Apple's Decision to Disable Web Apps Attracts Scrutiny in EU

[CarAnalogy]

Drag ‘em, EU. Apple’s behavior has been nothing short of disgraceful. “Core technology fee” indeed.

How is it disgraceful for for-profit companies wanting to make money off of their technology?

Like a lot of things they do with regard to the App Store, it sounds reasonable on the surface but the devil is in the details.

I have no problem with the concept of Apple charging some kind of "core technology fee." I do have a problem with the way they implemented it, because they know full well it does not fulfill the spirit of the regulation.

It's implemented in such a way that while it theoretically is compliant, for all practical purposes it is not. And Apple knows this, and did it on purpose.

They keep saying things their actions don't back up, and they keep digging in their heels and refusing to give an inch. It doesn't seem to me that their developer relations are in good faith. Whether and/or how the government should intervene in that is open to debate, but someone so powerful should act better.

 

[AppliedMicro]

I can't believe the EU with their technological know-how and forward thinking vision didn't see this coming and address it before it happened.

They did foresaw gatekeepers coming up with circumvention measures and put the legal framework in place accordingly.

In my opinion, none of these "hangers on" paid a dime to have an idea, develope it, and make it available like Apple has. So, they want to "take" others work and make money off it and not pay for the privilege

Apple didn't pay a dime to produce the Netflix show or Spotify podcast I may be listening to.
They just want to take others work and make money off it - because they can lock their apps out.

Shocker. Apple, just tell them to go **** themselves and leave already.

...like they "left" China, Russia, Japan, the Netherlands... oh wait - they didn't?!

As long as it makes them billions of 💶💶💶, they aren't going to leave just cause they - or you - don't like the rules. 🤣

 

[simps100]

This isn't a must-have feature; will the EU now start dictating phone features? I suspect this is a temporary removal as it most likely requires major rework on Apple's part.

This is a good point - I wonder if the prices of iPhones in the EU will raise further seeing as writing the OS to meet the EU demands suddenly requires significantly more effort?

 

[subjonas]

How it's weird group of countries (EU) to dictate rules under which some product may be sold?

It can be weird if the rules are made from lobbyists.

edit- also possibly anti-privacy agendas, or insufficient understanding especially for new laws in the technology arena.

 

[AppliedMicro]

People insisted this wouldn’t happen.

Apple are the Big Brother in iPhones that they claimed their Mac wouldn't allow back in 1984. No surprise.

Black Market sales would be booming though. Scalpers all over the EU will be like...

But I really really hope and pray that Apple simply says "ENOUGH!!"
And they pull the iPhone OUT of the EU countries, ....seriously !!

iPhones are still readily available in countries like Russia - that they supposedly pulled out of.
Pointless and meaningless. They'd have to pull out with their App Store and operating system.
As long as they run an app store, it will remain subject to legislation (for the foreseeable future).

Please Tim, closed down iOS for EU, and the whole nightmare will be over!

Illegal according to the DMA. They have to grant some access.

 

[AndiG]

Which is why I support Apple. I don't want web apps to succeed. I want native apps.

Sorry but this makes no sense. As soon as there is no difference between native and WebApp, you wouldn’t know. And technology like Webassembly can be transferred to machine Code in no time.

In a few years, there will be no more difference. Software will be written in a kind of meta language and some AI will transfer it platform specific code.
And browsers like Chome (Google) may be able to execute Android Apps without any barriers.

All of that will change. And if Apple doesn‘t change over time, times will change Apple. There is no company big enough to stop evolution.

 

[subjonas]

Wild how Android has had progressive web apps AND third-party browsers for all these years, and yet there doesn't seem to be a streak of people getting hacked via PWAs on there.

Do you have any data for that claim? Also it’s not just hacks but under the radar privacy violations concerns.

 

[hacky]

It can be weird if the rules are made from lobbyists.

Fortunately DMA rules aren't. They are pro-consumer and they're aligned with long term EU goals (check GDPR in this regards).

 

[hacky]

Please Tim, closed down iOS for EU, and the whole nightmare will be over!

Yep, close Apple's 2nd biggest market. That would be very smart move and shareholders would surely clap loudly.

 

[toobravetosave]

so basically apple is too incompetent/lazy/greedy to program a secure alternative

 

[AlexESP]

Fortunately DMA rules aren't. They are pro-consumer and they're aligned with long term EU goals (check GDPR in this regards).

They’re pro-some consumers and anti-some other consumers. Please, don’t speak for all of us.

 

[hacky]

The issue isn't Chrome or FireFox. Those are quite secure and powerful. But using this regelation ANYONE could make a browser with their own engine. Let's say someone who really doesn't care about security and makes a browser that runs scripts outside of the sandbox.

I'll stop you right there. Escaping sandbox is something which is not possible by the nature of the iOS security design. If you manage to do this, well done, you've found an exploit and you can earn quite some money by reporting so.

Tl;dr escaping sandbox means you've found fatal flaw in iOS. Not something you can do easily be design.

 

[subjonas]

Fortunately DMA rules aren't. They are pro-consumer and they're aligned with long term EU goals (check GDPR in this regards).

You might be right, I don’t know. Another possible reason for “weirdness“ is under the radar government anti-privacy agendas. Whether this is the case here I also don’t know.

 

[hacky]

They’re pro-some consumers and anti-some other consumers. Please, don’t speak for all of us.

They are pro-all consumers. Apple malicious complaince is to blame for being anti-consumer there. The DMA goal and idea is pro all consumers when implemented correctly.

