43 ms·

Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

• ano-ther 3y ago
  > We’re providing more flexibility for developers who distribute apps in the European Union (EU), including introducing a new way to distribute apps directly from a developer’s website.
  • lutoma 3y ago
    Important limitation if you click through to the "Getting ready for Web Distribution in the EU" page: > To be eligible for Web Distribution, you must [...] be a member of good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more, and have an app that had more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year.
    • nottorp 3y ago
      I thought it was already established that you don't have to be in good standing... cough Epic...
• lapcat 3y ago
  This is just more malicious compliance by Apple. Indie developers are completely locked out of web distribution, and it applies only to developers who are already paying the Apple tax. > To be eligible for Web Distribution, you must: > Be a member of good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more, and have an app that had more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year. > Developers will pay a CTF of €0.50 for each first annual install over one million in the past 12 months. https://developer.apple.com/support/web-distribution-eu/ https://developer.apple.com/support/web-distribution-eu/
  • classified 3y ago
    I really hope the EU regulators won't let this slide.
    • Spivak 3y ago
      Which part? I don't think the EU can rule that Apple can't charge publishers to be on iOS. This isn't malicious compliance, sans the size requirement it's exactly what they asked for. This keeps happening where people keep hitching "I don't want to pay Apple" to every wagon except a law that requires Apple to make access to iOS free. "Allow other payment processors": Okay you still pay 27% "Allow other stores": Okay you still pay a commission, a different one. "Allow installing from websites": Okay you still pay a commission, you just have to write us a check.
      • _v7gu 3y ago
        DMA requires free access to the platform
        • cowsandmilk 3y ago
          Citation needed
          • wolf89618 3y ago
            [dead]
          • internetter 3y ago
            56: The gatekeepers should, therefore, be required to ensure, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of its own complementary and supporting services and hardware
            • 3y ago
• joshstrange 3y ago
  Two big changes here. One is allowing third-party app stores to exclusively offer their own apps (I guess removing the requirement that they accept other apps). And the second is allowing apps that meet certain requirements to be installed directly from the publisher’s website: > Apple's specific criteria, such as being a member of the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more and having an app with more than one million first installs on iOS in the EU in the prior year, and commit to ongoing requirements, such as publishing transparent data collection policies But as you can see you won’t be seeing indie apps distributed in this way. Though, to be fair, for most indies the App Store with the old rules is probably the best deal available to them.
  • lapcat 3y ago
    > Though, to be fair, for most indies the App Store with the old rules is probably the best deal available to them. How do you figure? Given the choice, many indie Mac developers continue to distribute their software outside the Mac App Store.
    • CubsFan1060 3y ago
      The core technology fee doesn't exist on the Mac.
      • lapcat 3y ago
        How is taking 15% or 30% of all revenue better than €0.50 per first annual install?
        • internetter 3y ago
          Because it means you need to be making more than $3.3-$1.5 per user per year to break even on this, which is difficult
          • lapcat 3y ago
            > Because it means you need to be making more than $3.3-$1.5 per user per year to break even on this, which is difficult Perhaps this is the case inside the App Store, but it's not the case outside the App Store, where indie apps tend to be higher priced and upfront paid. Moreover, keep in mind that the first million first annual installs have no CTF, and most indie devs will never even reach that point.
• overstay8930 3y ago
  The app still has to be notarized, this seems logical to me, I’d only be worried if they ever allowed unsigned apps to run. There are plenty of “free Vbucks” and survey sites that show you how to enable sideloading on Android to download said app that is just pure malware.
  • gear54rus 3y ago
    yes, very worrying to be able to run software you want on the device that you purchased
    • acdha 3y ago
      This framing ignores the very real harm which has come to millions of people. It’s not the 80s any more and there are mature industries built around spying on users or tricking them into decisions with significant financial consequences. Most of the effective defenses require something like notarization to make it hard for attackers to simply disappear without legal consequences, so we need ways to do that at reasonable cost. €0.50 seems like a reasonable cost for that, similar to how we don’t make circuit breakers or seatbelts optional just because some guy thinks he doesn’t need them and resents paying the extra cost.
    • overstay8930 3y ago
      I’m not going to hire an IT team to install and maintain MDM to prevent my grandmother from falling for a scam website and installing “free money quick 2024 +++ candy crush ultra”
      • Ajedi32 3y ago
        If you want to block your grandma from being able to install apps from outside the Apple app store, that's fine (as long as she agrees to it). Seems like a useful feature. Maybe file it under "parental controls" or something. If you want to block me from being able to install apps from outside the Apple app store though, that's none of your business (or Apple's).
• Ballas 3y ago
  I just want to be able to install my own apps on my own device without paying $99/year (and with a signature that lasts a reasonable amount of time). Sadly, this doesn't seem to allow for that.
  • Crosseye_Jack 3y ago
    Altserver+Altstore. Altserver will resign your apps, and altstore can background "refresh" your apps so they _shouldn't_ expire on your. It refreshes when your on the same wifi network as altserver, for me it works most of the time, but sometimes I need to kick altserver to get the phone to see it. Doesn't fix the issue, and its a limitation that annoys the hell out of me too, but at least helps mitigate it. (Though it doesn't solve the number of self signed app limit)
    • throwitaway1123 3y ago
      The only thing that bothers me about Altstore is that it require you to enter your Apple ID and password. I know the app is open source and only sends the credentials to Apple, but the risk of a supply chain vulnerability is terrifying.
      • e44858 3y ago
        You can create a new Apple ID and use it just for Altstore.
        • throwitaway1123 3y ago
          But don't you need a unique phone number for each Apple ID, which makes it kind of difficult to just create a throwaway account? Or is there a way to circumvent that requirement?
    • melvyn2 3y ago
      AltStore is a bad joke, you can only install 2 apps (three, minus the altstore app), and you have to connect your phone to a MacOS computer and run the app every week. Just let me click on an IPA to install it, it's really not that deep!
• fxtentacle 3y ago
  "The Core Technology Fee (CTF) is an element of the business terms in the EU that reflects the value Apple provides developers through ongoing investments in the tools, technologies, and services that enable them to build and share innovative apps with users around the world." I feel sick. Yet, I am intrigued by what kind of drugs the PR team at Apple is taking... ;) In my opinion, Apple's proprietary APIs provide a negative value to developers. Shuffling APIs around for no obvious reason is why none of my old iOS / Mac apps still work. I've been forced to issue refunds to people who upgraded their macOS and then afterwards noticed that my apps don't work anymore. And since Apple owns the customer relationship, we couldn't even send an email to warn them that upgrading will break their setup. (Pro Tools had to do that on basically every OS X upgrade.) On Windows, things JUST WORK! :) and they've continued working with almost no maintenance for almost 9 years. The Windows version is, thus, highly profitable. But the Mac version was a financial disaster. And discontinued. EDIT: Just to clarify, I was super happy with Apple from about 2008 to about 2014 and shipped multiple iOS and Mac apps. But needless to say, my impression of them has soured when they started treating us developers badly. I'm now using Pop! OS as daily driver and it kinda feels as nice as OS X was before the stupidification efforts started.
  • klaustopher 3y ago
    > provides developers through ongoing investments in the tools, technologies, and services that enable them to build and share innovative apps with users around the world. That's what the 99$ fee for the developer program is for. The 50ct Core Technology Fee is just Apple showing the middle finger to successful developers. I hope the EU goes after this fee first. The whole reason for the DMA is that developers do not use Apple's platforms to bring apps to the user's devices. The user has paid for the device and the operating system, the developer has paid for the developer account, so I am really interested to see how Apple justifies that fee in a court of law.
    • jijijijij 3y ago
      Maybe Apple's goal is to become irrelevant enough to not be subjected to the DMA. I mean, making developers despise you is a brilliant first step towards such an end!
• klaustopher 3y ago
  I am really impressed how much time and effort Apples legal department spends to find every single loop hole in the wording of the DMA. The 50ct per install for alternate app stores, 50ct per install for non-App Store apps after the millionth install, 1 million dollar in securities for alternate app stores, etc all follow the words of the DMA, but not the spirit. I am really interested to see the European Commissian drag Apple in front of a court and them having to legally defend their actions. I assume that all of those things they are setting up to circumvent people from using their rights will really blow up in their faces.
  • internetter 3y ago
    The EU has always been enthusiastic about the spirit of the law, and Apple is not used to this. You can see their temper tantrum unfold every time they find this out.
