Apple Confirms iOS 17.4 Disables Home Screen Web Apps in the European Union

[cupcakes2000]

Yeah right.

What do you mean ‘yeah right’? Are you denying that fact?

See, this is the problem with the world today and the fact denying, alternative fact, make up a theory with a grain of truth and present it as fact mentally that is prevalent.

There is no denying that intelligence sharing exists in the majority of countries to varying degrees. The 5 eyes is a particularly bad one of which no eu country (anymore) is part of. Some of them are part of the 14 eyes, which is a much less all encompassing ‘share everything’ deal - although still a thing to be wary of. There are many other schemes that exist too.

Unless we continue to properly differentiate between truth and fiction we’re going to go through a hellish century until we see the light.

Just because it’s similar or it sounds plausible or one read it somewhere, doesn’t mean it’s true.

Neither the EU not any of it’s member states are a part of the 5 eyes.

 

[mrochester]

Ok, I just have two questions:

For Apple - if security is your primary concern, why not keep it for Safari and its WebKit engine as before, disabling it in other browsers not using WebKit?

For the rest - is this a big deal? Can somebody come with a good current use example for PWAs?

Because gatekeeper the functionality to webkit would be illegal under the DMA.

 

[MilaM]

Let’s hope nothing changes for the negative but I’m not very optimistic. But at least the EU can possibly serve as a testing ground for how customer UX is affected by these sorts of law changes. Although in cases like this where Apple is apparently forced to choose between compromised security, or allocating some unknown amount of additional resources (although many on the internet will claim to know) toward supporting 3rd parties with the same integration as a 1st party feature, or dropping the feature due to low ROI, the data and its interpretation can get muddled.

I just don't believe Apple's communication, when they say this is a security/engineering problem. In my opinion this is FUD from their legal department. A semingly valid argument against doing something that they don't want to do because of business reasons.

Famously some decades ago, power utilities in my country lobbied government and the public, that the power grid could never work with more than 4% of renewable energy. They said the grid would collapse. At the time, many believed them. But it turned out to be complete ******** motivated by business decisions (aka greed).

 

[threesixty360]

The goal of the DMA is to give consumers more choice on how they can use their devices by forcing gatekeeper to let competition happening on a level playing field.

I don't think this is their goal. Their goal is to give businesses more opportunity to make money, consumers are second here. If they were interested in consumer choice they'd actually ask the majority of consumers whether they liked the product that they chose, whether there were alternative products they could have bought etc. And looked at the majority decision.

They would also have taken into account whether their laws will increase consumer satisfaction when implemented. Clearly that is not the case. European iOS users get less functionality, less security and ultimately a worse product. On top of that, 20% or so of mobile users have purposefully and deliberately chosen Apple BECAUSE it has the features they want. They had the opportunity to choose the other 80% (remember iPhones are nowhere near a monopoly in the EU).

Security is a feature apple consider is integral to their product. They go way beyond what their competitors do for this (i.e. walled garden etc). Yes there are benefits also. But it's a huge bet to make a curated system vs an entirely open one. And the the consumer agreed with apples view of the future. Fair and square.

And now that Apple have the best users who spend the most money, the EU want to shake them down for their customer base. This is what the DMA is. Nothing to do with consumers.

 

[The Phazer]

Apple's statement here is technically dishonest, and an attack on users.

Hopefully the EU will now realise the only thing that will reform the company is banning pre-installation of the Apple App Store, and breaking the App Store, OS developer and hardware divisions of Apple into separate companies with criminal penalties for exclusivity arrangements.

 

[tehabe]

I don't think this is their goal. Their goal is to give businesses more opportunity to make money, consumers are second here.

No. The goal is for consumers to have more choice, and to have more choice the DMA forces gatekeepers to open up their platforms for competiting companies. Otherwise consumers don't have choice.

That Apple claims that this is making iOS less secure makes me worried how secure iOS really was all along to be honest.

 

[Samplasion]

With the second beta of iOS 17.4, Apple disabled much of the functionality of Progressive Web Apps (PWAs) in the European Union. There was some speculation that it could be a temporary change or a bug related to some of the updates to the app ecosystem in Europe, but Apple has confirmed that PWAs were intentionally removed and won't be returning.

In an update on the Developer website (via 9to5Mac), Apple explains that users in the EU will not have access to Home Screen web apps due to the support for alternative browser engines and the accompanying security risks and work required to implement a new solution.

