Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

European DSA Recipients of Services Report

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 177 posts

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#41

Post by babypuncher »

fsckboy wrote: post #32
jsnell wrote: post #10

> iOS App Store: 101 million > iPadOS App Store: 23 million Asserting that the iPad App Store is distinct from the iOS App Store - and totally isn't in scope for the regulations - is certainly a bold strategy. I wonder why iTunes and Apple TV+ aren't included, and why Podcasts is only counting paid subscribers. Is there some obvious reason why these kinds of services would be out of scope?

> iPad App Store is distinct from the iOS App Store the whole idea that applications written in software shouldn't handle screensize differences (and dynamic changes) intelligently is just so broken. I get that feeling in the pit of my stomach like "who let these people in? is the door wide open out there?" i mean, to each their own, that's just me, but that's how I feel software should be written, and while we're at…

Software that dynamically changes to fit different form factors is difficult to write and rarely comes without compromises to the UX.

I prefer it when my iPhone and iPad apps have separate bespoke UIs that take full advantage of the different sizes and shapes.

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#42

Post by wildredkraut »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #28
wildredkraut wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I know, and they share the same AppleIDs/AppleID Backend/Purchages. These AppStores are not fully independent and have to be seen as one. Many Apps even share the same binaries and are cross Apple Device available. You can install iPhone Apps on iPads, and you can install iPad Apps on Macs. That won't work on court.

> That won't work on court. How do you know? If there was no chance of it working, you would think Apple's lawyers would have said so.

There is a reason why they bend over for EU's DSA.

They can view the stores as they want, but they know that per law they aren't distinct online platforms, as long their Userbase, AppleIDs, AppleID Backend, Hosting Services, Databases, iCloud Services, Apps, Games and In-App Purchases are cross-wired and shared between all Apple devices/stores. The DSA sees it as one(1) united Online Platform and would not care for Apple's Store breakdown.

This is just the typical Apple FUD: Without prejudice to further consideration of the legal characterisation, Apple views each version of the App Store as a distinct online platform under the DSA, and only the iOS App Store may qualify as a VLOP. Nonetheless, Apple intends, on an entirely voluntary basis, to align each of the existing versions of the App Store (including those that do not currently meet the VLOP designation threshold) with the existing DSA requirements for VLOPs because the goals of the DSA align with Apple’s goals to protect consumers from illegal content.

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#43

Post by jsnell »

MBCook wrote: post #16
jsnell wrote: post #10

> iOS App Store: 101 million > iPadOS App Store: 23 million Asserting that the iPad App Store is distinct from the iOS App Store - and totally isn't in scope for the regulations - is certainly a bold strategy. I wonder why iTunes and Apple TV+ aren't included, and why Podcasts is only counting paid subscribers. Is there some obvious reason why these kinds of services would be out of scope?

iTunes and Apple TV aren’t app stores. The Apple TV App Store is listed.

That explanation does not work. The DSA isn't a law restricted to App Stores.

Also, podcasts and ebooks are not apps, but they listed their ebook store and podcast subscriptions platform in this disclosure. Why not the music store, the TV series and movie subscription service?

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#44

Post by stirlo »

anonymouse008 wrote: post #25
CostcoFanboy wrote: post #2

I'm surprised there are more Apple TV users than Apple watch users. It always felt like a fairly niched device. On a somewhat unrelated side-note, as a hardcore Plex user for the last 5-6 years, Apple TV has been an amazing Plex client. Second only to a Nvidia Shield Pro downgraded to 8.2.3 firmware. Honestly with the quality of their TV boxes, screens and the "ecosystem", I'm kind of surprised they didn't dive into…

Wow, they may 'sell' millions in the market, but many end up in a drawer, or rarely seen as anything other than a wrist worn notification device. This information is beautiful! Reaffirms the true value of these things. (Well that, or the metric is truly skewed not including companion apps - though that would feel disingenuous)

Most apple watch apps are installed and managed through the watch app on your iPhone not from the app store on the apple watch itself. I just checked and I've never even opened the app store app on my watch but I have configured dozens of 3rd party apps using the Watch app on my iPhone.

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#45

Post by cma »

jsnell wrote: post #10

> iOS App Store: 101 million > iPadOS App Store: 23 million Asserting that the iPad App Store is distinct from the iOS App Store - and totally isn't in scope for the regulations - is certainly a bold strategy. I wonder why iTunes and Apple TV+ aren't included, and why Podcasts is only counting paid subscribers. Is there some obvious reason why these kinds of services would be out of scope?