    • procgen 3y ago
      Disregarding the letter of the law seems arbitrary and capricious.
      • klaustopher 3y ago
        There's different ways to interpret laws for courts. One of them is called teleological interpretation where you follow the intent of the law. For this courts also look into the documentation the legislation provided when defining the law. This is usually not done by lower courts, but courts like the CJEU use those when the letter of the law is unclear to define this for the lower courts to follow.
        • abigail95 3y ago
          This would be more valid if the law was passed with a message that says "please interpret this law according to this documentation teleologically"
      • internetter 3y ago
• realusername 3y ago
  > such as being a member of the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more and having an app with more than one million first installs on iOS in the EU in the prior year, and commit to ongoing requirements I didn't expect much but that list is a big joke. If you were looking for a way to distribute your ios software on the web, well that ain't it.
• endisneigh 3y ago
  Seems like it would’ve been easier for apple to just enable installing android on iPhones and iPads and just walking away. I do wonder if that would’ve been enough to have compliance. I also wonder if apple could argue that web apps are enough.
  • rchaud 3y ago
    Google pays Apple $19b to keep it as the default search engine on iOS Safari, so there will never be an iOS VM running Android.
    • asadotzler 3y ago
      that makes no sense. google owns android and the default browser on android and so they'd have all the same users using their search and saving some of that cash for any that switched to the Android VM. how is that a bad deal for google?
  • spogbiper 3y ago
    Allowing an alternate OS would allow users to avoid continually paying Apple to make use of their device. It will never happen
• sneak 3y ago
  > In addition, developers will soon be able to distribute apps directly from their websites, providing they meet Apple's specific criteria, such as being a member of the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more and having an app with more than one million first installs on iOS in the EU in the prior year, and commit to ongoing requirements, such as publishing transparent data collection policies. Apps distributed in this way must meet Apple's notarization requirements like all other iOS apps and can only be installed from a web domain registered in App Store Connect. So, there will still be a centralized chokepoint for censorship of apps the government would prefer you not be able to have on your phone. Cool. This means no protest apps, no encrypted communications apps unless they have the appropriate government approval/licenses, etc. This is the same censorship they exert over the app store. It's no benefit to users.
• AniseAbyss 3y ago
  [dead]
• jpalomaki 3y ago
  It's the big apps and vendors I want to have protection against. My negotiation position towards Facebook etc. is very weak. This is why I like when Apple is putting certain limits for them. With smaller apps I don't have this problem. There's typically plenty to choose from. If I don't like the policies of one, then I can go for something else.
  • hu3 3y ago
    These limits are and should be placed by the operating system. Android has sideloading yet Facebook still uses the official store.
  • asadotzler 3y ago
    Your negotiating power to make any app list in the any app store is approximately zero. If Facebook decides for any reason to leave, neither you nor Apple can stop them so this imagined power you think you get from Apple's App Store policies is just that. If Apple is forced to allow FB an alternate path and FB takes that path abandoning Apple's App Store, you can blame Apple for the extortion fees in its App Store that are driving FB and others away. Had Apple not been so greedy, there wouldn't have been suits and the EC wouldn't have forced their hand, but Cook's gotta cook for shareholders and leaving even a single penny on the table would be against his commitment to them. My grocer, who does far more for my well being than Apple, makes 2-3% store-wide markup and he still manages to invest in his store, feed himself and his family, and employ a decent sized staff on that ~2.5% -- and that's the case for most grocery stores, big and small, and we're all real good with that and have been for several decades, these people building actual buildings and gathering up the best foods the world has to offer from hundreds or even thousands of suppliers and paying people to cut open boxes and stock shelves with these amazing foods and mop the floors when we break jars of food that we never pay for he and his crew take sh*t from customers who had a bad day (who might even rob or assault them) and all for 2.5% margin while folks here, on a hacking forum of all places, simp for a walled garden that's extracting 30% from mom and pop hackers for providing what amounts to web hosting. C'mon. Get real.
• frankjr 3y ago
  From https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/ https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/ > First annual install. This is the first time an app is installed by an account in the EU in a 12-month period. After each first annual install, the app may be installed any number of times by the same account for the next 12 months with no additional charge. Okay... > A first annual install may result from an app’s first-time install, a reinstall, or an update from any iOS app distribution option — including the App Store, an alternative app marketplace, TestFlight, an App Clip, volume purchases through Apple Business Manager and Apple School Manager, and/or a custom app. Do I understand this correctly that you will have to pay the fee for each user (above the 1 million free) even if they just get an automatic update? Given that updates are automatic by default, you will end up paying even for inactive users (users who installed the app but long forgotten about it and don't use it).
  • AwaAwa 3y ago
    Sounds malicious. I expect their defense to consist of "can't spell 'App' without taking a portion of 'Apple' and therefore ...." Or maybe that's their hail mary for the next round.
• resource_waste 3y ago
  Oh man Apple is finally getting a feature Android had for 10+ years! Maybe in like 20 years iphones will finally have the features a $100 android has and will be up to bare basic standards. I def look sideways at people who buy a used $300 iphone when you can get a safer, higher quality, more feature phone with more for $150. This is different from someone buying Nike Jordans because they are status insecure, because Nike Jordan's dont affect my life. A critical mass of Apple users caused developers to make Apps for iPhones.
  • LordKeren 3y ago
    You shouldn’t let people’s decisions around phone purchases bother you
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • resource_waste 3y ago
      That is nice idealism. But if you own a company and make Apps, yes they affect you. Sorry, reality isnt as pretty.
• tibbydudeza 3y ago
  I reckon an uptake of 0.5% of EU users will do this - people will distrust if it does not come from the Apple store.
• wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
  They have made it so complicated, you need to already have 2 years app available and over a million downloads.
• bogwog 3y ago
  > Alternative app marketplaces. Marketplaces can choose to offer a catalog of apps solely from the developer of the marketplace. How does that count as a "marketplace"? > Web Distribution ... will let authorized developers distribute their iOS apps to EU users directly from a website owned by the developer All of this just makes it crystal clear what Apple's goal is: to prevent competition. It's not about security like they've been lying about; it's all about maintaining their app store monopoly.
  • MatthiasPortzel 3y ago
    Before this, if you had an alternative marketplace, you had to accept submissions from other developers. You are still allowed to accept submissions from other developers, but are no longer required to.
    • rsynnott 3y ago
      I suppose the point is that, if we're being pedantic (and after all, that is what the internet is _for_), you cannot have a single vendor marketplace based on the commonly understood meaning of the word 'marketplace'. (But yeah, this is just slightly silly naming from Apple).
      • yard2010 3y ago
        Are you demonstrating Cunningham's law because the internet is for porn
  • bloppe 3y ago
    Apple is just trying to protect users from scammers! I'm sure all this sensible authorization and notarization business will continue even after the fees are removed from the equation
  • nektro 3y ago
    debating about how they run the store is totally valid, but there being only one store absolutely does make iOS safer overall
• nottorp 3y ago
  As an Apple customer in the EU, I'm staying on iOS 17.3 until they rewrite 17.4 4-5 times based on how many times they get fined again for malicious compliance.
  • yaris 3y ago
    "Always wait for a point release". It seems for this we need to wait for the _next_ point release. It should become clearer for EU side of the movement also - it is far from certain that Apple to be the one f*cked.
    • nottorp 3y ago
      I don't trust the EU much to fix the things that I personally care about indeed. Namely: unrestricted access for new, small entrants. Less restrictions on utilities. Stuff like that. My favourite pet example: I want DaisyDisk for iOS. What does Cook need threatening with to allow that?
      • andersa 3y ago
        That's actually exactly what the DMA is supposed to solve. So maybe you just need to wait.
        • nottorp 3y ago
          I don't know about my pet. It would need full storage access, and even I agree that keeping apps separate from each other is a good idea, security wise. I don't see how you can argue against that when you're considering monopoly issues. On the other hand, Apple not allowing apps not approved by them and not allowing manual single app installs without going through their app store or some other app store does look to me like a monopoly issue.
      • coldtea 3y ago
        Are you sure you want iOS? Perhaps you want Android? Sounds like you just want the iPhone hardware, but not the spirit of the OS that contributed to what it is. Adding manual disk management makes more like running Windows XP than a smooth "mostly just works" phone.
