8 ms·

People keep mentioning Wi-Fi Aware with this, but so far haven't seen anyone actually prove that this is the case. Apple undoubtedly added Wi-Fi Aware support

People keep mentioning Wi-Fi Aware with this, but so far haven't seen anyone actually prove that this is the case. Apple undoubtedly added Wi-Fi Aware support to iOS https://developer.apple.com/documentation/WiFiAware https://developer.apple.com/documentation/WiFiAware, but its not clear whether iOS actually supports AirDrop over Wi-Fi Aware. Apple clearly hasn't completely dropped AWDL for AirDrop, because you can still AirDrop from iOS 26 to earlier devices. Note that the Ars Technica article never directly makes the claim that Apple supports Airdrop over Wi-Fi Aware. The title is two independent statements - "The EU made Apple adopt new Wi-Fi standards, and now Android can support AirDrop" - that's true. > Google doesn’t mention it in either Quick Share post, but if you’re wondering why it’s suddenly possible for Quick Share to work with AirDrop, it can almost certainly be credited to European Union regulations imposed under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Again, they're just theorising. They never directly make the claim. Would love on Hacker News for someone to do some Hacking and actually figure it out for real!

internet2000 11mo ago
It's frustrating how much people want this to be an EU win they'll fabricate evidence. The same happened with RCS in iOS, everybody jumped in to credit it to the EU, when you can find the document spelling out how RCS is a requirement for China.
- echelon 11mo ago
  I don't care which sovereign state or union forces the trillion dollar tech giant to behave. I'm just glad it happened. And I applaud China if this was their victory. I want it to happen with a thousand times more intensity for Apple and Google. We should own these devices. We shouldn't be subsistence farmers on the most important device category in the world. They need to be opened up to competition, standards, right to repair, privacy, web app installs, browser choice, messaging, etc. etc. They shouldn't be strong arming tiny developers or the entire automotive industry. It's vastly unfair. And this strip mining impacts us as consumers.
  - nozzlegear 11mo ago
    > They shouldn't be strong arming [...] the entire automotive industry. Yes they should, the automotive industry is much shittier. I have a 23 Chevy Bolt EUV with wireless CarPlay. Chevy/GM have been emailing and snail mailing me relentlessly trying to get me to pay for their $150 update to my car's navigation maps, which no longer work in my vehicle (presumably because they're out of date). This is quite the deal, according to their marketing materials, but I won't be paying for it because I've never used those maps thanks to CarPlay. With all this emphasis they're putting on upselling these $150 map updates, it doesn't take a genius to understand why GM is no longer making vehicles with CarPlay or Android Auto.
    - echelon 11mo ago
      > With all this emphasis they're putting on upselling these $150 map updates, it doesn't take a genius to understand why GM is no longer making vehicles with CarPlay or Android Auto. Because cars are a low margin, high capital business with ruthless competition. Because a trillion dollar duopoly gets to spend a billion dollars on mapping software and give it away completely for free as part of an ecosystem / platform play, which they then use to strong arm automotive manufacturers. If you had to bear the true cost, it would be $150. More car companies should ban Apple and Google. Fuck Apple and Google. They are not the heroes in this story. They're not Robin Hood here, even if that's what they're masquerading as. They're the child-enslaving "Land of Toys" from Pinocchio - they're using you and lured you in with a promise of freedom, but they have an ulterior motive. All of that "freedom" just gets added to the purchase price of your car, and you don't even realize it. You also get Google ads for McDonalds and shit.
      - ralph84 11mo ago
