Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It was and is a façade - especially considering they are allowing by way of enterprise certificates that subverts this security/privacy aspect.
The facade is focusing on the mobile app market as if it's the place where prices are too high. One of the reasons that smartphones and mobile apps became popular with consumers is because the prices were generally bargains compared to the desktop/laptop market and the functions that consumer level users liked on desktop/laptop were present in the apps on mobile.
 
No one was stopping you from buying an Android this entire time.

You chose to embrace the walled garden by buying Apple. Now all of us are going to be forced to endure multiple different app sources with varying and unknown security.
If you buy android, you’re willingly embracing the spyware. No one would be stopping you buying an iPhone instead, etc.

Some of us want neither lock-in nor spyware. However, I’d be happy to compromise with apple so they can continue to limit side loading but they have to accept any apparently legal app that meets their security standards at the actual cost of providing the App Store and performing the review.
 
One question that demolishes the "nothing will happen to you" or "more choice is good" or "your choice isn't being taken away from this"

Is there a law in place that every single iOS app must ALSO be on Apple's App Store?
No?

Then that invalidates all the "nothing will change" line of thinking. Just look at Epic as an example alone. Epic wants their own store. Epic sued Google as well as it was "too difficult" to side load on Android. Epic Games Store on PC gobbles up exclusivities where we need to leave Steam to install some games. There is more likelihood of this same thing happening on iOS than "nothing changes".

Therefore, this is not adding more choices, but taking the choice I and several others make with Apple. Android has far far FAR better phones out there. Android has a lot better operating system. Honestly, I don't know why you all love iOS so much but hate it at the same time. iOS has been playing catch up with Android for so long it's not even funny. It is not even that great of an operating system. I only chose iOS for its locked down environment.
 
It could yield a significant number of additional iPhone purchases. Especially since one of the use cases for Android was “not having to use an App Store”. If the iPhone has that, then many that are buying Samsung devices because they’re the most Apple Android devices can just buy the Apple device.

If in 5 years, Apple’s device share grows by 20% or more, putting MORE of the EU’s citizens on the iPhone and, thus, driving additional profits to Apple (while simultaneously not bringing any new hardware/software vendors to the market), then success? Though, I don’t expect the regulators had in mind “we need more folks buying iPhones!”

Interesting way to look at it. It would not be the first time a major company fought something only to have it work out great for them in the end anyways, or at worst, have no ill effect at all.

I think that would be the ideal ending.
 
I have spoken to my attorney in charge of my game development legal side at length about this.
You should speak to him again - since I'm pretty sure the way you phrased it isn't correct.

Emulators are not illegal and you don't need permission from the copyright holder. As for breaking encryption or DRM, they are (albeit only) a few exceptions already allowed by the Library of Congress in the U.S. (for example).

Unauthorised distribution of games of course remains largely illegal, and admittedly fair use won't be a very common use case for many emulators.
 
You should speak to him again - since I'm pretty sure the way you phrased it isn't correct.

Emulators are not illegal and you don't need permission from the copyright holder. As for breaking encryption or DRM, they are (albeit only) a few exceptions already allowed by the Library of Congress in the U.S. (for example).
The emulator application itself isn't. An example if I develop my own PS5 game I can emulate it myself being the copyright owner. HOWEVER, I cannot emulate God of War Ragnarok because I do not have the explicit permission from Santa Monica Studio. See the difference there? If I had their permission it wouldn't be illegal. Some games give you permission to emulate. But many don't

SomeOrdinaryGamers explains this very well in his video.

 
It could yield a significant number of additional iPhone purchases. Especially since one of the use cases for Android was “not having to use an App Store”. If the iPhone has that, then many that are buying Samsung devices because they’re the most Apple Android devices can just buy the Apple device.

If in 5 years, Apple’s device share grows by 20% or more, putting MORE of the EU’s citizens on the iPhone and, thus, driving additional profits to Apple (while simultaneously not bringing any new hardware/software vendors to the market), then success? Though, I don’t expect the regulators had in mind “we need more folks buying iPhones!”
Not going to happen. IT's a nothing burger overall.

people are on Android because of the cheap hardware.
 
Then that invalidates all the "nothing will change" line of thinking. Just look at Epic as an example alone. Epic wants their own store. Epic sued Google as well as it was "too difficult" to side load on Android. Epic Games Store on PC gobbles up exclusivities where we need to leave Steam to install some games. There is more likelihood of this same thing happening on iOS than "nothing changes".
You also have to keep in mind that Epic is intentionally losing money with their store in order to try and gain marketshare. Epic's managers have testified to that effect in court. The 12% commission is not viable.
 
HOWEVER, I cannot emulate God of War Ragnarok because I do not have the explicit permission from Santa Monica Studio
Agree. And it won't be fair use either - at least for a long time.

That said, the emulators aren't illegal per se and...
Just like with Steam and Dolphin emulator, Apple is required by law to not include these types of apps.
...the Dolphin team "adamantly" denies that its software is illegal (even though Valve may be unwilling to publish it).

I don't think Apple is prohibited by law from offering emulators through their App Store - though just like Valve they may decline to do it,
 
You also have to keep in mind that Epic is intentionally losing money with their store in order to try and gain marketshare. Epic's managers have testified to that effect in court. The 12% commission is not viable.
They testified that that's due to expensive exclusivity arrangements and marketing.

There are other digital software licensing service providers that can do it for less than 12% - though they'll discreetly do it in the background. And not as an expensive, well-marketed "store platform".

Anyway... what is it yours or Apple's business if Epic takes some initial losses to promote their platform? That's their problem, isn't it? Apple has done it too.
 
