6 ms·

Original post is from April, but there is an update at the bottom from June: > Got a call from Apple after 2 months. They have decided that iDOS is not a retro

Original post is from April, but there is an update at the bottom from June: > Got a call from Apple after 2 months. They have decided that iDOS is not a retro game console, so the new rule is not applicable. They suggested I make changes and resubmit for review, but when I asked what changes I should make to be compliant, they had no idea, nor when I asked what a retro game console is. We need a DMA over here yesterday.

LeoPanthera 2y ago
The DMA stifles innovation and would make many recent iOS features illegal. Apple Intelligence - points you to Apple Music or Apple Maps as a response to your query? Illegal. iPhone Mirroring - doesn't work with Windows or Android. Illegal. Shareplay screen sharing - doesn't work with Windows or Android. Illegal. There's a reason those features are not getting an EU release.
- doikor 2y ago
  DMA doesn't block Apple from making any of those features. It just makes it illegal for Apple to block others from implementing the same/similar features.
- threeseed 2y ago
  The problem isn't that it's illegal it's that it's unknown. DMA enforcement is about the spirit of the law rather than the clear meaning and so everything is vague and subjective. And with the fines being so ridiculously large it's not worth the risk.
  - troupo 2y ago
    1. Every law has the spirit of the law. Otherwise you wouldn't need courts to interpret laws, and no law would ever be made because it would have to describe every single permutation of every single possible human endeavour 2. Fines are capped at high numbers. It doesn't mean you will be immediately slapped with one. Stop perpetuating this bullshit. The law says up to, not just this fine and that's it. EU especially doesn't like fining companies. The usual process in the EU is "please fix this -> please fix that -> minor fine -> greater fine if persisting in breaking the law -> even greater fine -> ..."
- infotainment 2y ago
  Honestly, good. If Apple can't make those features interoperable, then they shouldn't exist at all. With Apple's size and access to development resources, there is absolutely no excuse for them other than greed.
  - INGSOCIALITE 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - HumblyTossed 2y ago
      > why the fuck should a government have the right to tell a company what they can and can't do with their product?! I mean, do we really need to enumerate the reasons for you? Next you will think it's okay for someone to manufacture a car that can't be opened when the 12V battery dies.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
      I think the issue is that of scope. Apple is not a mom and pop store, where you can just take your business elsewhere if you are unhappy. It is a global entity with means just to capture the market, but to dictate terms to it ( and by extension to its other participants ). We are now in a position where we effectively have two options ( Apple and Android ) and they both suck in their own special ways ( yes, we also have Purism and wossname, but last time I checked, neither is a decent daily driver ). To address your main point, in theory at least, as a society, we should be able to tell government that something is not cool and address it as needed. The good news for Apple and most oligopolies now is that neither society or government can agree on.. anything really.
      - lynx23 2y ago
        > neither society or government can agree on.. anything really. I believe what you describe is called democracy. The counterpart of which, where everyone "agreees" is totalitarian.
    - kelnos 2y ago
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  I'm pretty skeptical of your list, but in general they can easily support interoperability and if they choose not to it's not the fault of the law.
- lolinder 2y ago
  > Apple Intelligence - points you to Apple Music or Apple Maps as a response to your query? Illegal. There's a very trivial solution here that Apple already applies to password managers and Android applies to a bunch of things: allow the user to pick a Music and a Maps app.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    They even talked about letting in others such as Gemini in the very keynote in which they introduced the ChatGPT integration!
- lxgr 2y ago
  None of these seem like they're impossible for a company the size of Apple to provide open APIs for. They have even already hinted at that for Apple Intelligence! Siri has supported playing music on apps other than just Apple Music for a while now too (after taking their time with it for obvious reasons, which I found infuriating as a Spotify user).
- HumblyTossed 2y ago
