Apple's EU App Store Changes: iPads, TestFlight, Default Stores and More

[Jadzea97]

I’m really not hugely interested in alternative apps stores etc but the one thing I would be keen to see opened up worldwide is the alternative browser engines, particularly on iPad.

A Chromium based browser, like Microsoft Edge, would be great. I love safari for its simplicity and its integration across all my devices (password sync, history, etc etc) but all too often these days I need to load chrome or edge on my Mac to get a webpage to display or function correctly. On the iPad or iPhone the experience is worse still.

Would Apple consider doing a Microsoft and just use a chrome as a basis for safari if they won’t allow other browser engines?! 🤔

 

[Mescagnus]

From https://www.wsj.com/tech/apple-plan...ions-for-downloads-outside-app-store-f464f426 (two days ago):

“Officials from the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, have been holding meetings in recent months with Apple and other tech companies to discuss the new rules. Apple hasn’t provided a final package describing its solution to the commission or tested its plans with market participants.

Once it does, the commission will review the full package to look at whether it will make the market more open and contestable, and whether the company’s plans meet all the individual provisions of the law, according to a person familiar with its plans.”

Which will end up in endless litigations by the usual suspects

 

[omihek]

I think it's insulting that Apple only enabled these new capabilities in the EU, and only because they were forced to, rather than do it worldwide like they did USB-C on the iPhone 15 series.

It's incredibly petty and they're doing the absolute minimum to comply, to the point that I suspect the EU will spank them over some of it, like the "core technology fee".

For reals I can't believe Apple actually expect to get paid for their efforts, smh

 

[Jim Lahey]

Goodness gracious. What a mess. The EU has basically detonated the ecosystem and obliterated all cohesion.

Mission accomplished. Slow clap.

 

[omihek]

So i'm a bit confused here........are these changes mainly bc consumers were complaining and wanted it, or bc the developers were complaining and wanted it? I feel like this is a solution to a problem that the majority of consumers weren't actually complaining about.......

They are mainly because money

 

[Tailpike1153]

Nah, I blame Apple. They could have done this worldwide, but chose to be petty about it. They weren't petty about USB-C, and did a great job there, so I had greater expectations. Figures Apple would disappoint me.

It would be nice if Apple could set uniform rules across the world. But it does business at the whims of host countries. We don't see it telling China or India to bugger off when those countries demand it to do something. Apple makes compromises all over the place. Until it is our front door, sadly most of us don't care.

 

[klasma]

Now, why is iPad 'off the hook'?

Because, in the initial round, only iOS has been designated a “core platform service”, not iPadOS (see the infographics below). This may change in the future.

One applicable criteria for a “gatekeeper” is that “it provides a core platform service that in the last financial year has at least 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union and at least 10 000 yearly active business users established in the Union […]”. I don’t know if this is the case for iPadOS.

 

[hagar]

Based on these reactions it seems the land of the free is not favouring free choice that much.

Look: nobody is forcing EU citizens to do anything. They can just keep using their phones as before. With the option to install some third party marketplace apps. But they don’t have to. The concept of CHOICE seems to be foreign to some people. Fear mongering much?

 

[jgdeschamps]

Because, in the initial round, only iOS has been designated a “core platform service”, not iPadOS (see the infographics below). This may change in the future.

One applicable criteria for a “gatekeeper” is that “it provides a core platform service that in the last financial year has at least 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union and at least 10 000 yearly active business users established in the Union […]”. I don’t know if this is the case for iPadOS.

View attachment 2341509

Interesting to see how the most blatant "gatekeepers" are Alphabet and Meta, not Apple. You can clearly see that Alphabet is the one affected by Apple's OS/Browser/Payment combo. With a graphic like that, paranoids like me could asume they are the smoking gun behind this whole EU payment system and app distribution drama.

