Apple Files Legal Challenge Against EU Law as Sideloading Requirement Looms

[Sophisticatednut]

Think it’s pending reality. It’s not a big leap to see porn apps, drug apps, sedition apps flourishing on iOS with these “new wonderful” regulations.

It isn’t, because such scams when it comes to banking isn’t possible because the legal security standards is much higher.

Using a password to login to your bank is antiquated and nobody uses it.

Essentially everyone uses a physical Secure Enclave to authenticate their identity or biometrics.

 

[I7guy]

Sure you can have a disagreement, but 100% of the issues you mentioned and identified are legally anchored in decade old legislation and not new.

Well no they are not as not everything is clear cut and some things require a trial to come to a conclusion to.

And you obsess over monopolies, I’m sorry that USA care so much about monopolies, but here nobody cares about monopolies. If apple, Microsoft google etc etc had 100% of the market we wouldn’t care at all because it’s not illegal.

illegal monopolies. AT&T was an illegal monopoly but the way it ended up today, it almost seems it would be better then what judge Greene did.

 

[I7guy]

Well I really hope they do it. It would be fascinating to see what would be the outcome for a tech company to exit one of the largest and richest markets in the world, where they've been doing business for decades and are very well established. The outcome both financially and from a PR stand point. I suspect it would be a disaster for Apple but it would be still be interesting to watch.

To me it's fascinating to see how users on this site (especially those that live in the US) think that Apple is this huge power that should be above the law and can buy whatever company they want (I've seen suggestions Apple should buy Microsoft or Samsung 🤣) do whatever they want, well with 1 limitation: China. The discussions about fighting new legislations are more lit only when it's about the EU because if its about China and the largest Communist Party in the present well... Apple executes any demand immediately with no complain and those that accuse EU here, will defend Apple when they execute CCP's demands which is really funny. Also you won't se many "Apple should pull out of China" suggestions. The logic is simple, you do business in a country or region, they make the rules, pure and simple, your internal goals, culture and filosofy for making profit doesn't mean anything in front of the law. And honestly I'm glad EU is more proactive in protecting their consumers and it's especially vizibile in the food sector where countless more products in the EU vs US are banned for proven use of substances that harm the health of those that consume them. EU is also very proactive with recycling and improving the carbon footprint. Yeah its annoying, makes a lot of things more complicated but in the long term it will be beneficial.

What’s fascinating is the mindset from the EU that apple a popular lifestyle company should be a public utility.

 

[NagasakiGG]

I Hope EU will swing the hammer. I don’t get it how people are still against that and USB C. Nobody is forced to install side loaded apps.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Hmm I haven’t come across that. I might need to do some more research. Thanks

some developers have used other IDEs or cross-platform frameworks to create iOS apps without a Mac, such as Xamarin, Flutter, React Native, AppCode, and others.

But Apple kind of removed their possible use early

IMHO you are actually correct that the term "monopolistic" is inappropriate. Note though that under EU regulation is not necessary to be a monopoly to be subject to anti-trust intervention: having significant enough market power is enough.

Said that, the goal of these measures is fostering interoperability between key operators in the market. The EU wants to foster interoperability as it's considered a key aspect of a competitive market and to the advantage of the end users.

In typical fashion the EU first observes whether the free market eventually converges to a desirable outcome on its own volition, if not it intervenes with legislation and regulation. They did exactly that with many other aspects since they did start with a much more fragmented "common market", the EU Members being independent countries with their own idiosyncrasies.

It's always debatable when and if it's appropriate for a government to intervene in the free market but note that no country recognizes a free market to be viable without government intervention and the advantages of interoperability are often proven to be significant.

It’s so annoying nobody understands this.

 

[Samplasion]

some developers have used other IDEs or cross-platform frameworks to create iOS apps without a Mac, such as Xamarin, Flutter, React Native, AppCode, and others.

Oh if that's what you meant, in my experience as a Flutter dev Xcode is required to actually build the IPA file (or .app bundle for macOS) for installation. Though you absolutely can use other IDEs for the actual development and that's what I do with VS Code

 

[Sophisticatednut]

"Hindering competition" is a nebulous concept and in this case a wet finger in the air decided the app store was hindering competition. And while what's done is done, I don't have to get aboard and say this is good legislation... and the best way to describe it is to say the EU threaded the needed to snare Apple into some legislation that ultimately will have an overall detrimental affect.