  > The DMA stifles innovation Real innovation would be for iOS devices to be interoperable with non-Apple technology.
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
  Does the DMA mandate that they actually implement extra apps/features, or just provide the API surface for others to do so? Like, just to pick the first one on your list - any reason they can't just let it point at an arbitrary app that's tagged as providing music (and, I presume, that implements some standard API to query songs or w/e). Does the law really want Apple to integrate with ex. Spotify, or just make it possible for Spotify to integrate the same way as Apple's own music app?
- kelnos 2y ago
  That's fine. If they can't implement features in a way that doesn't stifle competition or create vendor lock-in, then they don't get to implement those features. I think that's a totally reasonable consequence of the DMA, if true.
- dmz73 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - andybak 2y ago
    Your point would have been more persuasive if you'd eased off on the caps lock.
    - phone8675309 2y ago
      [flagged]
Shank 2y ago
> We need a DMA over here yesterday. I understand why you would believe this, but Apple currently refuses to notarize UTM for distribution outside of the App Store via Notarization under rule 2.5.2: > UTM also noted that Apple is barring UTM SE from being notarized for third-party app stores because the app apparently violated guideline 2.5.2. That rule states that apps have to be self-contained and can’t execute code “which introduces or changes features or functionality of the app, including other apps.” [0] While the DMA may eventually force Apple to slide on this rule, currently it doesn't actually solve the problem at-hand. [0]: https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/24/24185066/apple-pc-dos-emulators-ios-rejection https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/24/24185066/apple-pc-dos-emu...
- infotainment 2y ago
  Let's hope it forces their hand. Either way, it shows that there is room for improvement to the DMA language to prohibit that type of behavior explicitly, which other countries could address in their DMA versions.
- lxgr 2y ago
  > apps have to be self-contained and can’t execute code “which introduces or changes features or functionality of the app, including other apps.” Meanwhile, on the very same app store: iSH – runs unmodified x86 Linux binaries and even supports custom APK repos: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ish-shell/id1436902243 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ish-shell/id1436902243 a-Shell – runs WASI binaries (via Apple's native out-of-process runtime, so it even gets to JIT, I believe!) and comes with a C compiler, as well as Python: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/a-shell/id1473805438 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/a-shell/id1473805438 LibTerm – compiles and runs arbitrary C via lldb: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/libterm/id1380911705 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/libterm/id1380911705 But yeah, sure these are all somehow self-contained in a way that a DOS emulator can't possibly be in a way only App Store reviewers are enlightened enough to grasp.
  - p_l 2y ago
    Apple has been well known to be absolutely obtuse, random, and not reliable when it comes to approvals for over 12 years now[1], at least unless you're a big company and can hound someone in upper management about it. It's a good reason why, for a lot of people, claims about Apple walled garden being such a privacy and security boon fall flat[2]. For all purposes, it's as capricious as other companies inscrutable "AI" systems. [1] Back in 2011, when I tried my hand at the startup roulette, I remember meeting companies which due to bad experience decided that Apple market is not worth possibility of going bankrupt because approvals might suddenly get denied so late in the process to kill the project [2] I remember how, before MS started submitting their own applications to AppStore/MAS, searching for certain microsoft products like a naive user got you a ton of scams that might be threading the needle on Apple rules - but not on intent.
isodev 2y ago
Indeed, the entire app store review is just a facade for Apple's market grabbing practices. I'm more than happy the EU is taking steps to address this. I really wish folks in the US would step back for a second and stop defending the corporation with "end to end" control of their life.
curiousdeadcat 2y ago
Yeah, it's crazy there's no other options, like a platform that openly allows sideloading. Its terrible that were all forced to buy Apple products, especially when this behavior from them is just so surprising. /s in case.

