41 ms·

Will this include the ability to compile apps for iOS without requiring Apple made hardware/software (that specifically must run on MacOS)? Have never understoo

Will this include the ability to compile apps for iOS without requiring Apple made hardware/software (that specifically must run on MacOS)? Have never understood why developers haven't kicked up more of a fuss over that restriction, but it's why I would never write iOS apps as a hobby.

aembleton 3y ago
I don't think there are enough users of XCode within the EU to trigger it as a gatekeeper. I think the threshold is 45 million MAU
extraduder_ire 3y ago
No. I don't think tooling is included in this. I assume many people are hard at work to get a free version of something like the xcode build system stood up. It's mostly there already, but I haven't seen anyone put the parts all together in a way you can self-host. I think iOS hobbyists these days usually use a SASS build system with a free or cheap lower tier.
catiopatio 3y ago
> Have never understood why developers haven't kicked up more of a fuss over that restriction It’s an innate limitation, not an arbitrary restriction. Should Apple really be forced to port their tooling — and the entire, massive software stack it’s based on — to other platforms? I assume most developers targeting Apple’s platforms don’t kick up a fuss because they’re happy running macOS.
- wizofaus 3y ago
  Just publish the specs for how to build/sign an iOS binary...
  - catiopatio 3y ago
    That information is already available, and much of the implementation (if not all) is open source. You’re free to produce your own toolchain, developer tools, IDE, etc. This generally isn’t done because it’s a significant amount of work, and you’ll always be playing catch-up to Apple’s comprehensive integrated development stack.
    - wizofaus 3y ago
      The fact that you need a MacOS machine even to build Xamarin or React native apps always struck me as bizarre though - I assumed there was some proprietary component that Apple wouldn't publish the details for.
      - catiopatio 3y ago
        My assumption is that the development/maintenance/support costs aren’t worth the bump in adoption/sales they’d see from doing it. It’s a large amount of expensive, ongoing work, and leveraging Apple’s native toolchain will invariably provide a better user experience.
        wizofaus 3y ago
        Not if it requires me to go out and buy a machine with an OS I'm unfamiliar with. Though I gather I don't really need to interact with it directly to build Xamarin/React-native type apps (not sure about Flutter etc.)
RIMR 3y ago
From my reading of the DMA, I would suspect that gatekeeping software development only to users who pay for Apple's hardware and software licenses would not be allowed. I imagine they can still keep things locked down, but they will have to include a way to turn off their restrictions so that people can run software without their gatekeeping. I think it's perfectly reasonable for Apple to continue prioritizing security and keeping things locked down, but the end user deserves to have a key that can unlock things if they want them unlocked.

aembleton 3y ago

I don't think there are enough users of XCode within the EU to trigger it as a gatekeeper. I think the threshold is 45 million MAU

extraduder_ire 3y ago

No. I don't think tooling is included in this. I assume many people are hard at work to get a free version of something like the xcode build system stood up. It's mostly there already, but I haven't seen anyone put the parts all together in a way you can self-host. I think iOS hobbyists these days usually use a SASS build system with a free or cheap lower tier.

catiopatio 3y ago

> Have never understood why developers haven't kicked up more of a fuss over that restriction It’s an innate limitation, not an arbitrary restriction. Should Apple really be forced to port their tooling — and the entire, massive software stack it’s based on — to other platforms? I assume most developers targeting Apple’s platforms don’t kick up a fuss because they’re happy running macOS.

wizofaus 3y ago
Just publish the specs for how to build/sign an iOS binary...
- catiopatio 3y ago
  That information is already available, and much of the implementation (if not all) is open source. You’re free to produce your own toolchain, developer tools, IDE, etc. This generally isn’t done because it’s a significant amount of work, and you’ll always be playing catch-up to Apple’s comprehensive integrated development stack.
  - wizofaus 3y ago
    The fact that you need a MacOS machine even to build Xamarin or React native apps always struck me as bizarre though - I assumed there was some proprietary component that Apple wouldn't publish the details for.
    - catiopatio 3y ago
      My assumption is that the development/maintenance/support costs aren’t worth the bump in adoption/sales they’d see from doing it. It’s a large amount of expensive, ongoing work, and leveraging Apple’s native toolchain will invariably provide a better user experience.
      - wizofaus 3y ago
        Not if it requires me to go out and buy a machine with an OS I'm unfamiliar with. Though I gather I don't really need to interact with it directly to build Xamarin/React-native type apps (not sure about Flutter etc.)

RIMR 3y ago

From my reading of the DMA, I would suspect that gatekeeping software development only to users who pay for Apple's hardware and software licenses would not be allowed. I imagine they can still keep things locked down, but they will have to include a way to turn off their restrictions so that people can run software without their gatekeeping. I think it's perfectly reasonable for Apple to continue prioritizing security and keeping things locked down, but the end user deserves to have a key that can unlock things if they want them unlocked.