        The EU mindset in a nutshell. It doesn’t matter how shitty and expensive the solution is, as long as they get to say they owned big tech.
        echelon 11mo ago
- yieldcrv 11mo ago
  There is very little literature about Chinese requirements rolled out and when there is, its talked about as American tech companies bowing to an authoritarian regime as opposed to fighting a burgeoning market force acting on behalf of consumers and the American tech companies losing that fight the latter is how the EU work is syndicated in between is that there likely is no fight with Chinese regulators alongside an unwillingness to alter access to that market
- gmueckl 11mo ago
  Don't forget that Apple is feeling sore and playing the petulant child in their PR regarding EU regulations, especially regarding the digital markets act. They don't want to appear to give in the EU, so I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Apple doesn't want to admit that the EU forced them.
- matwood 11mo ago
  Same with usb-c when Apple was one of the main drivers of usb-c adoption.
  - monocasa 11mo ago
    Apple had to be dragged kicking and screaming into supporting usb-c on the truly mobile devices.
    - matwood 11mo ago
      Apple was clearly moving towards usbc (which they helped develop). Their laptops and iPad pros had moved along with the pro phones. To think the EU the reason usbc came to the iPhone is ignoring the clear path Apple was on. At best they put it in the rest of the phone line a generation early. Any fight that Apple put up was performative and them not wanting any sort of precedence to be set.
      - monocasa 11mo ago
        Their laptops never had lightning, so there was no "moving along". And iPad Pros moved because they're trying to create a product niche that people use like a laptop/desktop, but where Apple actually gets that sweet, sweet App Store money for all software on the device. In that niche, people expect actual expandibility to access stuff like large disk storage, and the App Store money greatly outweighs the patent money from lightning. If apple had planned to drop lightning, we wouldn't still have rhe crappy USB2 controllers backing that port on those SoCs that would still would have been under development when the EU decision came down.
    - mmmlinux 11mo ago
      I remember when usb c first came out and Apple went all in on their laptops and everyone was pissed about that. So much complaining about adapter dongles. So pissed that apple had to bring back the MagSafe connector instead of straight usb c for charging.
      - 11mo ago
- miladyincontrol 11mo ago
  Imo kinda same about usb-c on iphone. The writing was on the wall that they were transitioning devices away from lightning to usb-c, a standard they too had their hands in. Especially so when wanting to position the pro model iphones as professional cameras with external storage capable of doing decent levels of prores to boot, they werent about to make lightning ssds to do the job. The only thing perhaps expedited was the push to have it on base model iphones sooner.
tech234a 11mo ago
I'm fairly sure the article is wrong. For example, someone found strings in Google's implementation that mentioned AWDL: https://social.treehouse.systems/@nicolas17/115584732339035177 https://social.treehouse.systems/@nicolas17/1155847323390351... Also people have mentioned having success Airdropping to macOS devices, which are not listed as being supported on the Wi-Fi Aware page.
- Aloisius 11mo ago
  Yeah, people have confirmed it works with iOS 15, so it seems more likely that Google implemented AWDL.
- est 11mo ago
  > macOS devices, which are not listed as being supported on the Wi-Fi Aware page. Not listed, but shipped with some Wifi Aware library /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DeviceToDeviceManager.framework/Plugins/WiFiAwareD2DPlugin.bundle
  - varenc 11mo ago