LeoPanthera 2y ago

The DMA stifles innovation and would make many recent iOS features illegal. Apple Intelligence - points you to Apple Music or Apple Maps as a response to your query? Illegal. iPhone Mirroring - doesn't work with Windows or Android. Illegal. Shareplay screen sharing - doesn't work with Windows or Android. Illegal. There's a reason those features are not getting an EU release.

doikor 2y ago
DMA doesn't block Apple from making any of those features. It just makes it illegal for Apple to block others from implementing the same/similar features.
threeseed 2y ago
The problem isn't that it's illegal it's that it's unknown. DMA enforcement is about the spirit of the law rather than the clear meaning and so everything is vague and subjective. And with the fines being so ridiculously large it's not worth the risk.
- troupo 2y ago
  1. Every law has the spirit of the law. Otherwise you wouldn't need courts to interpret laws, and no law would ever be made because it would have to describe every single permutation of every single possible human endeavour 2. Fines are capped at high numbers. It doesn't mean you will be immediately slapped with one. Stop perpetuating this bullshit. The law says up to, not just this fine and that's it. EU especially doesn't like fining companies. The usual process in the EU is "please fix this -> please fix that -> minor fine -> greater fine if persisting in breaking the law -> even greater fine -> ..."
infotainment 2y ago
Honestly, good. If Apple can't make those features interoperable, then they shouldn't exist at all. With Apple's size and access to development resources, there is absolutely no excuse for them other than greed.
- INGSOCIALITE 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - HumblyTossed 2y ago
    > why the fuck should a government have the right to tell a company what they can and can't do with their product?! I mean, do we really need to enumerate the reasons for you? Next you will think it's okay for someone to manufacture a car that can't be opened when the 12V battery dies.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
    I think the issue is that of scope. Apple is not a mom and pop store, where you can just take your business elsewhere if you are unhappy. It is a global entity with means just to capture the market, but to dictate terms to it ( and by extension to its other participants ). We are now in a position where we effectively have two options ( Apple and Android ) and they both suck in their own special ways ( yes, we also have Purism and wossname, but last time I checked, neither is a decent daily driver ). To address your main point, in theory at least, as a society, we should be able to tell government that something is not cool and address it as needed. The good news for Apple and most oligopolies now is that neither society or government can agree on.. anything really.
    - lynx23 2y ago
      > neither society or government can agree on.. anything really. I believe what you describe is called democracy. The counterpart of which, where everyone "agreees" is totalitarian.
  - kelnos 2y ago
Dylan16807 2y ago
I'm pretty skeptical of your list, but in general they can easily support interoperability and if they choose not to it's not the fault of the law.
lolinder 2y ago
> Apple Intelligence - points you to Apple Music or Apple Maps as a response to your query? Illegal. There's a very trivial solution here that Apple already applies to password managers and Android applies to a bunch of things: allow the user to pick a Music and a Maps app.
- lxgr 2y ago
  They even talked about letting in others such as Gemini in the very keynote in which they introduced the ChatGPT integration!
lxgr 2y ago
None of these seem like they're impossible for a company the size of Apple to provide open APIs for. They have even already hinted at that for Apple Intelligence! Siri has supported playing music on apps other than just Apple Music for a while now too (after taking their time with it for obvious reasons, which I found infuriating as a Spotify user).
HumblyTossed 2y ago
> The DMA stifles innovation Real innovation would be for iOS devices to be interoperable with non-Apple technology.
yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
Does the DMA mandate that they actually implement extra apps/features, or just provide the API surface for others to do so? Like, just to pick the first one on your list - any reason they can't just let it point at an arbitrary app that's tagged as providing music (and, I presume, that implements some standard API to query songs or w/e). Does the law really want Apple to integrate with ex. Spotify, or just make it possible for Spotify to integrate the same way as Apple's own music app?
kelnos 2y ago
That's fine. If they can't implement features in a way that doesn't stifle competition or create vendor lock-in, then they don't get to implement those features. I think that's a totally reasonable consequence of the DMA, if true.
dmz73 2y ago
[flagged]
- andybak 2y ago
  Your point would have been more persuasive if you'd eased off on the caps lock.
  - phone8675309 2y ago
    [flagged]

Shank 2y ago

> We need a DMA over here yesterday. I understand why you would believe this, but Apple currently refuses to notarize UTM for distribution outside of the App Store via Notarization under rule 2.5.2: > UTM also noted that Apple is barring UTM SE from being notarized for third-party app stores because the app apparently violated guideline 2.5.2. That rule states that apps have to be self-contained and can’t execute code “which introduces or changes features or functionality of the app, including other apps.” [0] While the DMA may eventually force Apple to slide on this rule, currently it doesn't actually solve the problem at-hand. [0]: https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/24/24185066/apple-pc-dos-emulators-ios-rejection https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/24/24185066/apple-pc-dos-emu...

infotainment 2y ago
Let's hope it forces their hand. Either way, it shows that there is room for improvement to the DMA language to prohibit that type of behavior explicitly, which other countries could address in their DMA versions.
lxgr 2y ago
> apps have to be self-contained and can’t execute code “which introduces or changes features or functionality of the app, including other apps.” Meanwhile, on the very same app store: iSH – runs unmodified x86 Linux binaries and even supports custom APK repos: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ish-shell/id1436902243 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ish-shell/id1436902243 a-Shell – runs WASI binaries (via Apple's native out-of-process runtime, so it even gets to JIT, I believe!) and comes with a C compiler, as well as Python: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/a-shell/id1473805438 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/a-shell/id1473805438 LibTerm – compiles and runs arbitrary C via lldb: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/libterm/id1380911705 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/libterm/id1380911705 But yeah, sure these are all somehow self-contained in a way that a DOS emulator can't possibly be in a way only App Store reviewers are enlightened enough to grasp.
- p_l 2y ago
  Apple has been well known to be absolutely obtuse, random, and not reliable when it comes to approvals for over 12 years now[1], at least unless you're a big company and can hound someone in upper management about it. It's a good reason why, for a lot of people, claims about Apple walled garden being such a privacy and security boon fall flat[2]. For all purposes, it's as capricious as other companies inscrutable "AI" systems. [1] Back in 2011, when I tried my hand at the startup roulette, I remember meeting companies which due to bad experience decided that Apple market is not worth possibility of going bankrupt because approvals might suddenly get denied so late in the process to kill the project [2] I remember how, before MS started submitting their own applications to AppStore/MAS, searching for certain microsoft products like a naive user got you a ton of scams that might be threading the needle on Apple rules - but not on intent.

isodev 2y ago

Indeed, the entire app store review is just a facade for Apple's market grabbing practices. I'm more than happy the EU is taking steps to address this. I really wish folks in the US would step back for a second and stop defending the corporation with "end to end" control of their life.

curiousdeadcat 2y ago

Yeah, it's crazy there's no other options, like a platform that openly allows sideloading. Its terrible that were all forced to buy Apple products, especially when this behavior from them is just so surprising. /s in case.