Apple Has 'Very Serious' DMA Issues, EU to Enforce Rules 'Soon'

[IsaacM]

We love you, EU. Keep pressuring their greedy asses.

 

[Haiku_Oezu]

Please for the love of God just let me load an ipa from my computer.

I don’t care about all this third party App Store nonsense I just want to install an ipa the same way I can sideload an apk with adb
I don’t even want to be able to install them directly on my Phone, force me to use Apple Configurator, give me all the “YOU WILL DIE AND YOUR DATA WILL BE GIVEN TO THE DEVIL” warnings but please just let me sideload a damn ipa

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Just curious, are people forgetting, an App has to have over a million downloads before they have the CTF. I would put money on, that 90% of the apps out don’t even come close to that. And Apple recently put in provisions to help combat apps that go viral.

I am starting to think, the only thing Apple will be able to do to make the EU politicians happy is to have a single option for everyone - not the old Apple rules and not the new one. If that is the case: (if I was Apple) I would change my rules to this

1: Anyone using our IP in the EU has to have a separate EU developer account.
2: Regardless of organization status (government, educational, non-profit etc.) everyone must be treated the same.
3: Apps that achieve more than 500k downloads will be subject to a .15 EU cent per download for CTF.

If Apple finds a company using their IP in the EU without a proper account - sue the stuffing out of them for IP theft.

If I was apple:

1: Let others create app stores.
2: Don't track them, don't monetize them, don't geolock them, don't worry about them.

 

[Jackbequickly]

If I was apple:

1: Let others create app stores.
2: Don't track them, don't monetize them, don't geolock them, don't worry about them.

THIS is exactly what Apple is trying to avoid!

 

[Shirasaki]

Would it make you happier if they said they’ll penalise them for 50% of Apple’s revenue in just EU then? Lol

They literally just have to follow the law like everyone else. It’s ridiculous apple fanboys are defending this ****. Apple are being scummy af.

The entire act of defending a corporation disgusts me. But I don’t want to delve deeper into this rabbit hole here.

 

[wbeasley]

I guess because the iOS reached enough of the EU consumer market for it to become a concern. With greater success comes greater responsibility kind of thing.

or the EU was worried they could never get a foot in the App Store door...

i cannot see that forcing alt app stores is going to stop the move to Apple devices or result in wholesale exodus from buying in the official store. People know and trust it.

And unless the alt stores are cheaper, why would you go there?

 

[Shirasaki]

A change in American Government will naturally lead to US banning anything and everything originating out of EU. And pull out of NATO as well. If EU wants to wage a war on American companies, America should respond in kind.

WW3 then. Except, it is unclear who’s the allies and who’s the opposite side.
Maybe it is not a good idea to burn everything to the ground for a change.

 

[Shirasaki]

THIS is exactly what Apple is trying to avoid!

And governments around the world forcing Apple towards that direction. They cant hold their 50% profit margin like that forever.

 

[wbeasley]

The entire act of defending a corporation disgusts me. But I don’t want to delve deeper into this rabbit hole here.

Yet defending the EU lawmakers who write vague decrees isnt digusting?

Apple should always abide by local laws.
Yet those laws should be clear in scope and intent and processes.

 

[wbeasley]

And governments around the world forcing Apple towards that direction. They cant hold their 50% profit margin like that forever.

Business is actually there to make a profit... it's how they exist and make new products and get shareholders. 🙂

 

[WarmWinterHat]

And unless the alt stores are cheaper, why would you go there?

Because they can offer apps that Apple wouldn't approve on the app store. In the case of SetApp, their entire app store is a single monthly subscription for every app. Apple doesn't have any method to allow that.

 

[wbeasley]

If I was apple:

1: Let others create app stores.
2: Don't track them, don't monetize them, don't geolock them, don't worry about them.

dont worry until someone writes dodgy code that compromises the phone, spreads to others and brings networks down or shares private data... right.

even the EU still granted GateKeepers the right to validate apps to ensure platform integrity and security.
How that is implemented and paid for is the issue. Some here think it should be free.

 

[wbeasley]

Because they can offer apps that Apple wouldn't approve on the app store. In the case of SetApp, their entire app store is a single monthly subscription for every app. Apple doesn't have any method to allow that.

SetApp is useful for very few people and if you subscribe for long enough, you're better off buying the few apps you use.
It's not a model that will suit the masses.

As for apps that Apple wouldnt approve, they still get to check every app and notorize it or not.
They can easily claim an app violates security or platform integrity and not do so.
The EU granted them that right.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

dont worry until someone writes dodgy code that compromises the phone, spreads to others and brings networks down or shares private data... right.

even the EU still granted GateKeepers the right to validate apps to ensure platform integrity and security.
How that is implemented and paid for is the issue. Some here think it should be free.

It happens to Android almost daily!

Yawn. Tired arguments are tired.

SetApp is useful for very few people and if you subscribe for long enough, you're better off buying the few apps you use.
It's not a model that will suit the masses.

The point is that it's something that Apple won't offer. Whether or not it's good financially is irrelevant.

 

[wbeasley]

Because they can offer apps that Apple wouldn't approve on the app store. In the case of SetApp, their entire app store is a single monthly subscription for every app. Apple doesn't have any method to allow that.

The list of iOS apps in SetApp arent that useful for most people.

I own a few already. Boom, PDF Squeezer so what they need to. But $10 a month for the rest? It's like those dev app packages you can pick up. one or two apps might be handy. the rest are filler.

 

[wbeasley]

It happens to Android almost daily!

Yawn. Tired arguments are tired.