    Just `tcpdump -i awdl0` while Airdrop-ing to a Mac to observe it's still using AWDL. (unless the interface named awdl0 is actually using WiFi Aware...) Another fun thing to do: `ping6 ff02::1%awdl0`. Pings all nearby Apple devices with AWDL active. Including things like your neighbor's phone that's not even on your local network. (but addresses rotate I believe so can't track persistently)
    - darkwater 11mo ago
      > (but addresses rotate I believe so can't track persistently) But maybe you can infer presence tracking the response time? Could be exploited anyway, no?
      - varenc 11mo ago
        yes! I've had the same thought. If you have only one neighbor in range, seems like you could definitely infer their presence and approximate range based on latency. Phones don't keep AWDL active all the time, but every time you swipe control center it perks up I think. Could also detect when someone is hosting a party or something.
isodev 11mo ago
It’s funny how we’re all trying to piece together the stack from bits and obscure clues. Would be so cool if Apple and Google finally embrace their role as “essential public infrastructure” and release their specs, interoperate, etc.. so one doesn’t end up trapped one way or another when picking a personal device.
- Longhanks 11mo ago
  > "essential public infrastructure" If people wanted these devices and services to be public infrastructure, they should be developed and maintained using public funds.
  - pjc50 11mo ago
    Once something becomes so widely used that almost everyone has one, the public interest is involved. In the same way that cars are essential public infrastructure and have to comply with public safety standards, interoperable fuel nozzles, etc.
    - isodev 11mo ago
      Indeed, especially with heavy vertical integration - when a company is both the phone, the tv, the tablet, the music, the headphones, the watch, the glasses, etc... they all become subject to the expectation that I as a citizen can change my mind and pickup a different brand of glasses and be able to move my data or use it with my phone of choice.
    - LexGray 11mo ago
      Public interest does not seem to be the driving factor. Everyone owns kitchen appliances and even if there is network support it generally requires a specific app that is out of support very early in the device lifetime. Vehicles barely support operability with phones at all and there is no standard UI or phone side vehicle monitoring. At least personally I would like enforced open device standards on home appliances and vehicles far before I care about something like AirDrop that has work arounds.
ulfw 11mo ago
Apple usually gatekeeps their EU required features with a strong region lock. If Airdrop was changed to use Wifi-Aware due to EU regulation it very likely wouldn't be enabled worldwide.
quitit 11mo ago
If the EU forced Apple to adopt Wi-Fi Aware then Apple would just fence it to EU users. The attempt of trying to paint this as a powerplay by the EU is tenuous: - Apple, along with Microsoft and Intel are founding members of the Wi-Fi Alliance, whose objective was to introduce a standard of interoperability through Wi-Fi Aware.1 - This work commenced long before the EU showed any interest in regulating tech. - Apple have a pretty solid history of fencing EU-mandated changes to EU devices. - Microsoft's Windows, also deemed by the EU as a "gatekeeper" hasn't deployed Wi-Fi Aware in Windows. With no public plans to do so.2 1. https://www.washingtoninformer.com/wi-fi-aware-aims-to-connect-all-your-devices-instantly/ https://www.washingtoninformer.com/wi-fi-aware-aims-to-conne... 2. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/2284386/does-windows-have-plans-to-support-wifi-aware https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/2284386/...
- madeofpalk 11mo ago
  Apple _did_ adopt and support Wi-Fi Aware as a protocol iOS supports. It just doesn’t use it for AirDrop.
  - quitit 11mo ago
    I never said they didn't. They did, they announced they would, and it's now shipped. This entire thread is about whether or not they were forced to do so by the EU. As another dot point: We also don't have Margrethe Vestager or Thierry Breton (or other EU figures) doing a victory lap on social media as they usually do.