According to Apple, Home Screen web apps are built on WebKit and its security architecture, and are designed to "align with the privacy and security model for native apps on iOS." Storage isolation and system prompts to access privacy functions on a per-site basis are crucial.

Without isolation, Apple claims that malicious web apps could read data from other web apps and gain access to a user's camera, microphone, and location without user consent. To fix these security issues, Apple would need to build a new integration architecture, which it says is not practical because of the other Digital Markets Act requirements and because Home Screen web apps aren't used by many people.

iPhone users in the European Union can access websites directly from the Home Screen through a bookmark, but PWA features won't be available. Web apps on the Home Screen will be forced to open in Safari (or another default browser) rather than in a dedicated window, there isn't support for long-term local storage, and notifications won't work.

Apple says that the changes are a direct result of DMA compliance, and will affect only a "small number of users." The company also says that it regrets the impact the change will have on developers of Home Screen web apps and iPhone users.

The update to Home Screen web apps comes alongside many other changes to the App Store in the European Union, with Apple allowing alternative app marketplaces, alternative payment methods, different browser engines, and more.

Article Link: Apple Confirms iOS 17.4 Disables Home Screen Web Apps in the European Union

Bullsh*t. They could've worked for the same solution that worked for the other 4 operating systems but decided to throw a fit. Embarrassing

 

[Jim Lahey]

What do you mean ‘yeah right’? Are you denying that fact?

Yes. Five Eyes colludes with several European nations including France and Netherlands. Otherwise know as the Nine Eyes. In addition, Germany is included in a wider group unofficially named the Fourteen Eyes, as you say. The notion that the EU is not joined at the hip with the rest of the Five Eyes is preposterous. But let's say for a moment that they are completely isolated from it (lol) the fact that they even conceived a programme called Chat Control means they should be considered just as dangerous in this context.

 

[nnoble]

I don't know of any webapp that I use at the moment but I certainly have had before.

Sick and tired of the EU whiny nanny...

Sick and tired because; it doesn’t affect me, it may have done some time in the past, but not now. Solution - don’t buy a Time Machine and travel backward in time. No ‘sick and tired’ medication required.

 

[.wojtek]

How exactly is complying with legislation dumb?

"Malicious compliance"? Doing anything in their power to _seem_ like they comply but actually throwing more obstacles just to protect their money-growing-tree...

I do like (a lot) Apple hardware (using MBP M1) but I'm liking less their software and actually despising their policies... At least on MBP I have relative freedom and can (still) install any software I want. Probably because of those limitations I don't use iPhone all that much because it's just annoying to use...

 

[cupcakes2000]

Yes. Five Eyes colludes with several European nations including France and Netherlands. Otherwise know as the Nine Eyes. In addition, Germany is included in a wider group unofficially named the Fourteen Eyes, as you say. The notion that the EU is not joined at the hip with the rest of the Five Eyes is preposterous. But let's say for a moment that they are completely isolated from it (lol) the fact that they even conceived a programme called Chat Control means they should be considered just as dangerous in this context.

Yes, as I said. Colluding is not the same as being part of, in this context. Joined at the hip is also not in question. What is in question is mislabelling something as a fact, when it is not a fact.

It IS a fact that most nations collude with one another.

It IS NOT a fact that any EU member state is part of the 5 eyes.

 

[one more]

Apple's main point is that EU might force them to use PWAs in other engines.

PWAs:
http://web.telegram.org/
https://phtn.app/

And many other websites may work as a PWA. Eg the main fear with Telegram would be if Apple would remove the app from the AppStore (they've done it before), users would still be able to use Telegram as a native app.

I see, but why would Apple want to remove Telegram from their App Store?

 

[Jim Lahey]

Yes, as I said. Colluding is not the same as being part of, in this context. Joined at the hip is also not in question. What is in question is mislabelling something as a fact, when it is not a fact.

It IS a fact that most nations collude with one another.

It IS NOT a fact that any EU member state is part of the 5 eyes.

Sure thing. But I never made the claim they were officially a member. It’s self evident that they’re not. I said they were inclusive. And in the context of dangerous state overreach, they are 👍

 

[cupcakes2000]

Sure thing. But I never made the claim they were officially a member. It’s self evident that they’re not. I said they were inclusive. And in the context of dangerous state overreach, they are 👍

Indeed, as I said, you’re correct in this. However, I’m just saying that there are many implications by making offhand statements in today’s world, semantics are important and there is nothing more important than defining facts from fiction rather than entwining fact with fiction.