• okso 3y ago
  Apple keeps a strong control nevertheless, as detailed in the page "Getting ready for Web Distribution in the EU." > Apps offered through Web Distribution must meet Notarization requirements to protect platform integrity, like all iOS apps, and can only be installed from a website domain that the developer has registered in App Store Connect. Further, the conditions for eligibility seem to block access to new startups and indie developers. > To be eligible for Web Distribution, you must: (...) Be a member of good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more, and have an app that had more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year.
  • markus92 3y ago
    The one million requirement is where you start paying them the 50cts per install, right?
    • rekoil 3y ago
      It is indeed. Can't have this being used by those who might not net Apple any money, they're locked out obviously. Fair and reasonable. /s
    • usrusr 3y ago
      An interesting perspective, makes it surprisingly fair play and totally crippling to third parties at the same time. I guess the outcome will be that outside some completely irrelevant oddballs there will just be one or two entities like Epic serving the intersection of non-casual gamers and people who consider the iPhone a gaming platform and they won't pull much market away from Apple, but serve as a limiter to how much Apple can abuse their platform rule. It will look like a failure, but only because some of the limiting effect on platform abuse will also bleed into makets not directly affected by EU rules.
      • EMIRELADERO 3y ago
        No, the outcome will be that the EU rightfully fines them an examplary amount for this non-compliant farce of a plan.
• shinryuu 3y ago
  > Web Distribution, available with a software update later this spring, will let authorized developers distribute their iOS apps to EU users directly from a website owned by the developer. iPhone users don't really own their own device, do they...
  • pavlov 3y ago
    The iPhone revolution was that your phone used to be owned by the carrier, but now was owned by Apple, and Jobs got away with it.
    • pjmlp 3y ago
      Hence why most European countries just mostly stayed with pre-paid, and operators have been trying to bride us with contracts for iDevices, or if that doesn't get us, contracts in disguise for pre-paid users as post pay. I will keep using Android devices with physical SIM until it isn't no longer viable.
      • PlutoIsAPlanet 3y ago
        Due to financing options like Klarna, keeping on monthly prepaid sim-only plans (which are cheap) and using a finance option to purchase the device outright has become much more popular at least in my circle in the UK.
        • desas 3y ago
          You don't even need Klarna, the Apple website offers 0% 24 months financing for iPhone in the UK.
      • sbuk 3y ago
        That’s nonsense! Bundled contracts are common in most if not all of Europes economies.
        • pjmlp 3y ago
• MatthiasPortzel 3y ago
  > Be a member of good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more, and have an app that had more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year These are the same as the current requirements to create an alternative App Store. So it sounds like this is a way for developers of a single app to allow users to install just their app. Before this comes into effect, these developers will have to create a custom store to allow users to install a single app.
  • jshier 3y ago
    Alt stores also require specific insurance, which doesn't seem to be the case here.
• Etheryte 3y ago
  The terms and conditions for web distribution [0] are concerning to say the least. In short, you have to have at least one million first installs annually on iOS to even qualify, in addition to other terms such as "good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more". I doubt Epic and the like would be considered in good standing as far as Apple is concerned. Also, quote unquote, developers will pay a core technology fee of €0.50 for each first annual install over one million in the past 12 months. I don't see this ending well for Apple in any measure. It seems they think the EU lawmakers will just go away if they stick their fingers in their ears hard enough, but that's not how the EU works. The gears of EU turn slowly, but grind finely. [0] https://developer.apple.com/support/web-distribution-eu/ https://developer.apple.com/support/web-distribution-eu/
  • MatthiasPortzel 3y ago
    They’re the same terms as those required for an alternative app marketplace.
    • rekoil 3y ago
      Not exactly, looks like there's no requirement to have €1,000,000 in your bank account like you need for alternative app marketplaces.
      • concinds 3y ago
        They dropped that too. https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/05/apple-tweaks-eu-app-store-business-terms/ https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/05/apple-tweaks-eu-app-sto...
  • concinds 3y ago
    In other words, you're only "eligible" for web distribution if you meet the threshold to pay the Core Technology Fee tax? (on top of the other requirements). Sounds convenient.
    • 3y ago
• andersa 3y ago
  What the hell is going on at Apple? It's starting to become really funny to see one obviously non-compliant malicious compliance attempt being made after another. Do they really not understand that they're no longer involved in the relationships between users and developers?
  • paulcole 3y ago
    They are deeply involved. If it’s that bad for developers, drop the iPhone and develop solely for Android. Developers need the iPhone and Apple needs developers.
    • pbmonster 3y ago
      > They are deeply involved. If it’s that bad for developers, drop the iPhone and develop solely for Android. EU: "No."
      • paulcole 3y ago
        Yes, that's called having differing opinions and it's not bad. If enough people in the EU agree with this, go for it. If Apple ends up saying that they're willing to abide by the letter of the law and no more, great.
        • oblio 3y ago
          Apple's not abiding by the letter of the law, though. They're the drug dealer flushing drugs before the cops come in, or in this case Apple is trying to buy time because each month they can delay this they're probably making $1bn more.
        • malermeister 3y ago
          Actually that's exactly the misunderstanding that's getting Apple in trouble. In European law, the letter of the law doesn't matter. The intent does. It's called teleological interpretation, here's an EU document with a bit more background: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/599364/EPRS_BRI(2017)599364_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/5993... Key quote: > When interpreting EU law, the CJEU pays particular attention to the aim and purpose of EU law (teleological interpretation), rather than focusing exclusively on the wording of the provisions (linguistic interpretation). This is explained by numerous factors, in particular the open-ended and policy-oriented rules of the EU Treaties, as well as by EU legal multilingualism. Under the latter principle, all EU law is equally authentic in all language versions. Hence, the Court cannot rely on the wording of a single version, as a national court can, in order to give an interpretation of the legal provision under consideration. Therefore, in order to decode the meaning of a legal rule, the Court analyses it especially in the light of its purpose (teleological interpretation) as well as its context (systemic interpretation). Facebook, too, tried rules-lawyering EU regulations only to be slapped with a huge fine. This shit doesn't fly here.
• newbie578 3y ago
  We will see how long they can keep this facade up. I expect a couple of fines are needed to rein them in.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• shortsunblack 3y ago
  All computers are Turing machines.
• EMIRELADERO 3y ago
  Apple is still non-compliant with the requirements of the DMA, especially in regards to Article 6(7), which provides: "The gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services." This means the Core Technology Fee is per-se illegal. The only exception to the provision is security, so Apple can probably demand notarization of IPA files (although maybe not really, since Android does not enforce that at all and the sky hasn't fallen over there) but the requirement that the developer already be in good standing and have 2 million app downloads is insane and non-compliant too.
  • alwayslikethis 3y ago
    The rules aren't really strict enough it seems. The gatekeeper should not be able to have any control over app distribution at all. Notarization and other forms of code signing must be possible to turn off and should not place the gatekeeper in a privileged position (for example, it should be possible to enroll other certificates).
    • EMIRELADERO 3y ago
      The DMA says this about it: > The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking strictly necessary and proportionate measures to ensure that interoperability does not compromise the integrity of the operating system, virtual assistant, hardware or software features provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper. > The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking, to the extent that they are strictly necessary and proportionate, measures to ensure that third-party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper. > Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall not be prevented from applying, to the extent that they are strictly necessary and proportionate, measures and settings other than default settings, enabling end users to effectively protect security in relation to third-party software applications or software application stores, provided that such measures and settings other than default settings are duly justified by the gatekeeper.
• sampa 3y ago
  [flagged]
• bsaul 3y ago
  i don't understand how the EU didn't put up a very simple rule : users owns their phones and should be able to install any software they want without apple putting artificial restrictions or gateways exclusivity. Period. That should remove all the possibilities of apple trying to find the loopholes with shit measures such as those "options".
  • alwayslikethis 3y ago
    Or alternatively, that the manufacturer shall have no special privileges when it comes to software. The OS APIs needs to be public and if Apple can do something, someone else unauthorized should be able to do it also. This would also apply the play store privileges on Android, but that is a much less egregious violation than what Apple does.
    • temac 3y ago
      Google Play store has some exclusive privileges?
      • alwayslikethis 3y ago
        Yes, for example you can't allow an alternative app store to do auto updates on the background.
        • themacguffinman 3y ago
          That kind of restriction is now gone https://www.xda-developers.com/android-14-new-apis-app-stores/ https://www.xda-developers.com/android-14-new-apis-app-store...
      • deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    • EMIRELADERO 3y ago
      They already did that. Article 6(7): > The gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services.
• CaptainMarvel 3y ago
  My tolerance for Apple's walled garden expired with what they've pulled in reaction to the Digital Markets Act. It's become blatant (to me) they are landlords of their digital empire seeking to squeeze rent from everyone. I wouldn't mind paying for their expensive and yet still-profitable hardware if not for the antics they pull on the software side. Everyone should be able to run whatever legally-obtained program they have on their device without needing to pay someone, and without needing the permission of someone else. In my opinion, that should be law. (I think that would be net-beneficial to society and so worth the restriction on profits for a couple of humongous companies or whatever.)
  • dangus 3y ago
    I just wonder how products like game consoles would be viable under a law like this. I assume they would have to cost much more and there would be far less incentive for their development in the first place. Then again, we are at the end stages of game consoles. Microsoft in particular seems to be considering the idea of not even bothering with hardware. Software is where the money is, Chinese hardware companies can make hardware like you see in the retro handheld scene.
    • fsflover 3y ago
      Steam Deck doesn't cost much more and allows you to run anything you want.
    • dotnet00 3y ago
      MS already allows you to unlock the ability to run custom code on their hardware for a ~$20 fee. Sony doesn't seem to do this yet, but on the other hand, they did eventually get the disk drive version of the PS5 to not sell at a loss. So, I don't think it'd affect them too much. Alternative stores would mainly just end up being convenient for small indies and homebrew developers, neither of which would've been able to afford the fees to get onto the official stores anyway.
      • KingOfLechia 3y ago
• hjnilsson 3y ago
  The web distribution certainly makes it much more viable to offer apps outside the App Store, and have reasonable conversion rates. Now PornHub or similar could easily offer their app from the website. With this available (which is a much simpler system), all of the App Marketplace-convoluted setups seems redundant.
• clementmas 3y ago
  I bought Apple stock a while back but that kind of behavior makes me want them to fail so bad. So I guess I'll sell my shares.
• tebbers 3y ago
  This is still not good enough because as Apple demonstrated last week, they can capriciously remove access for any developer at any time for any reason at all. They need to be removed completely from the code signing and publishing process altogether.
  • hyperhopper 3y ago
    What happened last week? Could you please provide context?
    • makeitdouble 3y ago
      I think it's about Epic's account ban and reinstatement afterwards.
• gabea 3y ago
  I didn’t read anything on the 30% for apps downloaded this way. Do you still have to offer IAP or is that optional if your app was downloaded from the web?
• ChrisArchitect 3y ago
  More discussion on official Apple post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39678555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39678555
• tallanvor 3y ago
  > Be a member of good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more, and have an app that had more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year. In other words, small developers without the resources to challenge Apple on these rules don't get to play.
• nerdjon 3y ago
  It really bothers me that so much of this is focused on the developers, and that is the problem here. How many users actually want this? I am sure some, but I doubt it is a significant number. I have said this before here, but I am not looking forward to when this likely eventually comes to the US and as a user I have less control over my phone, not more. The walled garden is why I chose an iPhone and continue to stay with the ecosystem. Not being at the mercy of dark patterns that many website still employ when trying to cancel subscriptions or just not reminding me of a yearly subscription about to charge. Apps having no choice but to get money from me by going through the App Store is a benefit to me as a User. Developers I also hope quickly realize that if they try to push me to subscribe outside of the App Store they will get $0 from me instead of 70%. I continue to be worried about the Facebook's and similar companies (we already know Epic is doing it) forcing users outside of the App Store.
  • afavour 3y ago
    > so much of this is focused on the developers, and that is the problem here. How many users actually want this? How many users actually understand the issues at stake, though? I don't say that to be patronizing but it's a nuanced, thorny problem. I bet if you simply asked "do you think it should be allowed to download porn apps?" a good number of users (if asked anonymously!) would say yes. How many users understand why they can't subscribe to Netflix through the iOS app? How many know what Apple's cut even is? The government has all kinds of regulation in what my utility providers can and can't do, in ways I'm not fully clued into. I see this as similar. > I have less control over my phone, not more. > Developers I also hope quickly realize that if they try to push me to subscribe outside of the App Store they will get $0 from me instead of 70%. To my mind all of this comes back to the free market: you're free to ignore all this stuff and keep getting everything through the App Store. If you and many others do the same thing then the market will prove the idea to be a dud.
    • nerdjon 3y ago
      > How many users actually understand the issues at stake, though? I don't say that to be patronizing but it's a nuanced, thorny problem. I bet if you simply asked "do you think it should be allowed to download porn apps?" a good number of users (if asked anonymously!) would say yes. How many users understand why they can't subscribe to Netflix through the iOS app? How many know what Apple's cut even is? The iPhone isn't a new platform though. I feel like people well understand what they can and cannot download through the App Store by this point. While I do completely agree that Apple needs to loosen the control on things like porn apps, that is a different issue. As far as Netflix, that is ultimately Netflix choice. They could allow you to subscribe through the App Store if they really wanted. As far as Apple's cut. I mean I don't ask my grocery store what their cut is, or target, or any other store. I don't ask what Steam's cut is, or Xbox, or Playstation, even though all 3 of those are similar cuts. As a user, that number really doesn't mean anything to me. > To my mind all of this comes back to the free market: you're free to ignore all this stuff and keep getting everything through the App Store. If you and many others do the same thing then the market will prove the idea to be a dud. That is the problem, how free am I really to ignore it if the only way to get by budget app or whatever other app that I have come to rely on is suddenly a different store or they just don't want me to subscribe through the App Store anymore. This isn't hypothetical, if I want to play Fortnite I will have to get the epic game store when that comes out. Is that really a choice for me? Instead of being able to choose if I want to play Fortnite or not, I instead am choosing if I care enough to download an alliterative store. Why is that ok? Instead Epic is making the choice for me, and it is up to me to decide if I care enough. And then it becomes normalized and just accepted because most users who don't understand the risks of alternative stores, just go with it.
• spacebanana7 3y ago
  This is a great step forwards for mobile computing freedom. I imagine it'll make it a lot harder for congress to kill TikTok in the US if rolled out globally. Hopefully the EU can pressure Apple to relax some of the requirements.
  • actionfromafar 3y ago
    How does this have anything to do with the US?
• sparrowInHand 3y ago
  How about companies ripped off by apple get together and offer the european union a "neutral" plattform, a app-store of its own without app-store tarifs? Make infrastructure infrastructure again and destroy the walled gardens while they are at it?
• arnaudsm 3y ago
  This topic is polarizing because it shows how Silicon Valley betrayed its original hacker mindset of openness in favor of tech feudalism. I'm pleasantly surprised to see the EU standing in this battle. This is a good thing for hackers, creativity and competition in the mobile space
  • kmeisthax 3y ago
    "Wait, it's all feudalism?" "Always has been." Silicon Valley's original sin is Steve Jobs conning Steve Wozniak and a bunch of tech contractors into building his business empire. Every company in the Bay Area is a politically implausible liason of a very specific kind of Objectivist control freak CEO[0] and the hippie nerds that can actually build what they want to sell. The hacker mindset of openness is very easy to confuse with Jobs-types that want openness for thee but not for me. It's very easy to complain about people currently abusing their power (remember Google's "Don't Be Evil" poking fun at Microsoft?) but hard to recognize incipient abuses of future power. The only way to unambiguously avoid this is to go full Stallman[1] and categorically distolerate any amount of control or ownership over one's work. To make matters worse, this industry is one in which you really can't make money unless you're selling something that's closed off and locked down. The people who actually do play fair get bankrupted any time the government is looking the other way on antitrust. [0] Yes, I am calling out YCombinator. You're part of the problem. [1] To be clear, RMS very much has Jobs' personality, grafted onto Woz's morality and skill. He would have become just as awful as Jobs had he not insisted on Free Software early on.
    • user_7832 3y ago
      I don't think it's fully impossible, but rather just very difficult, especially if operating in the software space. I'd call framework laptops an example of the exception to the rule. But yes, they're very rare.
• hellcow 3y ago
  This is likely my last iPhone. Apple’s behavior in opposing their own customers is unacceptable. I’ll switch to a Pixel running GrapheneOS, where I can run “real Firefox” and any other software I choose.
  • alwayslikethis 3y ago
    Android Firefox lets you have uBlock origin, among other things.
