Perhaps if Apple spent that billion on development instead. Apple have lost many legal battles. Just as apple won't have the ability to take a fee in the appstore if alternative in app purchases are provided
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Publishes First-Ever App Store Transparency Report
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They already are my friend. In September 2023 it will come in effect.Let me know when they do the same for consoles as well. Epic, Sony, Nintendo, Xbox. I am sure developers would love for the ability to reach their customers without having to pay that sweet 30% cut on other platforms as well.
Consoles just don't fulfill the basic criteria yet. But when they do they will be opened up.
Since a while ago.
How-To: Create a free Apple developer account for sideloading apps - 9to5Mac
Starting with Xcode 7, Apple made it possible to sideload apps on the iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV using a...
9to5mac.com
No. You need to sign in to developer.apple.com with your Apple ID and accept the Developer Program terms. Once you do that, you are now registered as a developer.
You think that's the best way?
If I was EU, I'd enforce it at the html5 standard level. Browsers will have a native consistent pop up for every website and user can manually set "always allow tracking + stop asking me" or "ask me every time". Saves millions of hours of frontend developer work, saves time for the end user, and makes it a consistent experience. Any large for-profit company that builds a browser must implement this. If browser does not respond to the API, disallow tracking by default.
So yes, it is an absolute royal screw up as EU has no idea how to implement technical things properly.
The first result for me below an ad was the Microsoft app, which is named "Microsoft Authenticator".
Last edited:
yea... That would be impossible and a complete screw up. Html5 isn't used by everyone. And it's already done by every browser
You are doing a completely wrong understanding. You think Gdpr is for tracking? It's for how you handle, store and process data.
Why they would ever write an api is baffling. How things are done is upp to the market. Eu only explain what the end result should be and what it should be. How you get there is up to you.
They do hence it it's not a technical document but a legal directive. It implement technology neutral requirements
All 27 members can also implement their own version of the law. Because some wanted more explicit privacy and others wanted less.
- It must be just as easy to say yes as to say no
- Consent must be given clearly, unambiguously, freely and actively
- Consent rules must be applied to the fullest extent
- The language used must be clear to the user
- Disclose who stores and retrieves cookies, the purpose of processing, the term of validity and whether they are shared with third parties
- Link to your privacy and cookie policies
- It must be easy for the user to withdraw their consent. Referring to a process in a policy is probably not considered easily accessible and understandable for the user
- Dark patterns can lead to a higher penalty because of deliberately misleading the user
- Designing your cookie banner as a cookie wall is not permitted by a number of DPAs
- Conditional consent is not permitted
- Pre-filled checkboxes do not constitute actively giving consent
- Clicking “I understand" does not constitute giving consent
- Do not set tracking cookies prior to obtaining explicit consent
- Do not deny access to your website if consent is not given
This is a nonsensical statement. All modern browsers adopt html5. Add in the API into the HTML5 standard for asking consent by the user the same way the browser asks for consent to share geolocation.
GDPR deals with collection of data that has large implications of tracking. I know considering I've used Google Analytics and Plausible analytics for a variety of client sites.
They don't need to write an API. End result: all modern browsers should handle the consent between the user and the website just like the browser asks for the geo location today.
Not much different than EU enforcing all phones to have USB-C ports.
The fact that you're so against the will of the user and see EU can do know wrong suggests you're completely biased here.
And can be done via a native API to present the user with a consistent, easy to understand UI.
I don't think you understand what this API would do. All the API is doing is shifting the UI of displaying accept/deny dialog box to the browser level. Everything else is the same.
Last edited:
Before you bark at Apple perhaps look to the source... if you go to the MS website and use the link embedded in the MS website nothing happens.
This is from the MS website
Microsoft Authenticator
app.adjust.com
It's not about the browser but the website.
This is about privacy not anti competitive actions
Implication is irrelevant as this isn't a narrow legislation. And tracking is not part of it. That might be part of some other legislation.
Why would they regulate the browser? It's disconected and unrelated to the content of the web and seem to do just fine considering the privacy initiatives they have done without the government.
It's the legal responsibility of the website to follow it and should never be for the browser to enforce it.
