So it sounds like it requires Apple to give away its IP at no cost. This is no different from (for example) requiring the linux kernel devs, or the fsf to allow people to use their IP without complying with the GPL.
Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
41–50 of 125 posts
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#42They should force apple and android manufacturers to add 1 button to jailbreak and root. Rooting is much more useful than that warranty
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple could always enforce a more restrictive, hardened security model for non-official App Store distributed apps. Again, they control the platform- they could change it at will to accommodate new use cases.
The whole point of this is that it does not allow that.
Allowing sideloading and independent app stores doesn't say anything about adding restrictions on third party app permissions.
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#44They should force apple and android manufacturers to add 1 button to jailbreak and root. Rooting is much more useful than that warranty
Frankly I think the current root/jailbreak situation on android is fine, I feel like there should atleast be a some technical barrier to that power.
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#45So it sounds like it requires Apple to give away its IP at no cost. This is no different from (for example) requiring the linux kernel devs, or the fsf to allow people to use their IP without complying with the GPL.
No? This is more like Apple telling a car company to allow any gas instead of only "apple approved gas" which is marked up by 30% in price. It doesn't mean that any company can just copy that car and put their label on it.
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. They are general purpose computers, artificially crippled by their manufacturer, to prevent their (supposed) owner from using their full potential.
This is a silly argument. Nobody is checking their bank account on their Xbox. We can acknowledge that iPhones are needlessly closed platforms while also acknowledging that there are legitimate purpose-built computers in various form factors (gaming consoles being a good example.)
I actually used to do it. When I was younger, my parents offered me a PS3 and I had no personal computer of my own. So I installed Ubuntu on my PS3 (it was possible at the time, until a later patch where they disallowed it) and used it both as a desktop computer and as a PS3. That was pretty cool.
A PS5 today could easily run whatever desktop OS.
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can they? If you can sideload they have no way to enforce this.
“Not via the App Store” != “Without Apple Approval” Side loading will likely still require a business agreement with Apple and “App Review” to get a cert that allows your app to run.
That would really defeat the whole purpose... I'm sure this is not the intention of this law.
However it is indeed possible that Apple would weasel such a requirement through the loopholes, yes.
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand the Play store is not being policed for days tracking and many apps are stuffed to the brim with tracking libraries. So they really don't have a need to do this. Apple can still make it difficult for them though. They can just remove the forbidden APIs and sandbox apps better. If they do this they don't even have to bother to review as thoroughly anymore. The big benefit is that Apple no longer gets…
The sandbox is enforced by App Store review. I don't mean the runtime enforcement, but rather the sandbox that apps opt into. It is the App Store that rejects apps when they have attempted to include sandbox entitlements that they have no business having. Access to your photos, contacts, device identifiers, etc are all gated on sandbox entitlements, and if you remove the App Store review process then you remove the g…
Yes that's how it works now.
That can be changed of course. They can make it work just like on Android where the user has to give permission for things like filesystem access.
The point of the law is to bring more control away from Apple and to the user.
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a silly argument. Nobody is checking their bank account on their Xbox. We can acknowledge that iPhones are needlessly closed platforms while also acknowledging that there are legitimate purpose-built computers in various form factors (gaming consoles being a good example.)
That is exactly the point. There is nothing inherent in an Xbox that prevents it from running a web browser. Only our collective acceptance of the practice of denying users control of their devices, and letting these arbitrary restrictions contribute to e-waste.
Then the same argument covers a cars computer.
Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law
#50“Sideloading” is the perfect word to frame the behavior of downloading apps in a negative light or as an illicit activity. No-one has ever talked of sideloading an app on macOS – because sideloading is simply downloading an app from the Internet as we have known it from the very beginning of the Internet. I still cannot believe most people adopted this word as part of this discussion and keep using it, helping Apple’s narrative. Stop using “sideloading”, use “downloading from the Internet”!