The point is that it's something that Apple won't offer. Whether or not it's good financially is irrelevant.

tired responses are tired too 😉

There is nothing stopping Apple creating an app subscription model - they do it with Apple Arcade already 😉

 

[gnipgnop]

The CTF is not a charge for steering customers outside the App Store. It’s a cap based system just like the DMA. An app would only be subject to it if it’s for-profit and has exceeded one million annual downloads.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

tired responses are tired too 😉

There is nothing stopping Apple creating an app subscription model - they do it with Apple Arcade already 😉

There is Apple stopping other companies from creating a subscription model for a collection of pick-and-choose iPhone apps.

It's just an example. I have zero subscriptions from Apple, or any other company, and haven't bought anything from the App store in over two years. I'm very, very, very anti-subscription.

 

[wbeasley]

Clearly, you know nothing about the EU and its principles. The EU regulates fair competition in ALL sectors, including those where its industry is at the top end of the competitive landscape (e.g.: automotive).

The point here is that we have regulations asking large companies that could prevent smaller companies from innovating and growing not to raise anti-competitive barriers. While I have some sympathy for Apple, Google, and the others, if Apple had simply stated that companies with a turnover above x million dollars have to pay a certain (large at will) amount of money to have access to the same developer program that we all pay €99/year for, there would have been no problem. But in this case, the rule is "if you use my frameworks, you will have to give me 50 cents for each download per account." If this is the rule and Apple does not allow anyone to develop their own frameworks that interact with the hardware, it is quite clear that it does not offer any real choice to developers. Their solution to constraints is a workaround to avoid their application as defined in the spirit of the regulation.

Now, I have chosen the iOS ecosystem precisely because it is closed and I feel protected by the system's intrinsic security measures. But in the EU, we also have another regulation coming up that recognizes civil and criminal liability for poorly written code that causes harm to users. Therefore, Apple does not have an obligation to use the excuse of a long arm that also protects third-party applications just to maintain a revenue model directly connected to the value created by others... people should be free to choose whether to stay within the closed ecosystem or install whatever they want at their own risk. Similarly, developers will decide to take responsibility for the security and substantial correctness of their own code.

but users can already choose to stay in a walled garden or not.

they can go jump to Android if they want freedom to install whatever they want.

bit like consoles. i cant just put any code i want on a Switch or PS5 or Xboc.
But I could buy a Raspberry Pi and install an emulator and ROMs.
Options exist.

 

[gnipgnop]

While I agree with everything you said here, I feel it’s a high order to ask those cults to wake up and review the entire situation holistically, outside of rosy glasses. Apple was never and will never be the saint cults chanting about. It’s a corporation first and foremost. Profitability is what matters, no matter the cost.

That’s also true of Spotify, Tinder, Epic and Microsoft. The first three are billion dollar corps and the third is a trillion dollar one.

 

[wbeasley]

There is Apple stopping other companies from creating a subscription model for a collection of pick-and-choose iPhone apps.

It's just an example. I have zero subscriptions from Apple, or any other company, and haven't bought anything from the App store in over two years. I'm very, very, very anti-subscription.

youre very very very anti subscription but chose to use SetApp as a reason for all this to be allowed?

you dont have Netflix or Spotify or any media streamer? you'd be in the extreme minority of users if that's the case

 

[WarmWinterHat]

youre very very very anti subscription but chose to use SetApp as a reason for all this to be allowed?

you dont have Netflix or Spotify or any media streamer? you'd be in the extreme minority of users if that's the case

No, I don't subscribe to any streaming services.

I don't want to switch to Android. I want to use my iPhone, how or I want, with or without Apple's blessing. I bought the hardware, and I should be able to do with it as I please. As for game consoles, one can go to target or Wal-Mart or best buy or amazon to purchase the games. I'm not a gamer, but even I know that.

Example: I bought my vehicle, new, from a dealer. I have never been back to that dealer, or any other dealer, for maintenance or accessories. I should be able to buy my Apple (or Android) phone and then never interact with the parent company again for the life of the device, if that is what I want.

 

[User 6502]

Yet defending the EU lawmakers who write vague decrees isnt digusting?

Apple should always abide by local laws.
Yet those laws should be clear in scope and intent and processes.

No the eu laws are not ‘disgusting’. They are extremely sensible and it was very clear for the onset that Apple was violating them. A number of people said this immediately, Apple thinks they are in the states but in Europe malicious compliance is simply non compliance. One has to abide to the spirit of the law, not just the letter. Apple behaviour was clearly intended to limit and monetise third party stores, which is the opposite of what the law intended. Hence the heavy fines that will come, which will wipe out any profit Apple made with their illegal behaviour.

 

[wbeasley]

No, I don't subscribe to any streaming services.

I don't want to switch to Android. I want to use my iPhone, how or I want, with or without Apple's blessing. I bought the hardware, and I should be able to do with it as I please.

but all those apps youve bought still work exactly as they did when you paid for them.
so you can keep using that device. even on wifi if you dont want to keep paying a ... monthly telco SUBSCRIPTION... 🙂

many of us have been around long enough to know as tech advances, you often buy new hardware which means buying content again... vinyl to cassette to CD to MP3 to streaming. MSDOS to C64 to PC or Mac.

that's just life.

you can use your purchased hardware and do whatever you want with it.
go ahead, load your own OS and apps.
Apple never promised to do that for you.
Nor did any other hardware manufacturer.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Apple never promised to do that for you.
Nor did any other hardware manufacturer.

I'm close to 50. I know how hardware advances.

Apple never promised that, nor would they on their own. That's why I support government forcing businesses to be more consumer and competition friendly. No company should be able to restrict what the end-user does with a product they purchase.

Once it's sold, it's none of their business.