It’s not a nebulous concept. It’s specified according to objective measurable standards.

 

[M3gatron]

Well, someone who used to do sideloaders/sideloading for a long time. I say no. Seeing how hackers manipulate apps etc. I wouldn't recommend it. (If I spend as much as I am these days, why would I be doing this to my devices? ). Apple needs to protect the data and safety of its buyers and its data. If that is done there is no reason why this can be!

Well as someone which has huge experience with side loading and I have been doing it for many many years with no negative outcome I say you are intentionally blowing things out of proportions.
The wast majority of the APKs that exist on the internet are not manipulated in any way and don't contain hidden code to hack users.
With minimal common sense and simple logic most people will be fine.
On Android in order to get into trouble you have to intentionally search for hacked APK versions that promise to give you free access to premium paied apps. Even for somebody that doesn't know anything about tech it's immediately obviously that there's something wrong with such apps. This also reminds me of my neighbor's 11 year old kid which believed he was a hacker because he would constantly access dubious sites that provided hacking tools for "free" but the outcome was always a PC blocked by viruses 🤣

Wast majority of Android users don't have any problems because side loading is possible on the platform. Nobody cries for the guy that says "oh I just downloaded and installed this app which said I would get Spotify premium for free, but ever since I did that my phone is blocked by ads". Yeah though luck, the natural selection it's doing it's job in such cases.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Well no they are not as not everything is clear cut and some things require a trial to come to a conclusion to.

No, because 100% of things are codified. Courts coming to a conclusion doesn’t change the law.

illegal monopolies. AT&T was an illegal monopoly but the way it ended up today, it almost seems it would be better then what judge Greene did.

Sure and close to 100% of your networks would still be illegal here as currently implemented.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Oh if that's what you meant, in my experience as a Flutter dev Xcode is required to actually build the IPA file (or .app bundle for macOS) for installation. Though you absolutely can use other IDEs for the actual development and that's what I do with VS Code

Well to be fair Apple kind of prevented any other development early on with clarifications in their AppStore policies when it started appearing in the store.

 

[Samplasion]

Well to be fair Apple kind of prevented any other development early on with clarifications in their AppStore policies when it started appearing in the store.

Oh wow, I wasn't aware of that. I'm glad the situation has opened up then

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Disagreement of government policies and understanding can go hand in hand. I’m not a spokesperson for EU policies.

I understand, but I try to explain so you can have a fair understanding of the laws and disagree with it properly.

 

[I7guy]

I understand, but I try to explain so you can have a fair understanding of the laws and disagree with it properly.

Believe me I properly disagree with it.

 

[webkit]

So it's a thirty year old law that apple can't have their own app store.

What law is preventing Apple from having its own App Store?

What’s fascinating is the mindset from the EU that apple a popular lifestyle company should be a public utility.

This is not turning Apple into a public utility. If it were, Apple would be likely be facing additional pricing regulations (e.g., having to go through government agency for approval on price increases), additional minimum service requirements, etc.

 

[bsolar]

Oh if that's what you meant, in my experience as a Flutter dev Xcode is required to actually build the IPA file (or .app bundle for macOS) for installation. Though you absolutely can use other IDEs for the actual development and that's what I do with VS Code

You can but Xcode and the Apple SDKs can only run on Apple's hardware. I'm pretty sure Xcode's tools are required for building, but maybe there are third-party build tools that also work. Xcode is definitely required for signing the app bundle though.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Believe me I properly disagree with it.

No you don’t because you constantly make equivalency in an American legal context that makes quite literally zero sense.

You are doing the equivalent of: why aren’t you targeting anker babies… while ignoring that anker babies doesn’t exist in EU and the legal concept is non existent…. And then continue to reference anker babies

 

[Wildkraut]

Oh if that's what you meant, in my experience as a Flutter dev Xcode is required to actually build the IPA file (or .app bundle for macOS) for installation. Though you absolutely can use other IDEs for the actual development and that's what I do with VS Code

You just need the dev certificate to make iOS swallow your App/Game. Technically you don’t need Xcode to compile and create the ipa, just when you want to publish on the AppStore. I completely compile and create solely under Windows during the development stages. Xcode does nothing fancy, it’s just another paywall to sustain their anticompetitive business.

