…and so you can.
Nothing stopping you from conducting your App downloads and in-app purchases exclusively through Apple.
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.
Report: Apple to Announce More App Store Concessions for the EU
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nothing stopping you from conducting your App downloads and in-app purchases exclusively through Apple.
Yea, but just “forcing” it to be different by a vast munority doesn’t make any sense.
I’ve been told here on MR several times a few years ago that side loading on Android is done unless than 1% - why does that 1% get to dictate how things should work?
The vast majority of users doesn’t give a ratz about what the DMA sets forward…
That’s fair. And was thinking more as you said it. Every year held of would increase the number of cables that would be thrown away.
Just as when we always moved away from mini-USB and Micro-USB cables. And all the proprietary charging cables that were made for no other purpose but vendor lockin was thrown away as well
It’s not different tho. The ability to install alternative apps have been possible for years. But a few contractual and some artificial limitations have been used.
1: developers aren’t allowed to to provide apps outside the AppStore.
2: Apple's free developer accounts only get 3 installed apps per device and 10 app IDs per 7 days you must reset to continue using them.
So what Apple would actually need to do is:
1: Remove the installed apps per device limits. And remove the 7 day reset.
2: contractually Allow apps to be delivered outside the AppStore
Apple opted to make something worse and cumbersome of their own volition.
“Almost nobody would or wants to sideload”
So Apple wouldn’t even lose money on it, cause hardly any customer would make use of it?
👉 Great. So what’s bloody stopping Apple from silently complying and moving on?
Since the technical infrastructure has existed for almost 15 years now (@Sophisticatednut beat me to it, by mere seconds) it wouldn’t even cost Apple a thing to implement it.
Again: Comply and move on - what’s the problem?
Allow it silently - and silently laugh in Cupertino about EU regulation that no one makes use of.
As things currently stand, they’re creating a huge “Streisand” effect about it.
Last edited:
But I have the option of installing experimental apps like Google's Edge Gallery that aren't on any app portal for a reason.
Has Apple actually presented their case to the court? I tried to look for it, but I couldn't find it on the EU site.
Subjective. Objectively, the rule increased ewaste.
That really doesn't matter why they did it. The way EU should have implemented this was at the browser level. Require all major browsers to implement this change. Saves everyone time and is a cleaner implementation.
Says who? Had Microsoft locked down their OS, demand for an alternative desktop platform would increase.
Terrible argument. EU should have anticipated the annoyance and required implementation at the browser level.
How's that working out for you? It's wild that you're REALLY defending EU's actions here.
There's already a surplus of lightning cables which could have still been used in iPhone 15, 16. But since those phones aren't using lightning anymore, there are millions of people getting rid of good functioning lightning cables.
I traded my iPhone in to Apple. Millions have. Apple doesn't ask for the cables back and there's no room to include all of my lightning cables. Even if I did include it, Apple would just ewaste it.
Or just stop including new cables in iPhones when Apple could have done with lightning because there's a surplus of it out there which Apple would have done to reduce ewaste. But now, Apple has to include usb-c because most of their customers don't really have a dedicated usb-c cable just for charging iPhone.
Then Netflix/Apple/Disney/Hulu wouldn't be spending $$$ on content because their content is no longer worth as much.
Says who? If windows was locked down, demand for alternate OS would increase
If it happens sooner and you're throwing away good functional cables, that's increasing ewaste unnecessarily. the correct way to do it is to ban inclusion of charging cables. most returning iPhone buyers and Android buyers wouldn't buy an additional cable because they'll just reuse the cable they already have.
But because iPhone switched ports, hundreds of millions of customers would have to buy separate USB-C cables which would increase emissions. So now Apple feels the need to include the cable longer due to port change.
In terms of consumers' rights and environmental rules, the European Union is to the world what California is to the United States.
Such unbundling is what they did with chargers - and are considering for cables as well.
It has to happen at some point.
And Apple could have made a softer transition earlier - they just didn’t do it, waiting until the last minute to move to USB-C).
For the time being - but any year longer Apple would have stuck with Lightning (long being outdated in terms of transfer speeds) would have increased that over the long term.
The switch will make an amount of cables obsolete prematurely - but any year we have that common standard will reduce such waste compared to having proprietary standards from different manufacturers. Apple isn‘t the only company offering such devices and cables - they‘ve just been the last holdout, so to speak.
Well, it does matter to answering the question of who “gave” us the cookie banners.
Defending? I’m aware of what actually happened. EU have no regulations about cookies.
The ePrivacy Directive that makes it a member state issue is from 2002.
The ePrivacy Regulation wasn’t passed alongside GDPR because the parliament and council haven’t been able to agree on the text.
And the GDPR is unrelated to cookies. And regulates the handling of personal information.
Your kicking the can done the road and making the future waste worse.
Sell it on eBay with the cables. Give them to a friend or family member with an older iPhone. And Apple would recycle it.