I don't know why its such a controversial topic to want my phone to be more secure than my computer.
because some people think it is the end of the world, but I have an advise for those people: Don‘t enable sideloading!

Fot all the other people and also for a lot of companies this is good news. So Apple is no longer in the position to be gatekeeper and competitor like Apple Music vs Spotify. And Spotify can offer a different Payment option in the app without owing Apple 30% and so on.
In the end, In App Payment using Apples mechanism will get cheaper, since as soon as there are competitors (e.g. Paypal) the one with the best offer wins - free market!!
 
That's a weird way of putting it but yes, because that's what free market is, isn't it? Shouldn't a business be free to decide what they want to sell or not sell (within legal bounds of course)?
Mmm, but the EU isn't telling Apple they can't offer apps in their app store. Just that the App Store can't be the only way to get apps on the iPhones. The only one who has been limiting customer choice, has been Apple.

And if it's a free market - shouldn't people be able to install what they want on their phones?

Either way, there's no such thing as a "free market". It's regulated, both in the US and in the EU. Because history has shown corporations can't be trusted to regulate themselves.

Look, like I said in my first post. I don't like the concept of side-loading or multiple app stores. But Apple has been acting too much of a gate keeper, controlling what you can and can't do on your iPhone. As an example, not allowing Microsofts Xbox Cloud streaming app onto the app store is just nonsense, at least the reasons they gave.

And it's not like I think Epic is doing all their legal battles "for the consumer", they just want a piece of the pie. But again, Apple could probably found some middle-ground here, but they played a high stake game, preferring to maximise profit for a period, rather than having something a bit less profitable, but also less likely to be struck down by regulators.
 
It's still not clear to me how this will work in relation to sideloading. Apple doesn't do geofencing like Android, you can access whichever app store you choose. The only real barrier is requiring a local payment method for paid apps.
You don't seem to know how the app store works you cant skip the 30 or 15% apple charges for everything you sell except big companies they are exempt like microsoft or amazon they say they check on every app they post in the app store but they don’t there are lots of racist apps in the app store such as 9gag, its a pain in the arse to upload an app they always reject it even if its a simple clock app
 
Yeah, I’m sure the US would be totally fine with the outcome of that. Should have stayed out of the first two as well. 🙄
Most of Europe would have been better off if America had stayed out of WWI, because the naval blockade would have defeated Germany anyway and then no one would have been stupid enough to let Wilson get involved with the peace treaty.

WWII wouldn’t have gone so badly in Europe if Britain hadn’t decided to help America build their empire instead of Japan, although South East Asia wouldn’t be very happy about it if they’d stuck with Japan.

As for WWIII, well , France has nukes and they can use them without America’s permission, and they’ve probably learned to stop deciding to sit out a war after their allies are all committed
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: Jeaz and Chuckeee
Taking away my choice as a consumer is not standing up for consumers.
It anyone took (and kept) away your choice, it's Apple here.
Certainly not standing up for consumers.

Also, having less choice isn't "having choice".

Is there a law in place that every single iOS app must ALSO be on Apple's App Store?
No?

Then that invalidates all the "nothing will change" line of thinking
Just use other apps then! What's the problem?
You think that's a problematic lack of choice?

Then that invalidates all the "Just use Android then" line of thinking.
 
This will compromise iPhone security.
Never compromised my security on Mac and I never buy apps on the App Store for it. Apple themselves as a selling point have boasted about how apps on iOS are essentially sandboxed and can't pose a security issue. But I can see how they'd flip the narrative now. If an app can be an OS-wide security issue, then there's OS-level vulnerabilities that need to be fixed.

Some apps will not submit to the App Store in order to drive all sales to their outside store to increase profits.
And the whole point of the App Store is to draw all the sales to Apple's inside store to increase profits so it's not much different.

Bugs and deliberate surveillance will run rampant.
They already do. It's true that iOS apps tend to be higher quality because they have to work on essentially the same devices. But buggy apps that don't do what was promised are the majority of apps that aren't bigger/promoted by Apple.

Fake apps will proliferate outside with no oversight.
Many fake and misleading ChatGPT copycats that even mimic their logo and don't even do anything, and a huge pile of other examples. The App Store is full of bogus.

I don't think the majority of users are interested in sideloading as all of us pretty much keep the usual apps like social media, music and entertainment. What sideloading would unfortunately enable is piracy and modded apps, together with a whole lot of "download our app from our website". I agree that it's not going to be great for the customer down the line and will only make things more complex. But I don't agree that it's such a threat to security and Apple definitely did this all by themselves by getting so greedy. Sideloading should've always been an option like it is on Android and Mac. Android has already proven that customers prefer the market that comes with the device.
 
no, it’s not.
You can already run applications from anyone you want through Xcode for a limited time, this is no different than that except it’ll be permanent and obviously won’t require Xcode
Without the right signatures you can’t access some fairly important APIs, supposedly for security reasons.
 
Naa, you can still buy in a walled garden. Here you go.

Worthless response because can’t defend the argument I take it
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
  • Disagree
Reactions: Poot Windbreaker
What sideloading would unfortunately enable is piracy and modded apps, together with a whole lot of "download our app from our website"
...and that last part is a good thing.

It will at least in theory present an alternative to the App Store. If Apple gets - or remains - too greedy, or has too lopsided rules, a developer at least could offer product/service through their own website. Why would they though, as long as Apple offers fair rules and commission rates?

It just levels the playing field (at least a little bit), instead of leaving 100% unilateral pricing power to Apple.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.