6 ms·

> mandates to allow users to install apps from third-party platforms Some people at Apple are getting a headache right now. Other companies that have been dabb

> mandates to allow users to install apps from third-party platforms Some people at Apple are getting a headache right now. Other companies that have been dabbling with the idea to lock down their OS probably too. If this happens my next phone might even be an iPhone.

arlcode 5y ago
I had the same thought. Apple makes great hardware and the main thing that was holding me back from getting one was their heavy handed approach on what applications I am allowed to install on my device and from what source. If this works I would probably go for it.
- ericmay 5y ago
  I’m the opposite. I buy an iPhone specifically because I want a locked-down device. World is about to get a little worse on this front.
  - ketkev 5y ago
    But you can still choose to only download apps from Apple's app store?
    - ericmay 5y ago
      I explained this to another user. It’s not “I can just download apps from Apple’s App Store”. It’s everything that comes along with that. Also you can just buy a different phone if you want third-party stores.
    - Spivak 5y ago
      I really don’t get how people on a tech forum seem to believe that software is fungible. If I’m an Instagram user then I have to go to where it’s offered which will be the Meta store. As a user I can’t just download it on the App Store if it isn’t there. All of this legislation has been about publisher choice. Users do not not gain any choice in this — that’s all marketing.
  - m101010 5y ago
    I fail to understand how this is affecting you. Do you think that the existence of other App-Stores is reducing the quality of the apps in the Apple-Store?
    - ericmay 5y ago
      Yes it will once it happens on iOS. Large companies like Facebook (not picking on Meta, just an easy example) really don’t want to follow Apple’s privacy guidelines, don’t want to ask users for permission to track their location, and don’t want to tell users what info they gather and how it’s used. Once Apple has to allow third-party app stores, many major software companies will either create their own App Store (great now I have to download 15 different stores) or move to a third-party store where these rules are non-existent. So what will happen is that there will be a major exodus of software from the Apple App Store and on to third-party stores, which for me means a rollback of all of the momentum and progress Apple has made by collectively bargaining on behalf of users against developers. In addition, this will fracture things that are easy and convenient, like Apple Pay, or Sign-in With Apple being a privacy-focused mandatory alternative to other SSO options. It’ll also long-term enable more dark patterns. Oh you signed up for this $14.99/month app? Well gotta call if you want to unsubscribe. Hell maybe even have to send a letter! For some completely asinine reason people think that “allow third party stores” means “I get all the same stuff now but stuff will be cheaper and ‘more innovative’ because developers won’t have to pay the ‘Apple Tax’” but the reality is you’ll just get the same stuff, at the same prices, but it’ll be less convenient and you’ll lose any benefits that we previously had when Apple was able to collectively bargain for users. Companies will not lower prices. > “This hasn’t happened on Android” Yes. Because when companies start enacting these rules, users will flee to iOS. You need to be able to launch your store and dark patterns on both platforms simultaneously. Otherwise users have options. > “I disagree, this won’t happen”. Ok sure. What assurances do I have? What are you doing to make me feel better that my experience won’t get worse? Until then I’m firmly against third-party stores. > “Apple enables oppression and a single point of failure for regulation - China for example can ‘control’ what’s on the store” Any third-party App Store that’s not a complete scam will be forced to comply with any exact rules that Apple has to. There’s no difference.
  - andrew_ 5y ago
    There are those of us that would prefer to be protected, and those of us that would prefer to be free to make those decisions for ourselves. I've been an Android user for over a decade because of the latter.
  - oxplot 5y ago
    > World is about to get a little worse on this front. I think you underestimate the talent at Apple. The reason things are locked down isn't just that it makes them secure, spam free, etc. That's true of course, but it's not the only way to do it. It is however, the easiest way and in absence of external force, there is little reason to complicate it. If EU succeeds in forcing Apple to open somethings up, then the brilliant folks at Apple will rise to the challenge and will innovate to either keep the quality as is or even make things better.
  - fatboy 5y ago
