18 ms·
iPad users will miss out on third-party app stores, browser engines, and more
- rezonant 3y ago> iPadOS on the iPad is a completely different platform in the eyes of Apple and the European Commission. Is this correct, or is Apple making the distinction here?
- poniko 3y agoYes, Apple stated they have 5 different app stores.
- layer8 3y agoApp stores and operating systems are different things under the DMA to which different rules apply. The commission view Apple’s App Store as a single app store, but iOS and iPadOS as different operating systems. The rules apply accordingly.
- sharkjacobs 3y agoIs what correct? Is iPadOS a different platform than iOS? That's not an easy question to answer. It's a different OS, it has a different name, it runs on different devices, it has different features, it runs different apps. But iPads ran "iOS" for many years, and iPadOS was clearly just a rebranding of the iOS that ran on iPads. On the other hand, iOS (then iPhoneOS) was announced as a "compressed and streamlined" version of OSX. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that iPadOS is a different platform than iOS, but I do think that Apple is being very self serving by saying so in this context.
- zamadatix 3y agoI think the question was framed around verifying the part where it claims the European Commission is said to agree with Apple that the 2 operating systems are separate.
- rezonant 3y agoAs sibling points out, it's about what the EU thinks. "iPadOS" runs iOS apps, and iOS apps can be full fledged "iPadOS" apps with a single binary. The distinction is a business distinction, not a technical one. There are strange tiny differences in what APIs are offered, but the same is true of two Windows computers, for example, for one that has a DirectX capable graphics card and one that does not.
- makeitdouble 3y agoI had the same reaction at first. It looks like and probably is an obvious tactic to evade the DMA. But then, if we look at Debian and Ubuntu for instance, we'd agree they're different even if there will be compatibility. I think Apple should be allowed to set each of their stores and OSes as separate but compatible entities. And I also think scrutiny should be applied not on an OS base but on a more generic "platform" or "ecosystem" base. I suppose that's where the EU regulators are ropping in iPadOS even if it doesn't fit the bill strictly speaking.
- Tijdreiziger 3y agoRegardless of whether iOS and iPadOS are the same OS, I think it is substantially the case that they operate in different markets (smartphone market vs. tablet market).
- makeitdouble 3y agoI think looking at the competition is a good indicator. On one side we have the hybrid computer market -> computer market, like Chromebooks and chromeOS devices, and Windows 11 in the same space. On the other side android spans what we'd call phones up to 14" tablets, foldables brindging both ends. iOS is clearly competing with android, and the iPad is way closer to android than Windows or even ChromeOS. The iOS/iPad split would relate to Apple's internal divisions more than a existing split of the market itself IMHO.
- Tijdreiziger 3y ago
- Eric_WVGG 3y agonow that iPadOS has features that frequently trail a year behind iOS — lock screen widgets, off the top of my head — as well as features like Stage Manager and whatever it is I'm using right now to make my iPad an external Mac display, I think it's safe to say we're at least four years into a now non-trivial hard fork.
- kmeisthax 3y agoStage Manager works on jailbroken iPhones. There is no fork.
- kristjansson 3y agoGiven the literal billions of dollars at stake, presumably this has been viscously litigated already, and this is where the EC and Apple have landed
- ChrisLTD 3y agoIf it had been litigated, there would be stories about the court cases, no?
- rezonant 3y agoIf you presume that the EU has actually signed off on this and all the other DMA changes Apple announced, then the DMA at least as it affects Apple is useless. If iPadOS was deemed separate by the EU prior to the DMA rulings, that's interesting, and am wondering if anyone can cite a source. EDIT: Posted elsewhere, they have an iPadOS specific inquiry: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_4328 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_...
- jsnell 3y agoNo. EU doesn't pre-approve any of these plans. They'll only be assessed after the compliance deadline (in early March) and will take into account public feedback on the proposals. The interesting question will be how plans that are deemed to be insufficient are dealt with. If the companies can just change their plans after getting the EU's feedback, it becomes a rational choice to submit illegal plans and then "fix" it. That way there's no risk of accidentally giving too many concessions. To avoid that, attempts as blatant as Apple's shouldn't be just negotiated down to a compromise but result in immediate fines.
