Upcoming EU Sideloading Bill Would 'Cripple the Privacy and Security Protections' iPhone Users Expect, Says Apple

[I7guy]

Our health, food and finances (and, I want to add mobility) is increasingly managed and access through apps.

Which is the reason this impending legislation is bad. It’s my prediction the increase in malware, scamware etc will come to roost.

I don't think I'm being hyperbolic.

I do.

We've had multiple threads on the question, as I'm sure you know. And many users/posts have voiced their opinion for or against this legislation. The ones against mostly going along the lines "Their platform, their IP, they’re say. Government has no business in this. Period." Hardly ever have a I read a more balanced or nuanced take.

Everybody has their bias.

 

[I7guy]

Of cour💲e you do

Ye$ I do. But I’m as objective as everyone who claims I’m not.

 

[AppliedMicro]

I do.

Well then...

Should government, in your opinion, ever regulate App Store and policies?
Or never, under no circumstances?

I already provided some scenarios and would be interested to hear your opinion.

 

[I7guy]

Well then...

Should government, in your opinion, ever regulate App Store and policies?
Or never, under no circumstances?

I already provided some scenarios and would be interested to hear your opinion.

Apps stores in a competitive situation, meaning one or more, should be regulated similar to physical stores. Apps stores in a position of being the only should be regulated the same as physical stores where there is only one in the area.

There are already a myriad of regulations on the books covering business practices. Over course contract disputes arise and they should be handled on a case by case basis.

 

[deevey]

Hmmm. Never had the issue and jail broke for 10 yrs plus. No reason that would happen …. Never did.
I customized so many features.

Doom and gloom scenario. Jeez

Tech Savvy* people are unlikely to fall prey to any nefarious apps that could be exclusively available via side-loading.

How about your Grandma, Mom, Dad?

*If you jailbroke your iOS device 10 years ago, it's pretty obvious you aren't the run-of-the-mill user.

 

[MacFarmer]

Why are people so against having the choice to use you iPhone the way you want. I want to be able to customize my iPhone. I have done it for years safely with a jailbreak.
There’s absolutely no reason that an enduser can’t make their own decisions.

But that's the thing. You do have a choice. iPhone is so successful, not because of its amazing hardware, but because of the whole infrastructure, whole package. You can buy a great spec phone for way less, and if you want to customize everything, there is a phone for that too. End user can make their own decisions with the constrains provided within the system. But I guess there is a reason people choose iPhone. Make the fundamentals change and see what happens..

Let's suppose there were only two phone carriers in your country and one decided that only Nokia phones were allowed on their network and the other decided that only Motorola phones were allowed on their network, you’d be ok with that? I doubt it. Antitrust laws and regulations are meant to prevent scenarios like this from happening.

Allowing companies with dominant positions to do whatever they want opens the door for them to control the market too much which can lead to higher prices, stifled competition and innovation, etc.

Yeah, I don't think this is the way antitrust laws work. The whole system is rotten, and these laws server only those who lobby the most. Do you think meta cares about Germany's requirement not to share data between apps? Are you naive that that whatsapp data is separated from facebook? sorry LOL. Competition works as long as it gives business any benefits. Do you expect companies to spend money on R&D now for future better connectors, when EU mandated that all should use USB-C? Of course not, why bother. How come EU doesn't care about all other stores that have their on laws for getting on their shelf. Sony, Xbox, Nintendo (Same old boring example) are doing fine, but because they are not 2 trillion dollar operation, that is fine. There is a fine line to walk, but the current implementation is not it, and politicians are not the people to define it, that is for sure.

Also, look at what happened with Microsoft IE. They lost, google won, and the end result? Everybody moved to google chrome, google now owns all the data, there is barely any competition left. Innovation? What innovation, everyone is on chrome, the browser is a resource eating machine, we just moved from one standard to another, but the only innovation is happening on how to get google more data and ad revenue. Where is end user benefit?

No, no, just because they can. Maybe they want to prop up their own iMessage service and charge a subscription for that ("also included in Apple One") or something.

I mean, it's their platform and IP, they can do whatever they want, can't they?

Well, maybe they'll introduce a new 50% commission rate for any subscriptions tomoroww.

I mean, it's their platform and IP, they can do whatever they want, can't they?

Why not? After all, they're providing a secure platform that allows for biometric authentication to banking apps.
Why shouldn't Apple be compensated for that?

And... it's their platform and IP, they can charge whatever they want, can't they?