 

[klasma]

Interesting to see how the most blatant "gatekeepers" are Alphabet and Meta, not Apple. You can clearly see that Alphabet is the one affected by Apple's OS/Browser/Payment combo. Paranoids like me could asume they are the smoking gun behind this whole EU payment system and app distribution drama.

They are certainly the more prevalent target. Not the least since Android has a much larger market share than iOS in Europe. At the same time, it is notable that Google has made much less of a hullabaloo about implementing the required changes than Apple.

 

[jMc]

Would Apple consider doing a Microsoft and just use a chrome as a basis for safari if they won’t allow other browser engines?! 🤔

Given the developmental history of WebKit / Chromium, this would be a little weird. And given the relationship between Apple / Google extremely unlikely.

It’s actually quite depressing how many current web developers now develop against Chromium as if was a standard, just like previous devs used to develop against IE.

jMc

 

[KrisLord]

So i'm a bit confused here........are these changes mainly bc consumers were complaining and wanted it, or bc the developers were complaining and wanted it? I feel like this is a solution to a problem that the majority of consumers weren't actually complaining about.......

Some large developers were annoyed but not really European ones.

Consumers seemed happy.

The EU decided on a complex approach when it would have been much easier to simply cap the commission fees Apple could charge.

Instead this add huge complexity when it wasn’t needed.

It’s the same mess that gives us Cookie alerts on websites just 100x worse.

 

[truthsteve]

Customers and developers in the EU are free to use

you mean customers will be forced to download XYZ because the app they purchased, ABC, decided to leave the App Store.

 

[truthsteve]

App Store is not going anywhere…

some of the apps you already bought likely are.

 

[AppliedMicro]

The EU has basically detonated the ecosystem and obliterated all cohesion.

It hasn't. Apple has.

They could have complied with EU regulation in a very simple, cohesive manner (especially on the App Store/sideloading thing) - but they've chosen not to. Apple deliberately designed the new EU developer terms with the intention of fragmenting but steering towards their own store.

 

[MrSkoTA]

It's because Spotify, Epic, and some others made contributions to the right people so they can exploit iPhone users but not have to pay Apple for the privilege.

BOOM!

 

[MrSkoTA]

Based on these reactions it seems the land of the free is not favouring free choice that much.

Look: nobody is forcing EU citizens to do anything. They can just keep using their phones as before. With the option to install some third party marketplace apps. But they don’t have to. The concept of CHOICE seems to be foreign to some people. Fear mongering much?

Wrong! The CHOICE was IPHONE THE WAY IT WAS! I liked it! Now I have no choice! All because of clowns. The ‘CHOICE’ as you call it will disappear. Some apps immediately, some more slowly. But it WILL disappear! And I have no choice! A consumer.

 

[Jim Lahey]

It hasn't. Apple has.

They could have complied with EU regulation in a very simple, cohesive manner (especially on the App Store/sideloading thing) - but they've chosen not to. Apple deliberately designed the new EU developer terms with the intention of fragmenting but steering towards their own store.

I respectfully disagree. My position is that none of this was ever necessary. Consumers and developers already had the option to take their business elsewhere. This entire show only ever amounted to the EU trying to bully Apple into handing over their lunch money because that's what they do - use their state power to push people around. The air is thick with irony.

Moreover, if their lawyers were inept enough to leave all these loopholes wide open then they should probably not have bothered. But that's all just my opinion and I'm definitely not going to argue about it. To each their own. In any case I wouldn't worry too much because the EU were never going to stop here. They will be back for more before very long and Apple well knows it.

 

[dwaite]

I think it's insulting that Apple only enabled these new capabilities in the EU, and only because they were forced to, rather than do it worldwide like they did USB-C on the iPhone 15 series.

It's incredibly petty and they're doing the absolute minimum to comply, to the point that I suspect the EU will spank them over some of it, like the "core technology fee".

Google got spanked because they effectively changed the terms of their developer agreement such that games had to pay through Google's system - it was actually always in the terms, but Google went years without properly enforcing it.