    • genpfault 3y ago
      But not about:config :(
      • vel0city 3y ago
        Just opened Firefox on my Pixel, typed in "about:config", and got a long list of configuration options.
        • tuukkah 3y ago
          Works for me on Firefox Beta and Firefox Nightly, but not on normal Firefox.
          • vel0city 3y ago
            Ah, you're right, I'm running Firefox Beta. Forgot about that. Thanks for pointing that out.
  • gvurrdon 3y ago
    Same here. But, I'd like to wait until iOS 18 so that text messages from various contacts are less painful.
  • justinclift 3y ago
    If you're up for something experimental, then Genode on the PinePhone is coming along pretty well: https://genodians.org/nfeske/2024-02-15-fosdem-aftermath https://genodians.org/nfeske/2024-02-15-fosdem-aftermath
• Unfrozen0688 3y ago
  Android phones are great now. Come home devs. <3
• franczesko 3y ago
  EU needs to address this as it is still gatekeeping
• amne 3y ago
  Why isn't making the iPhone unavailable for sale in Europe not an option?
  • PavleMiha 3y ago
    I guess it is? No one can force Apple to sell iPhones in Europe.
    • przemub 3y ago
      And no one is forcing them.
    • sneak 3y ago
      Their shareholders can, and will.
      • burnerthrow008 3y ago
        lol. Shareholders won’t care if Apple pulls out of Europe if Europe makes it impossible to make a profit. Another comment claims that the App Store represents something like 40% of Apple’s profit. If you chop a company’s profit in half and lay on a bunch of regulatory costs, pulling out of the market starts to look appealing. And, who is to say that the EC will stop here? What happens when all the alternative app stores fail because they fail to enforce the same developer-hostile, user-friendly features as Apple (like request to track). You think the EC will just roll over and let that happen? Or will they take even stronger measures? Continuing the humor the EC is just throwing good money after bad at this point. Shareholders can see that just as well as anyone else.
        • smoldesu 3y ago
          > if Europe makes it impossible to make a profit. Unless they stop them from shipping iPhone hardware or tax the MSRP beyond 40%, I think it's quite literally impossible for that to happen.
          • 3y ago
• totaldude87 3y ago
  An interesting analogy and a thought experiment , replace Walmart instead of Apple, how would this play out? you cant force Walmart to sell stuff (nor) ask them to open up a small space inside their stores for others to open up their shop. If they wont, how is this different for Apple? just becuase they are a software company? or just because they allowed this all on a mac and not on an iPhone? P.S As long as the regular Joe doesn't bother about walled gardens, apple is on the green. How many developers actually have a problem with apple's "My Way or highway" approach when it comes to walled garden tax or others, and how much are them from EU..
  • user_7832 3y ago
    It's closer to Ford forcing you to drive only on Ford™ roads or charge your Ford EV at a Ford™ certified $$$ charging station.
• m_a_g 3y ago
  I wonder why the EU is pushing Apple this hard, and not the other gatekeepers. For example, Xbox, Playstation, and Nintendo consoles should now support an external store.
  • makeitdouble 3y ago
    They're not general purpose computers, even if architecturally they could be. Apple amply touted the iPhone's capacities ("there's an app for that") and smartphones are defacto a core component of our lives. The Switch isn't.
    • ggreer 3y ago
      What applications are necessary to call it a general purpose computer? A web browser? A self-hosted development environment? I don't think there's a bright line between what applications a Playstation or Xbox has versus what a phone has. And it's not like the iPhone is the only phone you can get. If Apple is restricting such a core component of our lives, you can simply buy non-Apple products.
      • zarzavat 3y ago
        Games consoles are designed, marketed and used to play games and for similar entertainment purposes. You are not going to do your online banking on an Xbox, or write a letter on a PlayStation, even if the hardware is theoretically capable of that, it’s just not what it’s for.
        • weberer 3y ago
          That's what people said about phones at first too. The Nintendo Switch has the same capabilities with its touchscreen. Its more than capable of taking the place of an iPad.
          • asadotzler 3y ago
            That's what people said about phones and cell phones, not about smartphones and there's a meaningful difference. "Phones" include analog devices that send voltage over copper wires to make sound at each end and they were never nor will ever be capable of use as a general purpose computer, so care with product categories must be taken. The thing my grandfather used first as a child to call across town to his uncle is not the same thing our children are carrying in their pockets to watch TikToks, and any more than a carrier pigeon is a 747.
• ho_schi 3y ago
  Apple isn’t considering that they are the baddies? I suggest strong regulation of the complete BigIT and two chairs for public observers at minimum. In addition they are not allowed to enter any new market. Why? Because it worked well with AT&T. Results: * UNIX * C * Open-Source * Public Documentation Sounds good? Until the Reagan administration appeared, allowed them to split up (Baby Bells), the UNIX-Wars followed, law-suits against BSD and broad incompatibility. And despite this horrible changes we still got: * POSIX * GNU (immediate reaction by FSF - they recognized the situation) * Linux (which caused itself Git) * BSD (TCP/IP) Our information technology builds upon the regulation of AT&T. That was lucky, yes. But you need to prepare luck. The politicians instead opted for Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook and Amazon with near to no regulation at all. Despite we learned that software immediately tends to monopolize due to Vendor Lock-in and mass-effect. What are my benefits of a low billion fine ten years after on of this companies hurt us again? None. Splitting up? See again Vendor Lock-in and mass-effect.
  • eppp 3y ago
    Ironically AT&T is bigger now than it was when it was broken apart.
    • gorjusborg 3y ago
      And AT&T is now just a drop in the ocean of gigantic businesses.
    • kortilla 3y ago
      Size wasn’t the issue, it was being a monopoly. AT&T today has big and small competitors in every space. They used to own the phone in your house.
      • lotsofpulp 3y ago
        In wireless internet, ATT competes with Verizon and T-Mobile. But for fiber internet to the home, ATT is still a monopoly for its customers since there are never 2 fiber ISPs.
• sidcool 3y ago
  People like to crap on EU for decel and regulation. But it's needed in some aspects.
  • justinclift 3y ago
    What's "decel"?
    • user_7832 3y ago
      "decelerationist" apparently. > “Decel” is a derogatory slang word used by the e/acc community. From https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/dont-be-a-decel https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/dont-be-a-decel
      • justinclift 3y ago
        Thanks. :)
        • CatWChainsaw 3y ago
          e/accs think if they aren't free to move fast and break things (and/or people) that the singularity won't happen fast enough and that would be doubleplus ungood.
• bilekas 3y ago
  > We’re providing more flexibility for developers who distribute apps in the European Union (EU), including introducing a new way to distribute apps directly from a developer’s website. They make it sounds like they're being super generous and they've gone out of their way to provide this 'cool new innovation' for us out of their own desire to give back to their customers. You have to really appreciate the spin and shamelessness of some of the large companies. It's genuinely humorous.
  • rrrrrrrrrrrryan 3y ago
    "We're happy to announce the door lock we built now accepts coins"
    • catlikesshrimp 3y ago
      or "We made available for succesful developers a new multi stage door lock. Don't worry, it accepts coins, as the "more secure branded door"
  • pndy 3y ago
    The dichotomy of how real world looks and functions and how it does according to the big corpos is astonishing and terrifying. And this is the yet another example - there's no failure in this rose-tinted corporate world, just a minor difficulty which will be portrayed as a success. Honestly, I'm surprised Apple didn't come up with the overused standard reply #1: "We are excited to announce (...)", or the standard reply #2: "We've been working hard making XYZ experience better for you (...)"
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • bilekas 3y ago
      > he dichotomy of how real world looks and functions and how it does according to the big corpos is astonishing and terrifying. I don't know you, but I feel the same with less words. We're not alone. "You don't need to embrace to understand"
• coolspot 3y ago
  Ok folks, how can we get copy of this DMA thing in the USA? P.S. Apple stockholders downvoting me, lol
  • weberer 3y ago
    Step 1 would be to identify those in government who accept lobbying from Apple. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/apple-inc/summary?id=D000021754 https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/apple-inc/summary?id=D00002...
    • NekkoDroid 3y ago
      You misspelled bribes
• ApolloFortyNine 3y ago
  50 cents an install over 1 million downloads? Every year? Is Apple trying to get fined? They're not even hiding the fact they're maliciously complying. For one, this makes deploying a free app on an alternative store (that becomes popular) simply impossible? I highly doubt that was the EU's intent. Usually with malicious compliance you can at least see the logic for a future legal case. Here, if they were trying to lose a future case I don't think you could do worse.
