7 ms·

I hope this will make Apple finally comply with EU law and allow app side loading on iOS. Real side loading, not the joke they implemented since iOS 17.

SanjayMehta 1y ago
I would not hold my breath. They are adept at malicious compliance. Cook will do a cost/benefit assessment and will come up with another workaround.
- londons_explore 1y ago
  The EU should instead set targets. Ie. "More than half of users have installed at least one app from a non-apple affiliated store by Jan 2026 or you shall pay a fine of $10 per month per iPhone in use in the EU".
  - _mlbt 1y ago
    That’s a terrible idea. How would they have any control over that. I think you are way overestimating the amount of iOS users that want to use software from outside the App Store.
    - rokkamokka 1y ago
      Agreed, the only realistic way they could hit such a target is to shut down their own app store...
      - 13_9_7_7_5_18 1y ago
        [dead]
    - londons_explore 1y ago
      If 3rd party stores didn't charge the Apple tax, I think you'd find plenty of apps moving to other stores, and within a matter of weeks more than half of users would have used a 3rd party store.
      - _mlbt 1y ago
        That’s my worst nightmare. On my iPhone I want the equivalent of Spotify, not Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, Max, etc.
        socalgal2 1y ago
        I want the equivalent of a shops in the real world. One shop doesn't carry everything. Even Spotify doesn't carry everything. For one, Apple doesn't allow adult content apps. Steam does. I'm sure there's a market for adult games on iPhone as Steam's success there would seem to suggest. I don't think Apple should be required to sell adult games but I also don't think they should get to dictate that people can't use their phones for adult games. So, more stores would great.
        _mlbt 1y ago
        Why can’t people just buy Android phones that allow for this? They should change, not Apple and their users that like the walled garden.
        guappa 1y ago
        I mean, you realise nobody is going to point a gun at your head and force you to sideload apps right?
        _mlbt 1y ago
        Yeah but these companies will force me to install their garbage third party app stores to install their apps. I really just want one good, properly vetted app store on my phone, is that so hard to understand? If you ever tried out third party app stores on Android you’ll see what I mean. See also the crappy launchers/stores major game publishers try to force on you on PCs.
        sheepdestroyer 1y ago
        It's a bit of a false comparison, since you wouldn't have to pay monthly subscriptions to others stores as you have to for streaming services.
    - socalgal2 1y ago
      That really depends on the store. If Value made a Steam store, or Nintendo made a Nintendo store with Nintendo exclusives I'd expect millions of installs.
      - neilc 1y ago
        Maybe but that is also not within Apple's control.
- StopDisinfo910 1y ago
  > They are adept at malicious compliance. They just got fined 500 millions for failure to comply so I'm not sure adept is the adjective I would use.
  - weavie 1y ago
    500 million is like half a days revenue.
    - mdhb 1y ago
      The actual fines for this moving forward are up to 10% of a companies global revenue. The EU made a big point to say that this is the first time they are issuing those fines and as a result they are smaller than they otherwise would be especially in the case of repeat offenders.
  - serial_dev 1y ago
    Whether it's adept or not depends on what would have happened if they actually complied. Sure, a half a billion fine sounds like a lot, but if you don't have another number to compare against, you can't tell if it was clever or not.
  - _Algernon_ 1y ago
    How much additional profit have they made based on their malicious compliance? I bet it dwarfs this fine.
    - myrmidon 1y ago
      That is not so clear. Appstore revenue is ~ $100 billion/y, but Apple makes less than 30% from that. So the question is: Would more convincing compliance have cost Apple more than single digit percentage decreases in Appstore sales? Comparing the F-Droid vs Playstore situation, this seems unlikely to me.
      - seanmcdirmid 1y ago
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
judge2020 1y ago
Isn't it just in the name of competition, i.e. alternative app stores? Or is sideloading an explicit goal of the EU's efforts?
dmitrygr 1y ago
Generally, as a society, we hold that a contract cannot be modified without both parties’ agreement. When you bought that phone, it was with the completely clear, overt, and in no way uncertain understanding that it does specifically X Y Z, and does not do A B C. Now, without additional payment to the counterparty, you’re demanding your phone do A B C. What am I missing? According to accepted understandings of contracts, how are you possibly in the right? How are you possibly in a position to demand government use force to modify a contract you accepted before to somehow benefit you more at a cost to your counterparty?
- bootsmann 1y ago
  Parts of the contract can be illegal, this is completely within the power of the EU to enforce a crackdown on illegal contracts.
- Sloowms 1y ago
  I'm not sure what society you are referring to but contracts have to adhere to laws in the EU. This is also about software that is being updated. So the transaction is not completed yet. Apple could probably go the route of not providing the update to phones that were sold before the law was voted on/in place. I would guess that would lead to other legal battles.
  - dmitrygr 1y ago
    And is it reasonable that the laws are created after the contract was already agreed to and still apply to it? At least here in the United States, laws are not allowed to make things illegal that happened before the laws were written.
    - makeitdouble 1y ago
      Laws can definitively be retroactive or affect existing contracts. Imagine a world where governments have no power to stop anti-social behavior if it was ever baked into private contracts ? Also the DMA didn't fall from the sky one day and enforced the next. Every business impacted had years to do something about it, and they preferred to play chicken race instead.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