They also got slapped pretty hard in the US recently for claiming their system was open, while working behind-the-scenes to restrict competition - such as paying handset makers to not establish their own alt stores.

Apple can only make changes later which are favorable to the entire market, such as how they reduced subscription commissions after the first year or how they launched a small business program. When they do so, they have to be prepared for that change eventually being applied to everyone, worldwide.

They can't launch with everything open, no fees/commission, then in a year be 'we changed our mind' and charge a Euro per user. That would be completely unacceptable because it would destroy businesses established on the previous terms.

This is the EU so these are regulations around economic competition. The core technology fee is very similar to what you see for licensing game engines and the like, with one engine (Unreal) also having similar problems over also operating a store (Epic Games Store).

 

[dwaite]

It would be nice if Apple could set uniform rules across the world. But it does business at the whims of host countries. We don't see it telling China or India to bugger off when those countries demand it to do something. Apple makes compromises all over the place. Until it is our front door, sadly most of us don't care.

They are trying to retain their old model as an option so that they can have consistent licensing for those who don't have a European business present but still want to sell in the various EEA country stores.

This is ironically the part which I see most immediately being contentious as it can be seen as providing favorable economic conditions for apps to not operate in alt stores.

But I don't see what Apple would do in response to regulator complains other than abolish the old program, which would add huge costs to many free and low-cost freemium apps. Of course, I'd love to be in the room when Facebook realizes they have to pay Apple a half euro per user per year for each of their apps.

 

[vertsix]

Likely switching back to Android due to this.

I was gambling on getting a 15 Pro Max on the rumors of sideloading and it being a decent proposition, but it is not.

I'd rather burn a bit of money and sell everything and get a phone that allows me to do what I want to do with it.

Especially now that the Pixel 8 and Galaxy S24 series are signed to 7 years of OS upgrades, it makes iOS and iPhones less enticing.

 

[svish]

Opening up NFC is a very good move. Would have been good if it was available everywhere.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

From https://www.wsj.com/tech/apple-plan...ions-for-downloads-outside-app-store-f464f426 (two days ago):

“Officials from the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, have been holding meetings in recent months with Apple and other tech companies to discuss the new rules. Apple hasn’t provided a final package describing its solution to the commission or tested its plans with market participants.

Once it does, the commission will review the full package to look at whether it will make the market more open and contestable, and whether the company’s plans meet all the individual provisions of the law, according to a person familiar with its plans.”

That is something I absolutely love with EU. They absolutely refuse to hold the companies hands and treat them as adults.

Such a completely different approach than the U.S. companies are used to. Being treated as everyone else.

 

[TobiWahn_Kenobi]

Because, in the initial round, only iOS has been designated a “core platform service”, not iPadOS (see the infographics below). This may change in the future.

One applicable criteria for a “gatekeeper” is that “it provides a core platform service that in the last financial year has at least 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union and at least 10 000 yearly active business users established in the Union […]”. I don’t know if this is the case for iPadOS.

View attachment 2341511

How far are we here regarding WatchOS?

Also the chess move by Apple to say “iPadOs ≠ iOs“ will not work I think.
It would be like saying Windows Server ≠ Windows 11“ or „Windows 10 ≠ Windows 11“

 

[klasma]

Also the chess move by Apple to say “iPadOs ≠ iOs“ will not work I think.
It would be like saying Windows Server ≠ Windows 11“ or „Windows 10 ≠ Windows 11“

From https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_4328:

"In addition, the Commission has opened a market investigation to further assess whether Apple's iPadOS should be designated as gatekeeper, despite not meeting the thresholds. Under the DMA, this investigation should be completed within a maximum of 12 months."

So it seems that it's the commission who decided, at least for the moment, that iPadOS is a separate OS from iOS. Maybe the result of the assessment will be that it doesn’t count as a completely separate OS.