  • charcircuit 3y ago
    >For one, this makes deploying a free app on an alternative store (that becomes popular) simply impossible? You can monetize it with in app payments or ads such that wealthy people subsidize other users. If the app is from a nonprofit they can get the fee waived.
    • fsniper 3y ago
      This is asking some wealthier users to subsidize Apple, not other users.
    • themoonisachees 3y ago
      Or, and hear me out on this, maybe I want to make useful apps that don't data mine their users and I also would like not to take donations. This is a valid want to have (and I honestly can't believe you would suggest to 'just' sell out your users) and it would take a single app getting popular (or apple just straight up lying, I would have no way of verifying their count) to wipe out all of my capital. It's 'nice' that there exists options to pay for the fee, but realistically the fee shouldn't exist, and it is also illegal.
      • its_ethan 3y ago
        Lucky for you, you are still able to distribute your free app for free on the Apple App Store. No surprise costs if your app becomes incredibly popular, and better still- that's where the vast majority of people will continue to go for getting new apps (regardless of this legislation) so it's free exposure for you as well.
• lawlessone 3y ago
  >Web Distribution, available with a software update later this spring, will let authorized developers distribute their iOS apps to EU users directly from a website owned by the developer. Hmmmm, these feels like its still just apple controlling it.
• rchaud 3y ago
  Apple policies sound more and more like those of a Homeowners' Association with each passing day.
• yashu 3y ago
  Yashu
• justinclift 3y ago
  Sounds like a start. Now, get rid of the damn per-install fee.
• tr33house 3y ago
  Wow! Apple does Apple again. Just carved the exception to the EU market. I was hoping these pushes would stir changes across the globe but I guess the market size is too big especially the US market
• solarkraft 3y ago
  Looks like the DMA is a complete failure considering that the gatekeeper is still involved in the distribution process at all. You see what they'll do when they're allowed to do that. Apple's compliance will always be malicious, so the law may under no circumstance allow them to do that.
  • coconut08 3y ago
    if the eu hits them with enough billion dollar fines eventually they will comply. apple can avoid this by complying the first time, but if they want to give away 10 billion dollars before coming into compliance i'm more than okay with that.
  • latexr 3y ago
    That “complete failure” has already made Apple backtrack on their plans multiple times. It’s absurd, given what has happened in the last few weeks, to think everything is going to stay exactly as is.
• meindnoch 3y ago
  [flagged]
• isodev 3y ago
  Tell me you don’t want to comply with the DMA without saying you don’t want to comply with the DMA.
• tombert 3y ago
  It baffles the mind that having exactly one marketplace with rent-seeking level fees that neither users nor developers can opt out of doesn't violate some kind of antitrust law in the United States. Though it looks like the EU iPhone users are only in a marginally better position.
  • Terretta 3y ago
    Tell your mind it's an appliance/console.* Still baffled? Because nobody seems baffled they can't run arbitrary software on their Amazon Echo Show, AppleTV, Xbox, Playstation, or Switch. * If your mind is struggling with this, you might need a bicycle for the mind to help. ;-) But seriously, Apple's brand and value prop since original Mac has been to toasterize compute and make it friendly approachable and non-fiddly for normals. If you're bent about this, it's a values alignment issue. And Apple should have a right to have a brand proposition that sets them apart from the majority of PDAs, STBs, and PCs.
    • tombert 3y ago
      I don't really know that I agree with the analogy. Yes, you're kind of right, I don't really have a problem with not being able to easily sideload stuff on my oven or dishwasher, despite the fact that they technically have computers in them. They are highly specific, single-purpose things and sideloading Doom on there doesn't really make sense. Even a game console is still more or less single purpose (though that line is being blurred). Historically I don't do much on my console other than playing games, though now I'd argue that that's not necessarily true, since people install a lot of apps in the marketplace (e.g. Netflix). I do have a problem with Apple TV's being locked down, which is why I didn't purchase one. I use Nvidia Shield TVs, largely so that I could sideload ScummVM without any kind of jailbreaking nonsense. However, I'd argue that a smartphone/tablet is different. This isn't the 90's; you use your "phone" for a lot more than taking calls. I have an SSH client, a git client, word processing, web browsing, nearly everything that a 90's-era computer could do on my iPhone; if we're going to say that Microsoft Windows is "general purpose", then iOS/iPadOS qualifies as well. We took Microsoft to court for anticompetitive practices, particularly in regards to the inability to install third-party browsers. You can't really install third party browsers on iOS either. You can install Firefox or Chrome on there (and I do), but they're just frontends for iOS's internal Webkit engine. So I don't know that the appliance comparison works. iPhones are (purposefully) not single-purpose. They're computers.
• Ringz 3y ago
  We need Linux for smartphones.
• dang 3y ago
  Related: https://developer.apple.com/news/ https://developer.apple.com/news/ (via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39678555 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39678555, but we merged that thread hither)
• taylorbuley 3y ago
  Finally something to level the playing field for the little guys... of over 1M annual downloads.
• giancarlostoro 3y ago
  Whats most annoying is that Apple pioneered the idea of PWAs going all the way back to Steve Jobs. I have said many times Tim Cook is a good COO but Apple needs a visionary who wants to innovate. It feels like Apples innovations are not where they could be. They are making some amazing things here and there, but I can only imagine they would be far more innovative with a different CEO.
  • asadotzler 3y ago
    There were mobile devices with large screens and web browsers doing "web apps" years before iPhone. I know because I worked on Gecko browsers for two different OSes on those form factors starting with Pocket PC in 2003-ish all the way through Windows Mobile 5 in 2007ish. We also got running on Maemo with big screen handheld devices in early 2004, collaborating directly with Nokia and that Linux-based OS team. A full Gecko browser worked on multiple big screen 3G mobile communicators doing ajax apps before Gmail invites were a thing, years before iPhone. Apple didn't pioneer here; they fast followed us and others. Heck, we were running Gecko on the iPaq 64MB devices in 2001 and third parties were distributing that in 2002. Not some WAP browser, not some brew joke, but Gecko, the same Gecko that was taking the web by storm with Firefox pre-release versions (and of course Mozilla 1.0 and Netscape 6-7) the same Gecko plus DomI that inspired web apps and ajax to take off in the mid-2000s.Web apps were a thing in 2005 and so were mobile web apps. Joe Hewitt, a co-conspirator of mine on Firefox, who gave us both DOM Inspector and Firebug, was a web app master having built the entire Firefox UI out of XUL, CSS and JavaScript and Mozilla's and Netsape's UIs and themes before that. He wrote iUI, the first ajax framework explicitly for iPhones in the period before Jobs suckered everyone into the App Store and sunk those who'd invested substantially in the promise of web apps that Apple fully abandoned. iPhone was no surprise to us, nor Apple running a powerful browser as an app framework, as we and others had done the same thing with Gecko (Ever see the Mozilla Amazon Browser, an entire Amazon client written on top of Gecko back in 2002-2003 not much different than what we see so many Electron apps today. Multiple books were written on all of this. It's not a secret and yet everyone seems to insist that Apple was the first smartphone with a capable web browser and browser-based apps. They got it right where everyone before had failed in some way, but they were not the pioneers, they were the swift following colonizers that came to pave the cow paths that we and others laid down, only to abandon the suckers who believed they'd keep investing in the web on iOS, something that has only just started to happen in the last couple of years.
• henry2023 3y ago
  At this point the only entente that could make our devices more repairable is the EU. Easy Screen, Battery, and SSD replacements should be mandatory for every desktop computer, laptop, and phone
• goblin89 3y ago
  As a user, I cannot recommend iPhone to my older relatives if there is a way to run arbitrary code beyond Safari’s JS sandbox. Simple as that. It is a nuanced question with a computer[0], but for a phone (increasingly used for more important transactions and sensitive private data by people more naive when it comes to security) it is simply a no-brainer. Unless cyber crime is prosecuted as robustly as robberies, I want this kind of jail to constrain the device. Believe it or not, it is a feature. [0] I do run arbitrary code on my MBP, but then I am a dev who writes code. And, being that, I recently re-enabled the warning for running non-app-store apps on my Mac—I consider myself proficient enough, but perhaps that is exactly why I prefer having to go through an extra warning dialog if it helps reduce the attack surface.
  • SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
    I work across the street from a well-known security research group who has been on HN front page before. Every one of them uses iPhones because they cannot be rooted and are encrypted by default. Venn of old people and at least one group of security professionals.
    • e44858 3y ago
      > cannot be rooted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_jailbreaking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_jailbreaking
      • SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
        Remind me what the bounty is for an iPhone jailbreak right now, would you please?
        • e44858 3y ago
          Can't find prices for a jailbreak, but a zero click full chain exploit with persistence is $2.5M for Android, $2M for iPhone: https://zerodium.com/images/zerodium_prices_mobiles.png https://zerodium.com/images/zerodium_prices_mobiles.png Seems iPhone exploits got cheaper because they're too abundant: https://twitter.com/Zerodium/status/1260541578747064326 https://twitter.com/Zerodium/status/1260541578747064326 Apple has released phones with major vulnerabilities hard-coded in the silicon. When the checkra1n jailbreak was released, the only fix was to buy a new phone because it exploited flaws in the bootrom & secure enclave silicon. https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2019/09/new-ios-exploit-checkm8-allows-permanent-compromise-of-iphones https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2019/09/new-ios-explo... https://checkra.in/news/2020/09/iOS-14-announcement https://checkra.in/news/2020/09/iOS-14-announcement
• aa_is_op 3y ago
  Another case of malicious compliance from a big US corp that is accustomed to literally owning US lawmakers. Good bye! Another company I won't touch anymore.
• codedokode 3y ago
  DMA is absolutely unfair. Why it doesn't include consoles? Why manufacturers are allowed to prevent users from running their software? And Apple isn't. Some animals are more equal than others? Also, it is notable how free market fails to solve the problem: almost 100% of consumers seem to not care about freedom to install any software on their devices.
• runjake 3y ago
  One prerequisite is: "Be a member of good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more, and have an app that had more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year." The realistic part of me thinks this sounds like more resistance to the DMA. Another part of me thinks this will be good for security. Some random can't get a dev account and publish malware payloads on a hidden URL that will happily run on iOS devices, and are installed via a Safari zero day.
  • ThouYS 3y ago
    these zero days are already the status quo?!
• iamleppert 3y ago
  At this point the EU just needs to shut them down completely, or make their business completely unviable.
• somat 3y ago
  The whole app ecosystem(android and apple) is carefully constructed for maximum market owner value extraction, user value is a secondary consideration. Basically, it is what the web would look like if it were developed by corporate interests, conversely "apps" could have been a better designed web[1], but instead are this comparatively clunky gated process where you have to explicitly install the app first only then can you use it. 1. The web was designed to deliver pages, this was well designed, application like functionally grew organically afterwards and is quite the mess.
  • cosmojg 3y ago
    Oh, the tragedy of what could have been: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS
    • fsflover 3y ago
      Mobian, PureOS and pmOS are here today. Sent from my Librem 5.
    • umeshunni 3y ago
      But that would have required someone other than Mozilla to run Firefox
    • ryukafalz 3y ago
      Also MeeGo, which was killed off before it really had a chance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N9
  • catlikesshrimp 3y ago
    To be fair, this evolved naturally. The TI calculators were progamable, my brother used those. Then the pocket pcs (windows ce) had 3rd party programs, those were distributed as files by the publisher. Program stores were webpages were people sold their files. I used the skyscape medical books; you installed the program as usual, then you bought a code specific for your version and file. All that done through a webpage Then we have android. Google had the Marketplace (now playstore) as we know it today, except packages didnt use google services to validate licenses, Many times it was just a package (a file) The main progress was ease of use. Then comes iOS and their extreme BS of not being able to "sideload" "apps" The store is no longer a convenience, it is a requirement. For your safety, of course. The main "progress" here is that they convinced many "Americans" that a commodity affordable phone with a painted cartoon of a bitten apple is "Exclusive", as VIP only. I compare it to the NFT phenomena, except the fruit cartoon did stick.
• MetaverseClub 3y ago
  EU to take security risks on their own?
• noiseinvacuum 3y ago
  Malicious compliance attempt number 2 from Apple. This is clearly not complaint with DMA and there's no way that Apple doesn't know that. The core issue is that Apple doesn't want to give away the absolute god-like control over how apps are distributed on iPhone and they can't be compliant until they let go. I am guessing this is going to get dragged on with 3rd version of Apple policies coming out soon after they get sent back to drawing board by EU.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • CatWChainsaw 3y ago
    They're doing stress tests with the law.
• mrkramer 3y ago
  This is win for Open Web.
• yungporko 3y ago
  so there are zero situations where this could possibly be useful to anybody, nice. so glad we traded PWAs for this.
  • InsomniacL 3y ago
    PWA's were taken away as punishment.
    • yungporko 3y ago
      yep, apple can suck my dick from now on. spend a months wage on one of their shitty bug-ridden phones and get used as a punching bag for apple to vent their frustrations about a bitchy argument with the EU which i didn't even support. dog shit company.
• TheRealPomax 3y ago
  The amount of US attitude for the European market is staggering, and I'll be curious to see how many more fines they get for clearly and intentionally only doing the bare minimum required to be able to claim they're following regulations, with as many roadblocks as possible in place to make sure just enough content passes the bar to go "see? we've done the thing".
• sharkjacobs 3y ago
  It's so fucking embarrassing to be an Apple fan right now. At least Apple Silicon is amazing! Too bad about everything else!
• simonCGN 3y ago
  That is a joke and not different than downloading it from an alternative App Store. Still has to go though Apple notorisation and pay the Apple Tech Fee/tax. No small dev can do that.
• TheArcane 3y ago
  How does someone not in the EU get this? I wonder what Apple's line is to justify not making this open for everyone
  • fstanis 3y ago
    something something security
    • okanat 3y ago
      I think the main point is the theft protection and protection from state. The US and the UK's democratic systems are broken. In the US the social structure is slowly collapsing which increases theft and other petty crimes, at the same time the federal state has a huge surveillance power. Solving the societal and political problems so there is less incentive having your iPhone stolen is hard. Expecting a state-like company to benevolently save you is the way they cope. TBH without the EU, legislation like DMA would also be hard to come up with. The independent countries have less power to exert over American behemoths. This is the nice thing about EU.
• causality0 3y ago
  Root access on personally owned devices in exchange for termination of warranty coverage should be a human right.
  • grishka 3y ago
    Why even terminate the warranty? It's for the hardware. It's a law in many countries that the warranty still applies unless the manufacturer can prove that you yourself broke the device.
• judge2020 3y ago
  I'm willing to make a new phone that only runs code i approve, since iPhones can no longer support this maximum security use case. You must be a journalist or have production access to a F500 company's database (containing PII/PHI) to qualify to purchase the device; I'm sorry if you don't qualify, but I fear the EU might come and force me to break the device security simply if 'too many people' begin to use my device.
  • askonomm 3y ago
    Yeah, I don't get it either. All the Android fanboys seem to be wanting iOS to turn into Android for some reason (what, the blue bubble is so bad?) and I also don't understand how a company that isn't a monopoly (because there is in fact choice in the market) can be dictated to how they run their app distribution. That's akin to telling me, a software consultant, how I should do my software consulting. Maybe the EU will soon tell me what IDE I have to use or I will get fined. Maybe I have to start offering my services on some public forum where everybody can bid on my time equally.
    • asadotzler 3y ago
      people notice when you participate in circle jerks like that
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
• ghusto 3y ago
  The EU shouldn't even bother reacting to this. Just wait out the clock, and start fining day by day for non-compliance. We'll see how many attempts it takes them then.
• nightshadetrie 3y ago
  I feel Apple is on panic mode trying to find a way to avoid opening up. They will most likely lose.
• ben_w 3y ago
  So now we can apparently have arbitrary 3rd party malware on yet another platform (it's not going to get less frequent by virtue of not being on the Apple App Store, is it?), who should I look to for decent, preferably also not battery killing, anti-virus software for iOS?
  • brianwawok 3y ago
    Why can’t you pay your 30% for the App Store?
    • ben_w 3y ago
      Why do you think that response has anything to do with my question?
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
• j45 3y ago
  Oh wow. This would be great to have in North America because I own my phone and stuff.