They aren't, one is a universal regulation= same everywhere. And the other is a mandate=countries make it in to law in their countries according to the guidelines
And do you remember they did first do a voluntary agreement, then it was made obligatory 2012-2014. 2014-2023 it was no obligations and now 2023-2028 usb c will be required.
It's not targeting phones explicitly outside of it grabbing headlines. It's about everything else from keyboards and handheld fanns to phones and computers.
The will of the user? I'm not against it and EU can do alot of wrong. But then actually know what they are doing instead of making things up what you think it is.
The guidelines are clear. Single button to decline all cookies not needed for the function of the website. A link breaking down all details.
It's just that many intentionally don't follow it and do get fined
I'm aware, the thing is you just switch the legal requirement on the browser developers for somthing they aren't responsible for.
The market already provide multiple GDPR APIs of difrent styles for the specific requirements that is fully compatible and easily understood.
It's with Regulation 2016/679 GDPR and ePrivacy Directive 2002/58/EC.
These gives you the cookies consent form.
The ePrivacy Regulation (2023-2025?)(ePR) will replace the ePrivacy Directive of 2002. And might contain some things you ask for. It was intended to be launched alongside GDPR in 2018 but members didn't come to an agreement.
Geolocation is a private matter and that's part of the HTML5 spec.
You're the one that brought up the meaning, not me.
You say it's irrelevant but continue to debate on this.
"seem to do just fine"
considering as you mentioned, they had to adjust the popups to be less annoying, it's actually not doing "just fine".
It will still be the responsibility of the website to call the pop up on the browser. You're completely misunderstanding what an API is.
Thanks for agreeing? So we should integrate this.
Again, you completely misunderstood the implementation.
Wasn't question of guidelines were clear. It's the question of the UX and execution.
Same thing will still happen. If websites don't ask browser to pop up the content box, they will get fined. Again you misunderstood the implementation.
Browser will still not be responsible for displaying the box. It's up to the website to ping the browser the same way the website asks for location information.
Rest of your responses is operating under this misunderstanding.
As a developer the app store just feels kind of rigged, and you will never get a real reply to your concerns.
Here are two examples which aren't revealed by the report.
1. I had 10 solitaire variants. My competitor had 10 variants. New rule 4.3 brought in which is fair enough, except that afterwards Apple removed my solitaire variants but allowed my competitor to keep all of theirs.
2. Search for "Chess" on the app store (note I also have a chess app). Why does an old app with a rating of 3 stars and just 18 ratings come above Magnus Carlsen's app with a 5 star rating? He is the number one chess player in the World and his app is superb.
It is exasperating and you will only get a "Thank you for your concerns, we have passed them to the relevant department" kind of reply. You never hear from them again on the subject.
There are 1000s more examples ...
The only way Magnus can rectify this is, I presume, by buying Apple Search Ads.
Here are two examples which aren't revealed by the report.
1. I had 10 solitaire variants. My competitor had 10 variants. New rule 4.3 brought in which is fair enough, except that afterwards Apple removed my solitaire variants but allowed my competitor to keep all of theirs.
2. Search for "Chess" on the app store (note I also have a chess app). Why does an old app with a rating of 3 stars and just 18 ratings come above Magnus Carlsen's app with a 5 star rating? He is the number one chess player in the World and his app is superb.
It is exasperating and you will only get a "Thank you for your concerns, we have passed them to the relevant department" kind of reply. You never hear from them again on the subject.
There are 1000s more examples ...
The only way Magnus can rectify this is, I presume, by buying Apple Search Ads.
Attachments
Last edited:
They also won many legal battles many that MR posters didn’t think possible.
Sure. But I guess you would agree apple benefits from minimum lawsuits as it saves resources they can spend on making better products.
That’s a true generic statement except for the times lawsuits have to be used so that maybe a better product can be made.
Well yes. But the context is being sued by others. Not that apple shouldn't sue other.
If someone I'd wrong then apple should sue.
That may be so, but in a country that does NOT have this - why would the app still need to track this particular field? Why can’t an app have the code adjusted, uploaded and a payload ready to distribute to countries where payments within WhatsApp are NOT available?!
Is that even possible to do with the App Store?
Perhaps it's the same app uploaded. And it's geolocated? Seems wasteful to upload 80 difrent apps