- layer8 3y ago“Operating system” is one of the categories of things the DMA applies to. The commission so far has only designated iOS (among Apple OSs), not iPadOS. The commission could arguably have viewed them as being variations of the same single OS, but it didn’t.
- dmart 3y agoSuddenly it makes a lot more sense why Apple made a big deal about iPadOS being its own separate OS, even though the differences are so minimal.
- cqqxo4zV46cp 3y agoThat must be it. It always felt super peculiar that they did this, and I really didn’t see the value in it for Apple, even from a marketing perspective. I 100% buy that we’ve just gotten to peak behind the curtain.
- Someone1234 3y agoIt must be at least a little different since it is unable to run Calculator.
- Vicinity9635 3y agoFYI: If you swipe down you can just type mathematical expressions like finder on OSX. It may be finder, but I don't know.
- IMcD23 3y agoThat's Spotlight, not Finder.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lapcat 3y agoI'm as cynical as anyone, but iPadOS was introduced at WWDC 2019 and thus was in the works for some time before then. This conspiracy theory doesn't stand up to the historical timeline. The more plausible and less conspiratorial theory is that iPadOS was made separate to help market more expensive iPad Pro devices.
- lolinder 3y agoGovernment bodies also move slowly, and they usually telegraph their moves years in advance. When corporations act like they're caught off guard by a new regulation it's usually (though not always) just a PR move. It's not improbable that Apple could have predicted that separating the ecosystems would be legally beneficial, even if they didn't know about this specific regulation back then.
- mepian 3y agoDoes anyone know how these new rules affect JIT/AOT compilers in apps?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Klonoar 3y agoIt changes nothing unless you’re a web browser, in which case you have to apply for the entitlement.
- layer8 3y agoIt’s not clear. Download of executable code is still prohibited, but “installation” and “execution” is not mentioned anymore in the new terms.
- miohtama 3y agoDidn't Apple enable JIT long time ago, or was it just for Safari?
- mrtksn 3y agoFor anyone interested, EU has started an investigation on iPadOS despite not meeting the threshold: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_4328 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_... The investigation should be completed within 12 months.
- ivanmontillam 3y agoThe funny thing is that Europeans will eventually have a better experience with Apple than U.S. residents. It's not my intention to poison the well, but Apple feels like treating its customers like cattle.
- jachee 3y agoI’m a U.S. resident who’s eyeballs deep in the ecosystem… (well, I will be, come Friday…) and I feel much more valued by Apple than cattle. If there’s a future where there’s an app that requires me to install their store on my device to have the privilege of buying their app, I’m simply not buying that app. I’m pretty sure I’m not alone in that.
- JoshTriplett 3y agoAnd if that turns out to be the case, then it doesn't need to be enforced, as people will select accordingly. And then, the people who do want to run things that Apple won't permit in the app store (browsers/emulators/JITs/scripting/etc), or that aren't economically viable with a 30% cut, will have the option of doing so. The existence of an option does not force you to choose that option.
- floydnoel 3y agountil there's another pandemic, and your local government decides everyone has to install their tracking app. or any number of situations where users will be pressured by institutions they don’t have any control over.
- wilg 3y ago[flagged]
- viraptor 3y agoI'd take fixing the MacOS issues I raised, which have been already marked confirmed over a year ago...
- m463 3y agoyou a word.
- echelon 3y agoMonopolies are lazy. They grow fat on free cash flow they don't have to earn anymore. Apple needs razor-sharp competition. That won't happen without regulation. Remember when it took Google buying the Motorola patents in a MAD scenario to keep Apple from nuking even Android itself? They almost owned 100% of mobile computing forever. Now both companies are content with policing what gets put on mobile and taxing it when it tries to process dollars. And now mobile is the most used form of internet. There is zero chance of competing with this. Apple and Google tax the internet.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- HumblyTossed 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kmeisthax 3y agoNote that if you opt for the EU compliant new business terms for iPhone, you will still be obligated to pay Core Technology Fees on all Apple platforms, even if those platforms do not allow sideloading. So your iPad apps now have install fees and you still have to pass app review.