SanjayMehta 1y ago

I would not hold my breath. They are adept at malicious compliance. Cook will do a cost/benefit assessment and will come up with another workaround.

londons_explore 1y ago
The EU should instead set targets. Ie. "More than half of users have installed at least one app from a non-apple affiliated store by Jan 2026 or you shall pay a fine of $10 per month per iPhone in use in the EU".
- _mlbt 1y ago
  That’s a terrible idea. How would they have any control over that. I think you are way overestimating the amount of iOS users that want to use software from outside the App Store.
  - rokkamokka 1y ago
    Agreed, the only realistic way they could hit such a target is to shut down their own app store...
    - 13_9_7_7_5_18 1y ago
      [dead]
  - londons_explore 1y ago
    If 3rd party stores didn't charge the Apple tax, I think you'd find plenty of apps moving to other stores, and within a matter of weeks more than half of users would have used a 3rd party store.
    - _mlbt 1y ago
      That’s my worst nightmare. On my iPhone I want the equivalent of Spotify, not Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, Max, etc.
      - socalgal2 1y ago
        I want the equivalent of a shops in the real world. One shop doesn't carry everything. Even Spotify doesn't carry everything. For one, Apple doesn't allow adult content apps. Steam does. I'm sure there's a market for adult games on iPhone as Steam's success there would seem to suggest. I don't think Apple should be required to sell adult games but I also don't think they should get to dictate that people can't use their phones for adult games. So, more stores would great.
        _mlbt 1y ago
        Why can’t people just buy Android phones that allow for this? They should change, not Apple and their users that like the walled garden.
        guappa 1y ago
        I mean, you realise nobody is going to point a gun at your head and force you to sideload apps right?
        _mlbt 1y ago
        Yeah but these companies will force me to install their garbage third party app stores to install their apps. I really just want one good, properly vetted app store on my phone, is that so hard to understand? If you ever tried out third party app stores on Android you’ll see what I mean. See also the crappy launchers/stores major game publishers try to force on you on PCs.
      - sheepdestroyer 1y ago
        It's a bit of a false comparison, since you wouldn't have to pay monthly subscriptions to others stores as you have to for streaming services.
  - socalgal2 1y ago
    That really depends on the store. If Value made a Steam store, or Nintendo made a Nintendo store with Nintendo exclusives I'd expect millions of installs.
    - neilc 1y ago
      Maybe but that is also not within Apple's control.
StopDisinfo910 1y ago
> They are adept at malicious compliance. They just got fined 500 millions for failure to comply so I'm not sure adept is the adjective I would use.
- weavie 1y ago
  500 million is like half a days revenue.
  - mdhb 1y ago
    The actual fines for this moving forward are up to 10% of a companies global revenue. The EU made a big point to say that this is the first time they are issuing those fines and as a result they are smaller than they otherwise would be especially in the case of repeat offenders.
- serial_dev 1y ago
  Whether it's adept or not depends on what would have happened if they actually complied. Sure, a half a billion fine sounds like a lot, but if you don't have another number to compare against, you can't tell if it was clever or not.
- _Algernon_ 1y ago
  How much additional profit have they made based on their malicious compliance? I bet it dwarfs this fine.
  - myrmidon 1y ago
    That is not so clear. Appstore revenue is ~ $100 billion/y, but Apple makes less than 30% from that. So the question is: Would more convincing compliance have cost Apple more than single digit percentage decreases in Appstore sales? Comparing the F-Droid vs Playstore situation, this seems unlikely to me.
    - seanmcdirmid 1y ago
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

judge2020 1y ago

Isn't it just in the name of competition, i.e. alternative app stores? Or is sideloading an explicit goal of the EU's efforts?

dmitrygr 1y ago

Generally, as a society, we hold that a contract cannot be modified without both parties’ agreement. When you bought that phone, it was with the completely clear, overt, and in no way uncertain understanding that it does specifically X Y Z, and does not do A B C. Now, without additional payment to the counterparty, you’re demanding your phone do A B C. What am I missing? According to accepted understandings of contracts, how are you possibly in the right? How are you possibly in a position to demand government use force to modify a contract you accepted before to somehow benefit you more at a cost to your counterparty?

bootsmann 1y ago
Parts of the contract can be illegal, this is completely within the power of the EU to enforce a crackdown on illegal contracts.
Sloowms 1y ago
I'm not sure what society you are referring to but contracts have to adhere to laws in the EU. This is also about software that is being updated. So the transaction is not completed yet. Apple could probably go the route of not providing the update to phones that were sold before the law was voted on/in place. I would guess that would lead to other legal battles.
- dmitrygr 1y ago
  And is it reasonable that the laws are created after the contract was already agreed to and still apply to it? At least here in the United States, laws are not allowed to make things illegal that happened before the laws were written.
  - makeitdouble 1y ago
    Laws can definitively be retroactive or affect existing contracts. Imagine a world where governments have no power to stop anti-social behavior if it was ever baked into private contracts ? Also the DMA didn't fall from the sky one day and enforced the next. Every business impacted had years to do something about it, and they preferred to play chicken race instead.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]