internet2000 11mo ago

It's frustrating how much people want this to be an EU win they'll fabricate evidence. The same happened with RCS in iOS, everybody jumped in to credit it to the EU, when you can find the document spelling out how RCS is a requirement for China.

echelon 11mo ago
I don't care which sovereign state or union forces the trillion dollar tech giant to behave. I'm just glad it happened. And I applaud China if this was their victory. I want it to happen with a thousand times more intensity for Apple and Google. We should own these devices. We shouldn't be subsistence farmers on the most important device category in the world. They need to be opened up to competition, standards, right to repair, privacy, web app installs, browser choice, messaging, etc. etc. They shouldn't be strong arming tiny developers or the entire automotive industry. It's vastly unfair. And this strip mining impacts us as consumers.
- nozzlegear 11mo ago
  > They shouldn't be strong arming [...] the entire automotive industry. Yes they should, the automotive industry is much shittier. I have a 23 Chevy Bolt EUV with wireless CarPlay. Chevy/GM have been emailing and snail mailing me relentlessly trying to get me to pay for their $150 update to my car's navigation maps, which no longer work in my vehicle (presumably because they're out of date). This is quite the deal, according to their marketing materials, but I won't be paying for it because I've never used those maps thanks to CarPlay. With all this emphasis they're putting on upselling these $150 map updates, it doesn't take a genius to understand why GM is no longer making vehicles with CarPlay or Android Auto.
  - echelon 11mo ago
    > With all this emphasis they're putting on upselling these $150 map updates, it doesn't take a genius to understand why GM is no longer making vehicles with CarPlay or Android Auto. Because cars are a low margin, high capital business with ruthless competition. Because a trillion dollar duopoly gets to spend a billion dollars on mapping software and give it away completely for free as part of an ecosystem / platform play, which they then use to strong arm automotive manufacturers. If you had to bear the true cost, it would be $150. More car companies should ban Apple and Google. Fuck Apple and Google. They are not the heroes in this story. They're not Robin Hood here, even if that's what they're masquerading as. They're the child-enslaving "Land of Toys" from Pinocchio - they're using you and lured you in with a promise of freedom, but they have an ulterior motive. All of that "freedom" just gets added to the purchase price of your car, and you don't even realize it. You also get Google ads for McDonalds and shit.
    - ralph84 11mo ago
      The EU mindset in a nutshell. It doesn’t matter how shitty and expensive the solution is, as long as they get to say they owned big tech.
      - echelon 11mo ago
yieldcrv 11mo ago
There is very little literature about Chinese requirements rolled out and when there is, its talked about as American tech companies bowing to an authoritarian regime as opposed to fighting a burgeoning market force acting on behalf of consumers and the American tech companies losing that fight the latter is how the EU work is syndicated in between is that there likely is no fight with Chinese regulators alongside an unwillingness to alter access to that market
gmueckl 11mo ago
Don't forget that Apple is feeling sore and playing the petulant child in their PR regarding EU regulations, especially regarding the digital markets act. They don't want to appear to give in the EU, so I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Apple doesn't want to admit that the EU forced them.
matwood 11mo ago
Same with usb-c when Apple was one of the main drivers of usb-c adoption.
- monocasa 11mo ago
  Apple had to be dragged kicking and screaming into supporting usb-c on the truly mobile devices.
  - matwood 11mo ago
    Apple was clearly moving towards usbc (which they helped develop). Their laptops and iPad pros had moved along with the pro phones. To think the EU the reason usbc came to the iPhone is ignoring the clear path Apple was on. At best they put it in the rest of the phone line a generation early. Any fight that Apple put up was performative and them not wanting any sort of precedence to be set.
    - monocasa 11mo ago
      Their laptops never had lightning, so there was no "moving along". And iPad Pros moved because they're trying to create a product niche that people use like a laptop/desktop, but where Apple actually gets that sweet, sweet App Store money for all software on the device. In that niche, people expect actual expandibility to access stuff like large disk storage, and the App Store money greatly outweighs the patent money from lightning. If apple had planned to drop lightning, we wouldn't still have rhe crappy USB2 controllers backing that port on those SoCs that would still would have been under development when the EU decision came down.
  - mmmlinux 11mo ago
    I remember when usb c first came out and Apple went all in on their laptops and everyone was pissed about that. So much complaining about adapter dongles. So pissed that apple had to bring back the MagSafe connector instead of straight usb c for charging.
    - 11mo ago
miladyincontrol 11mo ago
Imo kinda same about usb-c on iphone. The writing was on the wall that they were transitioning devices away from lightning to usb-c, a standard they too had their hands in. Especially so when wanting to position the pro model iphones as professional cameras with external storage capable of doing decent levels of prores to boot, they werent about to make lightning ssds to do the job. The only thing perhaps expedited was the push to have it on base model iphones sooner.

tech234a 11mo ago

I'm fairly sure the article is wrong. For example, someone found strings in Google's implementation that mentioned AWDL: https://social.treehouse.systems/@nicolas17/115584732339035177 https://social.treehouse.systems/@nicolas17/1155847323390351... Also people have mentioned having success Airdropping to macOS devices, which are not listed as being supported on the Wi-Fi Aware page.