 

[KENPHOTO]

Let’s hope the EU also doesn’t let Apple exclude sideloading on iPads.

iPadOS name was just a trick to make people think they cared about iPad specific features of iOS. Now they also want to trick the EU. iPads and iPhone have always run iOS.

iPadOS is not included in the requirements that they have to do for the DMA for iOS. This is already well documented. You can have all the opinions you want regarding iPadOS just being a new name for iOS, but the fact is, iPadOS is not big enough to fall under the DMA for alternative app stores. Apple has already made that clear.

 

[d686546s]

You're right that the cookie consent form *could* be user friendly, but why would it be? Obviously the sites that are required to comply with the regulation (which, btw, are always going to be the sites that are not shady--shady sites don't have cookie nag screens) were always going to stack the deck to make it as difficult as possible for users to select the privacy-protection options. And if there were ever a new regulation to try to fix that, the advertisers would get around it.

So we just give up because we can't get a perfect solution? Having sites ask for permission is better than nothing and over time regulations get refined and improved. It's always been that way.

The disagreement we're having is that you understand the regulation from the perspective of hypotheticals of what the regulation could be--in a very abstract and academic way. No doubt the EU honchos who wrote the regulation had the same aloof understanding, which is why the regulation has panned out as it has, i.e., a nuisance that the vast bulk of people neither understand nor care enough about to take the time to activate the privacy protections it was designed to encourage in the first place.

No, not really. I'm pragmatic about these things. You never get 'em all, there's always teething problems and it's always a work in progress.

What's your alternative then? Just let everyone track to their heart's content?

And before you say just rely on companies like Apple to provide better privacy, yes it helps, but it also barely scratches the surface.

All of which is somewhat irrelevant to the present story btw, as Apple doing this is not about privacy protections. If anything, loosening Apple's grip on its own ecosystem will endanger privacy.

Well, you're the one who brought up the GDPR. I was simply replying to you.

Odd that you're silent about that.

What is it with your need for a sneaky ad hominem through the back door? That's a very frustrating style of discussion.

Anyway, there's no need to bring up everything all the time, but my answer would be that people can make their own choices. They can make their choices within the GDPR and they can make their choice by going outside the App Store or by using different browsers with different browser engines.

It is, as you are fond of saying, a tradeoff. It's a tradeoff between openness and security and privacy and competition and and and.

 

[I7guy]

Sorry but this makes no sense. As soon as there is no difference between native and WebApp, you wouldn’t know. And technology like Webassembly can be transferred to machine Code in no time.

In a few years, there will be no more difference. Software will be written in a kind of meta language and some AI will transfer it platform specific code.
And browsers like Chome (Google) may be able to execute Android Apps without any barriers.

All of that will change. And if Apple doesn‘t change over time, times will change Apple. There is no company big enough to stop evolution.

Companies cause evolution: Ford and Apple come to mind.

 

[AndiG]

Companies cause evolution: Ford and Apple come to mind.

Why not Kodac and Apple? Kodac once was a major company and then it missed digital photography, Apple is now a major company that missed the cloud, AI, connectivity, IoT, container technology, services, … and tries to stop evolution and competition by locking everyone out .,.

 

[SanderEvers]

I'll stop you right there. Escaping sandbox is something which is not possible by the nature of the iOS security design. If you manage to do this, well done, you've found an exploit and you can earn quite some money by reporting so.

Tl;dr escaping sandbox means you've found fatal flaw in iOS. Not something you can do easily be design.

It can be done. Otherwise it wouldn't be possible to make jailbreaks. Also no security is completely foolproof. And a bad actor can and will find these flaws, and if the apps aren't closely monitored and tested this will end up with a big issue.

I work in the security field as a software (web, mobile) developer. And I absolutely know this legislation is going to cause unforeseen issues. Without any real solutions.

 

[InuNacho]

Regulations always come at a cost to consumers. The question is always: is the cost worth it?

Is lead gasoline worth it?

 

[spazzcat]

Is lead gasoline worth it?

My prior statement was we have to decide if the cost is worth it for said regulation...

 

[hacky]

It can be done. Otherwise it wouldn't be possible to make jailbreaks. Also no security is completely foolproof.

You just confirmed what I said in my comment.

If you find a way to escape sandbox, you really don't need possibility of 3rd party browser core. You can use such exploit via any app in that regard... If you work in the security field you should know that.

If there's such essential hole allowing to escape the sandbox in iOS, it's not DMA regulation nor 3rd party browsers to blame. It's Apple's fault. Nothing to do with allowing 3rd party browsers. Such browsers are essentially just another app. No reason to look at it any different way. Sandbox applies to all apps the same. Browsers are no exceptions.

 

[I7guy]

Why not Kodac and Apple? Kodac once was a major company and then it missed digital photography, Apple is now a major company that missed the cloud, AI, connectivity, IoT, container technology, services, … and tries to stop evolution and competition by locking everyone out .,.

Sure, I worked for Kodak back in the day. Actually contrary to your assertions apple didn’t miss anything; they are giving their customers what they want. They are never first to the party. Let others sort out the future of tech, apple will get it right.

 

[MyOwnDrummer]

So weird to see people cheering on control freaks and abusers of freedom for going after a company for allegedly the doing same thing.

 

[hacky]

Actually contrary to your assertions apple didn’t miss anything; they are giving their customers what they want. They are never first to the party. Let others sort out the future of tech, apple will get it right.

Which - from one point of view - can be seen as lack of technological innovation. Apple is indeed iteratively improving their products and yes others are still copying Apple. But the copying is more about marketing and design improvements than actual technological innovations lately (except for Apple Silicon and maybe Apple Vision).

For quite some time Apple did not bring anything groundbreaking and innovating comparable to iPod or iPhone.

I'm not saying competitors are bringing completely new products to the table, but they're definitely innovating more than Apple (foldable phones, cameras under the screen and bringing innovating new tech a lot faster than Apple in general).