Don't purchases literally work between the iPad and iOS stores in most cases?

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#46

Post by makestuff »

_the_inflator wrote: post #33
anonymouse008 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, I get the position here. Different device classes, different markets. I've gotten more than a few apps approved on tv, watch, Mac, iOS, iPad. They are distinctly different. As much as Apple is helping us leverage 'one code base to rule them all' there are so many gotchas and detail required to make great experiences on each.

I agree. Almost anyone of these one size fits all approaches hits a wall sooner or later. Besides very basic applications, I would never make use of frameworks like Flutter or React Native. Same goes for Windows Universal Apps. Great concepts, but not very feasible in reality for slightly complex apps with good UX.

Do you think it is worth the increased time to start out as a native app, or is it still worth rolling your MVP as flutter/reactive native?

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#47

Post by babypuncher »

CostcoFanboy wrote: post #2

I'm surprised there are more Apple TV users than Apple watch users. It always felt like a fairly niched device. On a somewhat unrelated side-note, as a hardcore Plex user for the last 5-6 years, Apple TV has been an amazing Plex client. Second only to a Nvidia Shield Pro downgraded to 8.2.3 firmware. Honestly with the quality of their TV boxes, screens and the "ecosystem", I'm kind of surprised they didn't dive into…

You can thank me. I've been shilling the ATV to any friends or family I hear complain about their Roku/Fire Stick/smart TV.

I went through literally all of them before getting an ATV, even the Shield, because for a long time I refused to believe Apple could make a good TV experience.

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#48

Post by rnk »

_the_inflator wrote: post #33
anonymouse008 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, I get the position here. Different device classes, different markets. I've gotten more than a few apps approved on tv, watch, Mac, iOS, iPad. They are distinctly different. As much as Apple is helping us leverage 'one code base to rule them all' there are so many gotchas and detail required to make great experiences on each.

I agree. Almost anyone of these one size fits all approaches hits a wall sooner or later. Besides very basic applications, I would never make use of frameworks like Flutter or React Native. Same goes for Windows Universal Apps. Great concepts, but not very feasible in reality for slightly complex apps with good UX.

I strongly disagree. This is just big companies artificially separating their market segments to argue against too large of a market, and preserve their enormous profits with their huge percentage take. The world would be much better off with multiple stores. It will take legal action by the eu, and it will be hard, these rich companies are very influential. In the us we have too much capture of federal politicans, I only hope the eu can push it.

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#49

Post by 988747 »

apetresc wrote: post #40
nottorp wrote: post #34

> Without prejudice to further consideration of the legal characterisation, Apple views each version of the App Store as a distinct online platform under the DSA, and only the iOS App Store may qualify as a VLOP. LOL LMAO ROFL. I really hope there is some EU directive that this is breaking so they can be fined just for being asses.

Given that the definition of a VLOP is >45M MAU, and the iOS store is the only one that's even remotely close to being over that, what do you object with in this characterization? Also you left out the very next sentence , which completely reverses the interpretation you're trying to imply: > Nonetheless, Apple intends, on an entirely voluntary basis, to align each of the existing versions of the App Store (including…

I think the point is: App Stores for iPhone and iPads are in reality one and the same. Apple tries to artificially split them, so they can avoid regulations for at least one of them.

Re: European DSA Recipients of Services Report

#50

Post by fsckboy »

babypuncher wrote: post #41
fsckboy wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iPad App Store is distinct from the iOS App Store the whole idea that applications written in software shouldn't handle screensize differences (and dynamic changes) intelligently is just so broken. I get that feeling in the pit of my stomach like "who let these people in? is the door wide open out there?" i mean, to each their own, that's just me, but that's how I feel software should be written, and while we're at…

Software that dynamically changes to fit different form factors is difficult to write and rarely comes without compromises to the UX. I prefer it when my iPhone and iPad apps have separate bespoke UIs that take full advantage of the different sizes and shapes.

writing software is about writing the hard-to-write parts one time, so that users aren't confronted with the anomalies all the time. Computers are our servants, we need to let them figure things out for users, and take care of the headaches, not simply declare "here, this is a headache".

yes, what you are pointing out is the challenge. solve it, don't slough it onto the user.

However, the same app can appear on different sized screens with different skins, it doesn't have to be a different app.

Post reply on HN