- lxgr 3y agoDoes the iPad at least get support for alternative payments then? Edit: Seems like they will. From TFA: > Changes to App Store policy to allow alternative payments and lower commissions affect the App Store across all Apple platforms.
- crazygringo 3y agoYeah but your App Store commission is significantly lower as a percentage. So you're still going to wind up paying less money if you're collecting amounts like €5 or €10 or more from customers. In the cases where you'd come out worse, because your app is free or extremely low-cost like €1, then you shouldn't opt for the new business terms. You should use the current ones -- which show no indication of going away since they're what the rest of the world uses.
- DaiPlusPlus 3y ago> The point is that you've got a choice. Supposing I want to release a free, personal hobby project, app that uses some private APIs in iOS, to solve some long-standing usability or feature-gap within iOS, then no, I don't have a choice: I don't have an option at all: I can't release it in the Apple-run iOS App Store becuase it uses Private APIs, and I can't release it in a third-party App Store as a free app because I can't afford the "Core Technology" fee (despite paying my $99 annual fee to Apple, which they said (back in 2008) pays for the platform, SDK+DX) - that leaves me only with Cydia as my only option and a significantly reduced audience. ----- Actually, this whole debacle has me wondering - does this mean that Apple thinks they have the right to shakedown developers in the Cydia ecosystem for their "Core Technology" fees too? If so, it's going to be hilarious to watch them try to actually do that; and because they'll be unsuccessful, does that mean that other developers (using something-other-than-Cydia) can tell Apple to pound-sand as they have no moral-right to the rent they're seeking?
- sologoub 3y agoAre streaming gaming apps now allowed everywhere or just for EU users? Really want to see GeForce Now native iPad app!
- CubsFan1060 3y agoEverywhere.
- dehrmann 3y agoApple's really been acting in bad faith with moves like this and the 27% fee on external payments. Regulators took these actions for a reason, and Apple's doing its best to just barely comply, at the cost of bringing even more attention to itself.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rozal 3y ago[dead]
- addicted 3y agoThe Apple apologia anti regulation response to this comment is ironic because without anti monopoly protections Apple wouldn’t even exist right now. Microsoft bailed out Apple with an investment entirely because of anti monopoly regulations. More importantly, MS kept producing versions of Office and even Internet Explorer IIRC that allowed the Mac to remain an option because of their fear of being regulation. Then after that it was EU anti monopolist regulations that struck down MS and prevented it from strangling the open web, which allowed the web to become an open platform which made it possible for both the Mac and iPhone (which didn’t even have an App Store on launch and relied entirely on web apps) to exist. The only success Apple can claim credit that wasn’t directly the result of anti monopoly regulation was the iPod and even that wouldn’t have happened because Apple would have folded if Apple hadn’t been protected by anti monopolist regulations.
- addicted 3y agoImagine if MS had done the shit Apple is doing and blocked iTunes from Windows because it didn’t “add enough new functionality”. And then when it eventually did allow a gimped version of iTunes charged Apple 30% of all the music and movies sold on it. If they were being Apple like they would probably have even started charging 20% of the album price of every music CD users ripped to their iPods using iTunes. And MS was a far more ruthless company. If it wasn’t afraid of anti monopolistic regulation it would have come up with other ideas I can’t imagine in a 1000 years to have absolutely destroyed Apple.