    It's a shame that apple has been so obstinate for so long. Their behaviour is very clearly about money and not consumer protection, which is just used as a convenient excuse to hide behind. They could have allowed third-party payments through vetted providers. They could have reduced their rates to match those providers and no one would be so keen to use them anyway. They could mandate subscriptions must be cancellable with one click and even mandate using an api to make these all appear in the settings app. They could have ensured that their review staff were better trained to prevent capricious rejections. They instead decided to ride the wave of the apple tax for as long as they possibly could and then deal with whatever that caused later. And this is what it's caused.
- natch 5y ago
  It doesn’t allow people to install abusive and spyware apps on their spouse’s, girlfriend’s, coworker’s, roommate’s, and children’s devices… not to mention harmful ones on your own… that’s a feature. If you really want some nasty stuff on your phone for some reason you can always write it yourself or find something open source and install it with Xcode. You are free to do this; the idea that you are not is a myth regurgitated by haters who don’t think for themselves. Just good luck doing it on someone else’s iPhone without their permission.
  - oxplot 5y ago
    > that’s a feature It's a feature that can be implemented, with similar if not better effectiveness, in various ways that doesn't completely lock down a platform. Don't ask me how because I'm no match for brains at Apple but if EU succeeds in forcing Apple to open things up, Apple will rise to the challenge and will figure it out, just the same way they figure out how to roll out an ECG monitor that complies with local regulations of multiple countries. In other words, Apple already works under large amount of constraints of existing laws and regulations when creating products and that requires a lot of constant innovation in itself. This will just be another constraint they have to follow.
    - natch 5y ago
      Nobody ever said Apple was static. They roll out updates all the time, of course. No different here. It helps to understand the reasons behind some of the lockdown.
black_puppydog 5y ago
This is nice to see. It's fully in line with a report [1] by a (relatively new) French "expert group" within the government found. They were looking specifically at the security implications. Of course, the report is short and written for political decision makers, so not super technical. Money quote: > The checks made during the audits conducted by current application stores owned by operating system developers are indeed all reproducible by third parties. [1]: https://www.peren.gouv.fr/rapports/2022-02-18%20-%20Eclairage-sur-ouverture-os_EN.pdf https://www.peren.gouv.fr/rapports/2022-02-18%20-%20Eclairag...
- com 5y ago
  This is a surprisingly well-written report that an intelligent reader with exposure as an end-user to the mobile phone ecosystem should be able to comprehend, that summarises the risks around malware and app stores and a possible approach to opening up side loading of apps structurally. Masterful communication on top of solid analysis. I’m going to keep a copy just to review when I’m writing my own reports to stakeholders.
toyg 5y ago
Apple literally begged for this hammer to fall, ignoring calls for openness for 15 years and openly mocking efforts to get them to play ball (like the recent Dutch case, to which they responded by amending rules on dating apps, blatantly ignoring the spirit of the ruling). I expect they employ enough smart people that they prepared for this moment of reckoning despite the hubris of their leadership.
- oxplot 5y ago
  > ignoring calls for openness for 15 years I very much want this to happen now. However I would not have wanted this 15 years ago when the platform was a baby and little was known on how to move it forward. Last thing you wanted at that time was layers of regulation and laws that would hinder the speed of development. 15 years is probably too long and this could have happened 5-10 years ago.
  - sounds 5y ago
    I suspect you already know that 44 years ago when Apple's system was a baby, it was what, today, you would call "open hardware." See the last two pages of the user manual for the schematics. [1] At that time, Apple's system needed to attract developers, so instead of a walled garden, the company did what they could to encourage interoperability. [1] http://apple1.chez.com/Apple1project/Docs/pdf/AppleI_Manual.pdf http://apple1.chez.com/Apple1project/Docs/pdf/AppleI_Manual....
    - oxplot 5y ago
      > you would call "open hardware." You are confusing the "norm" at the time, with Apple specific decision to open up their hardware. At the time, a lot of consumer electronics shipped with their schematics, including TVs, Radios, etc. You cannot find a single TV today that ships with how to talk over its diagnostics port let alone schematics. The Apple computer you're referencing was more like an of IC of today, both in complexity (many $1 ICs today are orders of magnitude more complex than that entire computer), and the skills expected of the user of the computer. Both of which would require one to have intimate knowledge of the inner working of the device to be able to operate and maintain it. Users of that computer were like hobbyist of today, buying an electronics kit and rest assured, electronics kits come with detailed manuals, schematics and more.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Good, laws are supposed to be a headache for monopolists. If this happens, my next phone will also be an iPhone.

