-Fi connection, the phone "sent and received 8.88 MB/day of data, with 94 per cent of those communications occurring between Google and the device." The device, stationary, with all apps closed, transferred data to Google about 16 times an hour, or about 389 times in 24 hours. Assuming even half of that data is outgoing, Google would receive about 4.4MB per day or 130MB per month in this manner per device subject to the same test conditions...

An iPhone with Apple's Safari browser open in the background transmits only about a tenth of that amount to Apple, according to the complaint... Vanderbilt University Professor Douglas C. Schmidt performed a similar study in 2018 — except that the Chrome browser was open — and found that Android devices made 900 passive transfers in 24 hours...

The complaint charges that Google conducts these undisclosed data transfers for further its advertising business, sending "tokens" that identify users for targeted advertising and preload ads that generate revenue even if they're never displayed.

Apple on Thursday released the latest version of macOS: macOS Big Sur (also known as macOS 11.0), which is available to download now -- assuming you have a compatible Mac. From a report: Big Sur is one of the biggest updates to Apple's laptop and desktop software in years, featuring a top-to-bottom redesign of the interface, icons, and menu bar, a new control center UI borrowed from iOS, widgets (also borrowed from iOS), and a variety of other improvements (see here for the full list). It's such a big change that Apple is actually moving on from the OS X / OS 10 branding that it's been using for Macs for almost 20 years. Apple's also adding some new privacy-focused features, including better tracking information in Safari and new privacy data in the Mac App Store for any apps you download. ArsTechnica has published a comprehensive review of the new operating system. An excerpt from their conclusion: The Good
The bright, fresh visual style mostly looks pretty good.
The Control Center (and other changes to the upper-right section of the Menu Bar) are genuinely useful additions.
The Messages app finally catches up to its iOS/iPadOS counterpart, thanks to Catalyst.
The APFS version of Time Machine seems like an improvement, though we'll need to wait to see what its long-term reliability is like.
Aside from the old AFP file-sharing protocol and the Network Utility, Big Sur doesn't remove too many things or add many new security settings that will break apps. There may be some visual issues, but my experience has actually been that Apple breaks a lot fewer apps moving from Catalina to Big Sur than it did moving from Mojave to Catalina.

The Bad
A general reduction in contrast makes it harder to discern the difference between many buttons and controls at a glance.
If you want to fix any of these contrast issues in the Accessibility settings, it should be possible to increase contrast or reduce transparency in certain places without making it an all-or-nothing setting. Some of the new buttons and icons are nice. Some of them are less nice.
Big Sur on Apple Silicon Macs will give up the ability to run Windows in a virtual machine or on a separate partition, though Intel Macs can still do both things.

The Ugly
As usual, Apple is just a year or two more aggressive about dropping support for old Macs than I think they really need to be.

Owners of iPhones and iPads will soon be able to play Fortnite again, via a cloud service, the BBC has discovered. From a report: Nvidia has developed a version of its GeForce cloud gaming service that runs in the mobile web browser Safari. Apple will not get a cut of virtual items sold within the battle royale fighting title when played this way. Apple is embroiled in a legal fight with Fortnite's developer Epic, which led the iPhone-maker to remove the game from its iOS App Store. Epic has claimed that the 30% commission Apple charges on in-app gaming purchases is anti-competitive. But Apple has accused Epic of wanting a "free ride". The case is due to go to trial in May and could take years to be resolved. Papers filed in the case indicate that Fortnite had 116 million users on iOS, 73 million of whom only played it via Apple's operating system. Unlike Android, Apple does not allow games or other apps to be loaded on to its phones or tablets via app stores other than its own. But it does not restrict which third-party services can run within Safari or other web browsers available via its store.