- jchw 3y agoI really think this is insanely poor strategy on Apple's part. They know damn well that they're simply delaying the inevitable, and probably in deluded hopes that this can get watered down significantly with enough effort, but I don't think the public or the government regulators are going to be amused by these stunts in the slightest. They manage to get away with a lot by virtue of having probably the best PR in the entire computer industry as a whole, I don't think that's an exaggeration; but if they keep pulling moves like this, I feel they risk losing a lot of their public support. For me, it's quite unusual seeing even the most popular comments on sites like MacRumors absolutely trashing and condemning Apple--there is usually at least one highly sympathetic perspective that has a significant amount of mindshare, but in this case, it's hard to not see how egregious and petty this really is. And to be fair, I doubt their famously positive reputation is going anywhere overnight, but there are definitely cracks forming, especially between this and the near-miss with the CSAM scanning debacle. Well, the ball is in regulator's courts. I have mixed feelings about some of the EU tech regulation, but that doesn't justify malicious compliance like this, and I hope that regulators do their jobs and send a message that Apple (and Google) are not above the law.
- bhpm 3y ago> For me, it's quite unusual seeing even the most popular comments on sites like MacRumors absolutely trashing and condemning Apple MacRumors comments section is always filled with people bashing Apple.
- tonyedgecombe 3y agoI often wonder why they are there.
- hnburnsy 3y agoWonder if any of this affects the Apple Watch.
- matt3210 3y agoSo will iPhone users under Apples current plans
- yinyang_in 3y agoApple did lot of efforts building the ecosystem. No government system helped them in it. Now fruits have come up & they want to tweak it to their own taste. If monopoly is causing trouble to small businesses & you’re able to prove it then impose fines & whatever is under the law. But just being jealous & imposition of laws just to target businesses(here almost Apple is being singled out). But this is unpopular opinion. With 30% fees you get access to big ecosystem of Apple imo is cheap. They’ve put lot of efforts in building it. If don’t want to participate, then don’t. Use android it has what you all what EU wants. Ps. Not a US citizen neither stakeholder in Apple
- techdragon 3y agoYou may not be an Apple shareholder and I’m not sure how being a US Citizen has any potential to be a conflict of interest in this case but you still sound like you “drank the cool aid”… the question I have for you is where (if anywhere at all) do you draw the line between what Apple should be allowed to do and and what it should do voluntarily … and what rights you think individual nations have to regulate their internal commerce including regulations on what manufacturers and sellers of devices must make it possible for the purchasing public to do… while this regulation is targeting Apple’s software control the same principles are underlying the regulations that allow bilingual countries to require products be labeled in both languages, allow countries to mandate hygiene in health care facilities, higher food safety or ingredient quality control to minimise food contamination risks… Does Unilever have the right to decide what’s good enough for consumers in a country? Or does the country and its citizens have the right to demand Unilever products meet their standards if Unilever wants to sell in that country?
- filoleg 3y ago> what rights you think individual nations have to regulate their internal commerce including regulations on what manufacturers and sellers of devices must make it possible for the purchasing public to do > while this regulation is targeting Apple’s software control the same principles are underlying the regulations that allow bilingual countries to require products be labeled in both languages, allow countries to mandate hygiene in health care facilities, higher food safety or ingredient quality control to minimise food contamination risks I mean, while this regulation is targeting Apple’s software control, the same principles are underlying the regulations that allow countries like PRC to demand Apple to host data of their users in China in datacenters that are run by, essentially, the PRC government, as well as give them the keys to decrypt data of those users. I don’t see how that’s a point in favor of anything at all here. Just because the countries have the right to do those things and sometimes utilize those rights for things like food safety management or bilingual product labeling enforcement, it doesn’t automatically make their usage of those same rights for other things (like compromising user data and, with full legal support, spying on political dissidents) any more justified. No one is arguing that the EU doesn’t have the right to do what they are doing (the EU, indeed, has the right to do it). People are arguing whether it is a smart and beneficial thing to do.
- peterlada 3y agoAlso miss out on spam, scam and "custom" "keyboards" that just happen to use telemetry to collect passwords.
- calini 3y agoI really hope the EU doesn't take this lightly and modify the laws accordingly. And if not, I hope Apple ends up split like Standard Oil. - Sent from my iPhone