arlcode 5y ago

I had the same thought. Apple makes great hardware and the main thing that was holding me back from getting one was their heavy handed approach on what applications I am allowed to install on my device and from what source. If this works I would probably go for it.

ericmay 5y ago
I’m the opposite. I buy an iPhone specifically because I want a locked-down device. World is about to get a little worse on this front.
- ketkev 5y ago
  But you can still choose to only download apps from Apple's app store?
  - ericmay 5y ago
    I explained this to another user. It’s not “I can just download apps from Apple’s App Store”. It’s everything that comes along with that. Also you can just buy a different phone if you want third-party stores.
  - Spivak 5y ago
    I really don’t get how people on a tech forum seem to believe that software is fungible. If I’m an Instagram user then I have to go to where it’s offered which will be the Meta store. As a user I can’t just download it on the App Store if it isn’t there. All of this legislation has been about publisher choice. Users do not not gain any choice in this — that’s all marketing.
- m101010 5y ago
  I fail to understand how this is affecting you. Do you think that the existence of other App-Stores is reducing the quality of the apps in the Apple-Store?
  - ericmay 5y ago
    Yes it will once it happens on iOS. Large companies like Facebook (not picking on Meta, just an easy example) really don’t want to follow Apple’s privacy guidelines, don’t want to ask users for permission to track their location, and don’t want to tell users what info they gather and how it’s used. Once Apple has to allow third-party app stores, many major software companies will either create their own App Store (great now I have to download 15 different stores) or move to a third-party store where these rules are non-existent. So what will happen is that there will be a major exodus of software from the Apple App Store and on to third-party stores, which for me means a rollback of all of the momentum and progress Apple has made by collectively bargaining on behalf of users against developers. In addition, this will fracture things that are easy and convenient, like Apple Pay, or Sign-in With Apple being a privacy-focused mandatory alternative to other SSO options. It’ll also long-term enable more dark patterns. Oh you signed up for this $14.99/month app? Well gotta call if you want to unsubscribe. Hell maybe even have to send a letter! For some completely asinine reason people think that “allow third party stores” means “I get all the same stuff now but stuff will be cheaper and ‘more innovative’ because developers won’t have to pay the ‘Apple Tax’” but the reality is you’ll just get the same stuff, at the same prices, but it’ll be less convenient and you’ll lose any benefits that we previously had when Apple was able to collectively bargain for users. Companies will not lower prices. > “This hasn’t happened on Android” Yes. Because when companies start enacting these rules, users will flee to iOS. You need to be able to launch your store and dark patterns on both platforms simultaneously. Otherwise users have options. > “I disagree, this won’t happen”. Ok sure. What assurances do I have? What are you doing to make me feel better that my experience won’t get worse? Until then I’m firmly against third-party stores. > “Apple enables oppression and a single point of failure for regulation - China for example can ‘control’ what’s on the store” Any third-party App Store that’s not a complete scam will be forced to comply with any exact rules that Apple has to. There’s no difference.
- andrew_ 5y ago
  There are those of us that would prefer to be protected, and those of us that would prefer to be free to make those decisions for ourselves. I've been an Android user for over a decade because of the latter.
- oxplot 5y ago
  > World is about to get a little worse on this front. I think you underestimate the talent at Apple. The reason things are locked down isn't just that it makes them secure, spam free, etc. That's true of course, but it's not the only way to do it. It is however, the easiest way and in absence of external force, there is little reason to complicate it. If EU succeeds in forcing Apple to open somethings up, then the brilliant folks at Apple will rise to the challenge and will innovate to either keep the quality as is or even make things better.
- fatboy 5y ago
  It's a shame that apple has been so obstinate for so long. Their behaviour is very clearly about money and not consumer protection, which is just used as a convenient excuse to hide behind. They could have allowed third-party payments through vetted providers. They could have reduced their rates to match those providers and no one would be so keen to use them anyway. They could mandate subscriptions must be cancellable with one click and even mandate using an api to make these all appear in the settings app. They could have ensured that their review staff were better trained to prevent capricious rejections. They instead decided to ride the wave of the apple tax for as long as they possibly could and then deal with whatever that caused later. And this is what it's caused.
natch 5y ago
It doesn’t allow people to install abusive and spyware apps on their spouse’s, girlfriend’s, coworker’s, roommate’s, and children’s devices… not to mention harmful ones on your own… that’s a feature. If you really want some nasty stuff on your phone for some reason you can always write it yourself or find something open source and install it with Xcode. You are free to do this; the idea that you are not is a myth regurgitated by haters who don’t think for themselves. Just good luck doing it on someone else’s iPhone without their permission.
- oxplot 5y ago
  > that’s a feature It's a feature that can be implemented, with similar if not better effectiveness, in various ways that doesn't completely lock down a platform. Don't ask me how because I'm no match for brains at Apple but if EU succeeds in forcing Apple to open things up, Apple will rise to the challenge and will figure it out, just the same way they figure out how to roll out an ECG monitor that complies with local regulations of multiple countries. In other words, Apple already works under large amount of constraints of existing laws and regulations when creating products and that requires a lot of constant innovation in itself. This will just be another constraint they have to follow.
  - natch 5y ago
    Nobody ever said Apple was static. They roll out updates all the time, of course. No different here. It helps to understand the reasons behind some of the lockdown.