• userbinator 3y ago
  As someone who never got into the Apple ecosystem, the title is really amusing --- they're announcing it like it's a new feature and it actually comes with a lot of gotchas, when "download apps directly from websites" with absolute freedom has been the norm for just about every other computer in widespread use, for the past few decades.
  • NoPicklez 3y ago
    The average/majority of the population were not going to navigate to shitty mobile websites or desktop websites on their mobile browser to download apps in 2008. If the app store was such a bad place to put apps then why did they boom? Why do people use the Android play store at all if they can sideload, if the need to do so is so highly valued. I do think people forget that when the iPhone app store was released it was a game changer. The whole idea of a single place to download all apps and games was huge for most people including developers. It meant that everything was there, in the one place and managed through that one app. Now a decade has passed and we're asking for change. That's fine, but we can't forget that when the app store first came out there wasn't this hysteria around the need to sideload. The app store as a place for developers to publish their apps was huge, Apple did the publishing for you. How that we all have more choice, we're expecting Apple to change to provide more choice. But we can't forget how beneficial the app store and the "walled" approach was. Now there could be an aspect of predatory behavior by Apple in the way they charge developers etc, but that's where I feel the problem should be tackled.
• docmars 3y ago
  Oh the horror, it must be so hard for Apple to cave to an open system for these people. What will they ever do without their unbelievable tax on app profits simply for existing on their nearly unlimited real estate, that is, the web?! I have no sympathy for their concerns. I can download apps on my MacBook machines all day from many different sources, and it harms no one. While I understand the associated risks, computers have been this way long enough that the free and fair use of software on my devices is far more valuable than the brittle safety a marketplace offers. Apple's greed knows no bounds, and while I'm no big fan of the EU, there are some regulations like these that ensure these big bears in the industry can't abuse their positions for profit, at such unreasonable expense to consumers (not always monetarily, but be it fair access, availability, and choice), and developers especially. If commercial real estate charged XX% cuts of all sales from a business, every business would crumble with enough time, and only the big hitters would succeed with great resentment towards their gracious corporate overlords.
  • endisneigh 3y ago
    I’m very curious how you have this position yet have a MacBook. Why not support a better company like framework?
    • xvector 3y ago
      Because MacBooks are just better. (Have owned both.) I have owned, and continue to own, all sorts of laptops and phones. I could rant about Apple all day long online, but in the end their product is simply superior.
      • philistine 3y ago
        Within the corporate monopolist called Apple, that is to say within the minds of all its collective employees, lies an old idea still warm and vibrant after decades of waning indifference. This idea is called Apple Computer, and it makes the best gosh-darn computers in the world: the Mac. It is such a powerful and self-evident idea that those computers are still above and beyond the best ones in the world, even with all those years of indifference.
• Nevermark 3y ago
  Some specific benefits competitive apps stores could provide (within the general benefits of competition and innovation): 1. The open source app store. The git hub app store. Open source apps easily prepped by developers and installed and updated by regular users. With source and build files. 2. The developer tools app store. Real developer tools on iOS devices. 3. Lower app store vigs. Lower app prices. Allow the lowest cost part of the market to drop prices further. I would love to buy tiny solid 0.25 cent apps without ads. Maker markets without a parasitical Apple tax. 4. The ad free app store. Sorry I even imagined it, it just hurts to think about it. 5. And the no "in-app purchase" store. Only for substantial apps worth paying for up front. Use forever, or choose to pay again for an upgrade you actually want. 6. Children's only app store, with high safety bars of all kinds. Very parent friendly. 7. Formally verified app store. Starts small, but learns. Meantime, more safety than Apple can deliver by one astronomical unit. Pushing Apple to improve its safety MORE. 8. Different kinds of app infrastructure. Streaming apps and games from anyone. Better systems for software versioning, updating, cross-app plug-in mechanisms. 9. One shop app-stores that deliver different kinds of versioning, upgrading, and other kinds of support that Apple doesn't in a coherent manner. 10. The very safe no-code app store. Sorry, app stores with different approaches! Very sandboxed, but very easy for technically literate non-coders to create simple tools for anyone to use. Given the solid sandboxing, and restricted "source", no barriers for anyone to contribute their app. Maker friendly. 11. The novelty developers 1k-byte app store. It's just for fun but how cool would that be. Innovation in efficiency as a game. Other developer app store experiments. Innovation comes from freedom. (Had to turn this list up to 11.) -- None of these inconvenience those who wish to stay on Apple's store. They will only push Apple to increase its selling-point safety futher, while, while dropping anti-innovative self-interested restrictions it has misleadingly defended, like its prohibition on other web engines ("But the safety!"). Any other ideas for app stores that deliver useful differences?
  • boplicity 3y ago
    When the App store was new, the "free" apps were actually free. Now practically all of the "free" apps featured on the app store are not free at all. Half the time you can't even do anything without paying, but you only find this out after going through the hassle of downloading the app. A better app store would make pricing actually clear before you download the app, instead of the nightmare that pretend "free" apps have created.
• talsperre 3y ago
  Hopefully, this leads to a future where ios is a similar platform to Mac OS or Windows. Both are general computing operating systems where you have access to an app store as well as the ability to download arbitrary software from the web.
• computer23 3y ago
  People need to stop using the word "sideloading". It's just loading. The normal behavior is to allow apps to be installed from any source. I noticed Microsoft's developer documentation uses the word sideloading a lot: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/maui/windows/deployment/publish-visual-studio-folder?view=net-maui-8.0 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/maui/windows/deploy...
• 1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago
  Apple is so generous.
• tenlp 3y ago
  So can I download distributed apps through VPN nodes in the EU? If so, that would be great.
  • unstatusthequo 3y ago
    I think your account has to be an EU account, whatever that means. Maybe billing address and other things. But, would be nice if that wasn’t the case. Also, I could be wrong. Try it and let us know?
    • Hamuko 3y ago
      They seem to also be tracking what country you are currently in via the GPS.
• nojvek 3y ago
  Apple’s management and lawyers trying every trick in the book to follow the law by the line but not by spirit. He! I’m sad that EU has to make big tech pay. US antitrust and lawmakers love those sweeeet lobby donations. Corporations run US.
  • fddrdplktrew 3y ago
    [flagged]
• p5v 3y ago
  So, we in the EU will reap the benefits, and everyone else will keep abiding Apple’s rules? How is that not segregation and why is not other country doing anything about it?
• supermatt 3y ago
  One of the conditions to being able to distribute your app in this way: > Be a member of good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more, and have an app that had more than one million first annual installs on iOS in the EU in the prior calendar year. Apple really need to be slapped with another multi-billion dollar fine.
• mavili 3y ago
  Only developers with apps having had one MILLION installs prior year to be allowed. What's the fucking point then?? If an app developer is already distributing apps that popular on App Store, what's the point?? Am I reading this right?
• sifatbinr 3y ago
  [flagged]
• WilhelmHomer 3y ago
  Are there actually any "other" App stores available? It seemed so wildly prohibitive anyway.
• philoinvestor 3y ago
  I first invested in AAPL late 2013, but I wouldn't touch the stock here. I expand on my thoughts in this piece: https://www.philoinvestor.com/p/downside-at-apple-a-10x-in-10-years https://www.philoinvestor.com/p/downside-at-apple-a-10x-in-1... They are increasingly relying on having full control of their ecosystem to maintain their "monopoly", and with all the risks brewing in the horizon - its price is pretty high. People extrapolate the present too much into the future, but much of life does not work that way.
• monooso 3y ago
  Whilst I'm very much on the EU's side of this argument, the prospect of my 89 year-old father being able to download iPad apps from random websites terrifies me. The walled-garden App Store was one of the reasons I got him an iPad in the first place.
  • rickdeckard 3y ago
    In the current proposal even those apps would have to go through vetting of Apple, and apparently selecting them on a webpage would have the device show a summary-page with app-details fetched from an Apple server... It's more like a solution engineered around the headline of allowing direct-downloads, in the end Apple is still heavily involved in the release-process of the app...
• Alifatisk 3y ago
  If Apple manages to get away with this hostile behavior, I’ll actually boycott their products or maybe stick to refurbished apple devices. I’m glad people aren’t falling for their excuses and fights back.
• noiseinvacuum 3y ago
  It’s funny how Apple fans here, and on other forums, dislike the seemingly arbitrary heavy handed gate keeping on Apple by the EU when in fact Apple engages in far extreme level of arbitrary gate keeping and this is somehow loved by the same people.