You are just playing whataboutism. It is pointless to reason with you, but I just want to add, that there is a business sense in all of this. IF apple would do such a stupid decision, people would vote with their wallet and it would change. There is tolerance for all. All companies, not only apple, are pushing boundaries to increase their profit. Is it right? No. Is there a limit? I think there is. e.g. Banks were against apple pay, they wanted all data, and fore free. Why should they pay, everybody pays them! But competitors integrated it and now they do as well. And its fine, haven't head about any closures, because of apple pay. Banks have many ways for data mining anyway, I wouldn't trust them with access to my phone's core. Thanks to apple, they all now have modern apps (no more ****** ad filled websites), and they work with wireless payments. I would be willing to bet, that if they won, it would be much worse experience as a whole.

Also, everyone is moving to renting apps. This is not a business model I stand behind, therefore I have zero app subscriptions. And I'm fine. When everyone eventually sees that they are spending 500$ a month for some apps they barely use, they will change their behavior as well. If they are paying and happy to do so, lets go, I have no issues with that.

But most people will have a threshold above which they feel businesses should not be able to do as they please.

Exactly.

Apps stores in a competitive situation, meaning one or more, should be regulated similar to physical stores. Apps stores in a position of being the only should be regulated the same as physical stores where there is only one in the area.

Exactly.

Tech Savvy* people are unlikely to fall prey to any nefarious apps that could be exclusively available via side-loading.
How about your Grandma, Mom, Dad?
*If you jailbroke your iOS device 10 years ago, it's pretty obvious you aren't the run-of-the-mill user.

Of course they would suffer. Not even mom or dad, I have friends who bought iPhone 14 pro and they don't even know how to use night mode. Already we have this mess with all the permission popups, imagine having multiple stores (just look at android), teaching everyday Joe about security would be madness.

I do agree that there should be a market watch, but current situation is just falling victim for lobbying groups. There are way more important issues at hand that should be focused on. But when do politicians focus on core issues instead of playing power games? Rarely. Take GDPR as an example. It is a good thing, but look how it got implemented. Now every website is a cookie pop up nightmare. EU "punishing" big corps for using a tax sandwich, but if they really want to solve it, they should close the tax heavens: Switzerland, Malta, Cyprus, Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. They don't, because they use shell corporations themself. Green and utter hypocrisy.

 

[webkit]

Yeah, I don't think this is the way antitrust laws work. The whole system is rotten, and these laws server only those who lobby the most. Do you think meta cares about Germany's requirement not to share data between apps? Are you naive that that whatsapp data is separated from facebook? sorry LOL. Competition works as long as it gives business any benefits. Do you expect companies to spend money on R&D now for future better connectors, when EU mandated that all should use USB-C? Of course not, why bother. How come EU doesn't care about all other stores that have their on laws for getting on their shelf. Sony, Xbox, Nintendo (Same old boring example) are doing fine, but because they are not 2 trillion dollar operation, that is fine. There is a fine line to walk, but the current implementation is not it, and politicians are not the people to define it, that is for sure.

Also, look at what happened with Microsoft IE. They lost, google won, and the end result? Everybody moved to google chrome, google now owns all the data, there is barely any competition left. Innovation? What innovation, everyone is on chrome, the browser is a resource eating machine, we just moved from one standard to another, but the only innovation is happening on how to get google more data and ad revenue. Where is end user benefit?

Antitrust laws and regulations can cover a variety of activities but what I described is an example of one thing they are designed to help prevent i.e., dominant companies having too much control of a market and using that power to restrict/block competition. Microsoft had a dominant position in desktop OS and used that market power to try to restrict/block competition in, for example, browsers. Microsoft was investigated and sued for that and Apple deserves similar for using their dominance in mobile OS to try to restrict/block app access, alternative app stores, etc.

 

[Shirasaki]

I mean, it's their platform and IP, they can do whatever they want, can't they?

And... it's their platform and IP, they can charge whatever they want, can't they?

Anyone who says Apple can do whatever they want very conveniently forgets this: as an individual, you can’t do whatever you want either. Here’s a blatantly obvious example: I cannot just carry a knife, go to the street, and start stabbing random people without someone calling 000. Similarly, I cannot just drink drive at 120km/h, crashing into multiple cars, trees etc, without police confiscate my license and send me to jail for drink driving and reckless driving.

I don’t know why, but for some reason, Apple is the exception, and can be forgiven to do literally anything they want without consequences. For example, only Apple can clog up emergency resources with false positive and still people defend Apple saying crash detection saves lives so Apple is guilt-free.