Seems a bit of an overreach don’t you think? Apple could have stoped including the cable when they excluded the PowerBrick to but they didn’t.
Apple could ask when purchasing if you want a cable included.
Exclude first party content untill it’s done streaming plus a few years.
Says steam who wasn’t a relevant player in 2008. Steam and steamOS is a thing today because windows was open.
Had iOS not been closed then perhaps we would have had the equivalent of steam on it as well.
And as I belive you pointed to before… Android didn’t have any other stores either 🤷♂️
But not economic feasibility of delivering a competitive alternative.
SteamOS, Bazzite & co. are on the verge of becoming that (for games). But only because Valve poured money into SteamOS that they needed to earn - and convinced developers to make their games compatible (which needed a platform).
It‘s no coincidence that SteamOS and large parts of the associated software that makes gaming on Linux a viable alternative come from company that clinched a dominant market share in gaming - and they did it on Microsoft‘s platform, using Windows as a springboard, so to speak.
Last edited:
Ok?
This is what should have happen instead is my point. Forcing to switch ports and then banning inclusion of cables would increase emissions because now customers have to buy cables separately. That's separate shipments and/or unnecessary extra packaging.
Sure but decreasing usage of a cable from 5 years to 1 year means creating ewaste unnecessarily.
If they did, they would decrease usage of lightning cables and that creates ewaste unnecessarily.
Overall.
transfer speed is irrelevant. the cable included with iPhone 15 is USB2.0 anyways, but again, irrelevant to discussion.
apple would have gladly stopped inclusion of lightning cables and majority of iPhone returning users would not buy an extra cable.
but the port switch means either Apple has to include USB-C or majority of iPhone returning users would buy an extra cable.
the net increase in number of total cables owned by all increased by the usb-c switch over the scenario of not including the lightning cable at all.
It won't reduce net waste over the scenario of continuing to use lightning and not including the lightning cable.
Correct. And Apple would have gladly switched to USB-C or portliness once they see their users organically deciding to purchase/acquire usb-c cables or wireless chargers as they replace their lighting cables as needed.
No.
Answering "who" would be EU. Answering "why" is irrelevant because I didn't ask why did they do it.
Are people still banging on about lightning and Apple being 'forced' into adopting an industry standard every other product it sold was already equipped with? Really?! I guess we should spare a thought for all those FireWire cables MacOS27 will drop support for as well.
I wasn't asking if you were aware of what happened.
What EU did caused the cookie popups no matter how you slice it.
Which caused website developers to make cookie popups. Law makers should be aware of the consequences of developing these laws.
Like the ACA. Yes it's good to make it illegal for healthcare providers to deny coverage for preexisting conditions, but as the consequence of that, healthcare premiums go way up to this day.
Nope. future would have been great by banning inclusion of cables. That is objectively the best way to reduce ewaste. To force users to reuse cables that they have and only buy new cables if they need it. There's a surplus of lightning cables out there. Even if iPhone was still using lightning cables today, I'd gladly give away my lightning cables if I could, but everyone I know that had an iPhone didn't want any.
After shipping+fees, and the price people are willing to pay for it due to oversupply, not worth it.
No one wanted it because they had too many.
Yes, that's recycling ewaste. Emissions are involved in doing that.
Wait wait wait...dictating the design of the product isn't an overreach, but forcing exclusion of a cable that most customers have is an overreach? Lol?
Oh so it's fine to force Apple to switch to USB-C, but it's not fine to force Apple to stop including the cable?
That increases emissions. Overall shipping of the product increases because now you have packaging for usb and packaging for phones separate.
still same issue.
I'm sure internet speeds stayed the same since 2008.
SteamOS would have happened sooner if windows locked down
1. Desktop and Mobile are two separate platforms.
2. iOS App Store and Google Play already does a good job of handling digital distribution for games. I qualified my statement with " and [Microsoft] didn't improve their [Windows] store" fyi
3. Does Steam sell mobile games on Android. If they do, I don't know a single android user that does, myself included.
What?
75% marketshare of desktop computers at the time. If Microsoft took 30% of $50-$90 of all PC games, there would be a desire to build a new OS for economic reasons. I mean there's already Xbox/Playstation. Clearly people who have computers would still buy into a dedicated operating system just for games. These systems already generate billions in revenue.
Wrong.
It‘s the website operators.
As I said above: Consent obtained through cookie banners is not required for cookies that are strictly necessary for website functionality.
It‘s just that so many websites have decided to - in addition to that - also incorporate tons of advertising/tracking cookies into their websites.
…but no economic feasibility to do so.
You need the market first - you need to be the one that charges these commissions first.
They do take similar shares of revenue though, don‘t they?
Well EU wanted to implement it on a browser level. As also the preferred option. But please feel free to actually check some of the actual information. It’s easy to be misled.
Proposal for a Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications
The proposed Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications will increase the protection of people's private life and open up new opportunities for business. Other language versions will be available mid-February and will be accessible from this page.