Aloisius 11mo ago
Yeah, people have confirmed it works with iOS 15, so it seems more likely that Google implemented AWDL.
est 11mo ago
> macOS devices, which are not listed as being supported on the Wi-Fi Aware page. Not listed, but shipped with some Wifi Aware library /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DeviceToDeviceManager.framework/Plugins/WiFiAwareD2DPlugin.bundle
- varenc 11mo ago
  Just `tcpdump -i awdl0` while Airdrop-ing to a Mac to observe it's still using AWDL. (unless the interface named awdl0 is actually using WiFi Aware...) Another fun thing to do: `ping6 ff02::1%awdl0`. Pings all nearby Apple devices with AWDL active. Including things like your neighbor's phone that's not even on your local network. (but addresses rotate I believe so can't track persistently)
  - darkwater 11mo ago
    > (but addresses rotate I believe so can't track persistently) But maybe you can infer presence tracking the response time? Could be exploited anyway, no?
    - varenc 11mo ago
      yes! I've had the same thought. If you have only one neighbor in range, seems like you could definitely infer their presence and approximate range based on latency. Phones don't keep AWDL active all the time, but every time you swipe control center it perks up I think. Could also detect when someone is hosting a party or something.

isodev 11mo ago

It’s funny how we’re all trying to piece together the stack from bits and obscure clues. Would be so cool if Apple and Google finally embrace their role as “essential public infrastructure” and release their specs, interoperate, etc.. so one doesn’t end up trapped one way or another when picking a personal device.

Longhanks 11mo ago
> "essential public infrastructure" If people wanted these devices and services to be public infrastructure, they should be developed and maintained using public funds.
- pjc50 11mo ago
  Once something becomes so widely used that almost everyone has one, the public interest is involved. In the same way that cars are essential public infrastructure and have to comply with public safety standards, interoperable fuel nozzles, etc.
  - isodev 11mo ago
    Indeed, especially with heavy vertical integration - when a company is both the phone, the tv, the tablet, the music, the headphones, the watch, the glasses, etc... they all become subject to the expectation that I as a citizen can change my mind and pickup a different brand of glasses and be able to move my data or use it with my phone of choice.
  - LexGray 11mo ago
    Public interest does not seem to be the driving factor. Everyone owns kitchen appliances and even if there is network support it generally requires a specific app that is out of support very early in the device lifetime. Vehicles barely support operability with phones at all and there is no standard UI or phone side vehicle monitoring. At least personally I would like enforced open device standards on home appliances and vehicles far before I care about something like AirDrop that has work arounds.

ulfw 11mo ago

Apple usually gatekeeps their EU required features with a strong region lock. If Airdrop was changed to use Wifi-Aware due to EU regulation it very likely wouldn't be enabled worldwide.

quitit 11mo ago

If the EU forced Apple to adopt Wi-Fi Aware then Apple would just fence it to EU users. The attempt of trying to paint this as a powerplay by the EU is tenuous: - Apple, along with Microsoft and Intel are founding members of the Wi-Fi Alliance, whose objective was to introduce a standard of interoperability through Wi-Fi Aware.1 - This work commenced long before the EU showed any interest in regulating tech. - Apple have a pretty solid history of fencing EU-mandated changes to EU devices. - Microsoft's Windows, also deemed by the EU as a "gatekeeper" hasn't deployed Wi-Fi Aware in Windows. With no public plans to do so.2 1. https://www.washingtoninformer.com/wi-fi-aware-aims-to-connect-all-your-devices-instantly/ https://www.washingtoninformer.com/wi-fi-aware-aims-to-conne... 2. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/2284386/does-windows-have-plans-to-support-wifi-aware https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/2284386/...

madeofpalk 11mo ago
Apple _did_ adopt and support Wi-Fi Aware as a protocol iOS supports. It just doesn’t use it for AirDrop.
- quitit 11mo ago
  I never said they didn't. They did, they announced they would, and it's now shipped. This entire thread is about whether or not they were forced to do so by the EU. As another dot point: We also don't have Margrethe Vestager or Thierry Breton (or other EU figures) doing a victory lap on social media as they usually do.