 

[M3gatron]

What’s fascinating is the mindset from the EU that apple a popular lifestyle company should be a public utility.

🤣 sure, if you say so.

 

[I7guy]

No you don’t because you constantly make equivalency in an American legal context that makes quite literally zero sense.

You are doing the equivalent of: why aren’t you targeting anker babies… while ignoring that anker babies doesn’t exist in EU and the legal concept is non existent…. And then continue to reference anker babies

I’m not in favor of this law in spite of it the effective date is approaching. My opinion is the EU was very devious and this less about consumer harm and more about reigning in American tech.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I’m not in favor of this law in spite of it the effective date is approaching. My opinion is the EU was very devious and this less about consumer harm and more about reigning in American tech.

Again because consumer harm isn’t that important at all. In the USA it might be top 3 of the important issues. In EU consumer harm isn’t relevant and not a viable defense.

It might even be last on the list.
This is the case with most antitrust cases with EU companies as well.

Edit: eu don’t use consumer harm as a measurement for anti competitive behaviour

 

[Gudi]

What’s fascinating is the mindset from the EU that Apple a popular lifestyle company should be a public utility.

It gets better. Article 14 of the German constitution states that: Property is a responsibility. It's use shall at the same time benefit the common good. 🇩🇪

You'll never be able to own something to a degree that you're allowed to use it against the public interest of everybody else. Go figure!

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I’m not in favor of this law in spite of it the effective date is approaching. My opinion is the EU was very devious and this less about consumer harm and more about reigning in American tech.

USA uses consumer harm as a measurement for anti competitive behaviour.

EU doesn’t use consumer harm as a measurement for anti competitive behaviour.

So it wasn’t just less about consumer harm, it had zero to do with consumer harm. Consumer benefits are secondary downstream impacts from other factors.

 

[I7guy]

It gets better. Article 14 of the German constitution states that: Property is a responsibility. It's use shall at the same time benefit the common good. 🇩🇪

You'll never be able to own something to a degree that you're allowed to use it against the public interest of everybody else. Go figure!

That’s why innovation is dead in the EU. Big tech was allowed to grow because it wasn’t hampered by regulations that prevented innovation.

 

[Samplasion]

That’s why innovation is dead in the EU. Big tech was allowed to grow because it wasn’t hampered by regulations that prevented innovation.

You seem to care a whole bunch about innovation in the EU, for someone that doesn't sound like they live or do business there.

 

[djphat2000]

I’m still waiting Apple to officially announce the withdraw from EU. What’s happening on that one?

They are arguing against the rules. Any way they can. It is a democracy in the EU still. I hope Apple wins it case. But, when a union of countries wants to create rules that make doing business unnecessarily difficult. I say, it's time to go. There are other countries that aren't so difficult to deal with.

Yet Apple still stays in EU. This says all. All bark, no bite.

If they can figure out how to work within the rules and still make a buck. As a shareholder, I'm ok with it. As a customer, I'm perfectly fine with them walking away from the EU. I'm sure Apple would rather stay and do what they do. But, if push keeps coming to shove. Then, cut the losses. There is only really one other alternative to an iPhone. So let them have it. It's more popular there anyway. And if someone in the EU really wants an iPhone. They will find ways to have it shipped to them. Or when they travel, pick one up in a neighboring non EU country. It will probably cost less outside the EU too.

That’s a boatload of imagination and speculation on this one issue. Amazing brainstorming I see.

Since EU has caused so much trouble, where is their announcement to withdraw from EU market?

Better yet, google and Microsoft also withdraw, alongside other bigger names. Excuse? Regulatory cost is too high to keep business afloat. Drastic measures to prompt drastic response.

Every business wants to make money. And as long as that is reasonably possible, they will continue to operate in the EU. But, that can only go so far. If it becomes untenable, then they will leave. And again, as my opinion on the matter. I'd prefer it if they left. I think the rules go too far. It would be a hit to the bottom line. But, there are other countries to focus these efforts to.