black_puppydog 5y ago

This is nice to see. It's fully in line with a report [1] by a (relatively new) French "expert group" within the government found. They were looking specifically at the security implications. Of course, the report is short and written for political decision makers, so not super technical. Money quote: > The checks made during the audits conducted by current application stores owned by operating system developers are indeed all reproducible by third parties. [1]: https://www.peren.gouv.fr/rapports/2022-02-18%20-%20Eclairage-sur-ouverture-os_EN.pdf https://www.peren.gouv.fr/rapports/2022-02-18%20-%20Eclairag...

com 5y ago
This is a surprisingly well-written report that an intelligent reader with exposure as an end-user to the mobile phone ecosystem should be able to comprehend, that summarises the risks around malware and app stores and a possible approach to opening up side loading of apps structurally. Masterful communication on top of solid analysis. I’m going to keep a copy just to review when I’m writing my own reports to stakeholders.

toyg 5y ago

Apple literally begged for this hammer to fall, ignoring calls for openness for 15 years and openly mocking efforts to get them to play ball (like the recent Dutch case, to which they responded by amending rules on dating apps, blatantly ignoring the spirit of the ruling). I expect they employ enough smart people that they prepared for this moment of reckoning despite the hubris of their leadership.

oxplot 5y ago
> ignoring calls for openness for 15 years I very much want this to happen now. However I would not have wanted this 15 years ago when the platform was a baby and little was known on how to move it forward. Last thing you wanted at that time was layers of regulation and laws that would hinder the speed of development. 15 years is probably too long and this could have happened 5-10 years ago.
- sounds 5y ago
  I suspect you already know that 44 years ago when Apple's system was a baby, it was what, today, you would call "open hardware." See the last two pages of the user manual for the schematics. [1] At that time, Apple's system needed to attract developers, so instead of a walled garden, the company did what they could to encourage interoperability. [1] http://apple1.chez.com/Apple1project/Docs/pdf/AppleI_Manual.pdf http://apple1.chez.com/Apple1project/Docs/pdf/AppleI_Manual....
  - oxplot 5y ago
    > you would call "open hardware." You are confusing the "norm" at the time, with Apple specific decision to open up their hardware. At the time, a lot of consumer electronics shipped with their schematics, including TVs, Radios, etc. You cannot find a single TV today that ships with how to talk over its diagnostics port let alone schematics. The Apple computer you're referencing was more like an of IC of today, both in complexity (many $1 ICs today are orders of magnitude more complex than that entire computer), and the skills expected of the user of the computer. Both of which would require one to have intimate knowledge of the inner working of the device to be able to operate and maintain it. Users of that computer were like hobbyist of today, buying an electronics kit and rest assured, electronics kits come with detailed manuals, schematics and more.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

Good, laws are supposed to be a headache for monopolists. If this happens, my next phone will also be an iPhone.