 

[BigKahunaBurguer]

Who is using today home screen web apps??

 

[Jim Lahey]

Indeed, as I said, you’re correct in this. However, I’m just saying that there are many implications by making offhand statements in today’s world, semantics are important and there is nothing more important than defining facts from fiction rather than entwining fact with fiction.

Fair point if we’re going to use semantics to define facts. Otherwise I’ll stick with my original point and agree to disagree 👍

 

[BigKahunaBurguer]

BuffyzDead
38m ago

I just hope that the EU DMA act, inflicts so much pain, to users in the EU, that the users demand the EU. Change the laws OR the users are forced to abandon Apple, and “choose” Android. … it will prove what is Factual. That users Always had a choice, and no one is forcing them to use an iPhone. Apple will survive, no worries there

”so much pain” lol how old are you my friend? No one actually cares about this. Relax. xDD

 

[Moshe1010]

Who is using today home screen web apps??

The website you just wrote a comment on...

 

[cupcakes2000]

Fair point if we’re going to use semantics to define facts. Otherwise I’ll stick with my original point and agree to disagree 👍

Well yes, I do use the meaning of words and how they’re written to define facts.

 

[Jim Lahey]

Well yes, I do use the meaning of words and how they’re written to define facts.

You know what…you’re right. The next time the subject arises I’ll add ‘unofficially’ or implied ‘de facto’ to avoid confusion. Hopefully we can both agree that the thrust of the original argument stands.

 

[iPay]

I've said it previously, but this sort of thing is exactly why the US should have made it very clear that if the EU engaged in this behavior, it would lead to a ruinously expensive game of tit for tat the EU would lose.

> that if the EU engaged in this behavior
Like, passing their own laws?

 

[cmcbhi]

Leave it to the EUgo Union to screw up. Just like the car.

 

[threesixty360]

No. The goal is for consumers to have more choice, and to have more choice the DMA forces gatekeepers to open up their platforms for competiting companies. Otherwise consumers don't have choice.

That Apple claims that this is making iOS less secure makes me worried how secure iOS really was all along to be honest.

I don’t think there is an understanding of the security challenges here. The EU are taking sides. Apple are a huge engineering company so they have their point of view and then you have the android / open lot.

Apples view of security is the less doors open to a house the more secure it is. The less people have the keys the more secure it is. It’s very basic.

the EU have sided with companies who need open doors to make money. It’s very simple. Apples value proposition is to offer the consumer a system with less open doors to guarantee more security.

The issue I have is that the EU says that I as a consumer cannot choose apples view on security. I happen to agree with apples stance and don’t mind the tradeoff here.
So how does that increase consumer choice for me exactly?

It’s reducing market choice in favour of businesses that want to make money off me. All in the name of some “trickle down economy” , “free market is best for everyone” fallacy. That is not really true for the people at the bottom of the chain, us consumers.

DMa is a heist engineered by lobbyists in the eu.

 

[djphat2000]

So... they aren't required to block it, is what you're saying. PWA's on every other OS can use whatever engine the browser that created that PWA uses. If another browser with another engine wants to create a PWA, there shouldn't have been any technical limitation that stopped that browser from doing so, nor would that block Safari from continuing to serve the PWA's it created. There is absolutely no reason for iOS to work differently from any other OS in this regard. PWA's created with Webkit could just have remained as such.

The law required it to work with other browsers. Apple couldn't do that and ensure security. I guess Google doesn't care if another browser has access to your devices hardware without your knowledge.
And iOS isn't Android. They are different. So saying it should work the same is just your opinion.

They didn't want to spend "millions in engineering" to *checks notes* do nothing? Browsers can just support PWA's. There is nothing stopping them from supporting that, that's just nonsense.

Nothing stopping them other than time and money for very little benefit to too few users.

 

[djphat2000]

No, the default behavior of Web Apps could stay exactly the same until a user actually chose to change default web browsers. So long as the default browser is Safari, there's no security issue that requires this change.

People who continue to use Safari shouldn't need to see any difference in the behavior...

The feature has to exist even if you chose safari as your default. Say you change your mind later and want Chrome. All your PWA's would cease to work, and you wouldn't understand why. And the EU would blame apple for not supporting it for other browsers which in turn would make your phone insecure to those other browsers. It all has to work for any of it to work. And too few users use it to make the effort.