Apple vs the Law • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple vs the Law

#121

Post by grishka » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 9:59 AM UTC

bzzzt wrote: post #101

idle_zealot wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, they could just let their pocket computers run the software users download and install, like every single other computer ever made and sold, rather than special-case engineer padded cells for every use-case, application class, or bit of interoperability.

You mean those users that don't even know what an application is? And you mean that software that only has the users best interests in mind and is not spying on them, trying to scam or confuse them into buying unnecessary stuff? I think Apple has done a great job of protecting non-technical people from a lot of the possible harms of malware. There's a lot of incentive for them to make sure security is handled right.…

Maybe let's not optimize everything around people being tech-illiterate? We live in a society. You are expected to have some baseline knowledge to live in one. So let's instead educate people about that stuff instead of encouraging ignorance and punishing power users.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#122

Post by Y-bar » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:00 AM UTC

FinnLobsien wrote: post #106

Y-bar wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU has basically said that it's better to have a handful medium-sized companies in competition for customers than one or two mega-corps owning and dictating the market. And to resolve that they employ two things, one is the DMA/DSA and similar laws which mostly takes effect when your company reaches a certain large market penetration, the other is standardisations such as the Radio Equipment Directive (think "USB…

> The EU has basically said that it's better to have a handful medium-sized companies in competition for customers than one or two mega-corps owning and dictating the market. And to resolve that they employ two things, one is the DMA/DSA and similar laws which mostly takes effect when your company reaches a certain large market penetration, the other is standardisations such as the Radio Equipment Directive (think "U…

> Then show me the handful of European, medium-sized companies competing for customers.

Competing in category chemicals:

BASF, Akzo Nobel, Lanxess, Air Liquide, and a bunch others

Competing in category engineering:

Siemens, Bosch, ABB, Alstom, ThyssenKrupp, Airbus and a bunch others

Competing in category metals:

Aurubis, Umicore, Norsk Hydro, Gruppo Riva, ThyssenKrupp, and a bunch others

Competing in category pharma:

Novartis, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, and others

Competing in category electronics:

Nokia, Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent, Electrolux, Schneider Electric, and lots of others

> any scaling company is instantly hamstrung

You are assuming scaling this way is a long-term positive for consumers, investors, employees, and/or markets. I can find no such evidence.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#123

Post by alt227 » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:00 AM UTC

chongli wrote: post #112

alt227 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people are getting annoyed with Apple over these issues, and they are bleeding into the mainstream media more frequently. I have a few die hard Apple friends (Non-professionals) that have recently got so frustrated with being pushed into corners that they have given up the fruity ecosystem altogether. In no way am I suggesting that Apple are on the way out, but they have definitely started to turn the same corne…

“Challenging underdog” isn’t a term I’d have applied to Apple since the early days of the iPhone. They’ve been very big and very “big business” for a long time now, and I’ve called myself an Apple fan since the 1990s. They are a very different company today (mostly due to means; they’ve always had the ambition).

Exactly my point, in the days of the first colourful iMac G3, ads with Jeff Goldblum in it, and the massively popular iPod, Apple was known as the challenging underdog. Even when they first launched the iPhone they were thought of as challenging the existing mobile device space dominated by Windows Mobile and CE, and PalmOS. They were exciting, moving fast, and disrupting markets.

That early built up reputation has got them far, and I would say has continued on for about another decade or so after the iPhone launch. Since that, their coninued lawsuits and anti competitive practices have been more and more prevalent in mainstream media, and that previous reputation is now begining to tarnish amonst normal consumers. When the standard user sees them as big business and not the challenging underdog anymore, it paves the way for a new cooler small tech company to come and steal their bacon.

I believe that tipping point has come.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#124

Post by pjmlp » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:01 AM UTC

alt227 wrote: post #100

Zopieux wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens in the confines of legal (EU, California, ...) institutions and courts with the occasional boring news reporting the average consumer doesn't read, like this article. It's clearly a win for Apple.

More people are getting annoyed with Apple over these issues, and they are bleeding into the mainstream media more frequently. I have a few die hard Apple friends (Non-professionals) that have recently got so frustrated with being pushed into corners that they have given up the fruity ecosystem altogether. In no way am I suggesting that Apple are on the way out, but they have definitely started to turn the same corne…

Apple has always been like this, they were only humble during the few years they almost went bankrupt and needed all the help they could get.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#125

Post by Someone » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:01 AM UTC

agust wrote: post #107

jeroenhd wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I hate Apple's anti-consumer practices as much as anyone, the PWA platform is a system set up by Google first and foremost. Take-up has been limited outside of Google Chrome. I wouldn't say Apple's PWA approach is necessarily an example of Apple's fuckery. This wouldn't be much of an issue, of course, if Chrome would just run on iOS like it does on any other OS, so Google can implement PWAs themselves.

Mobile web apps that can be installed on device were invented by Apple. This was the way developers were supposed to develop apps for the iPhone when it was released, before Apple introduced the App Store.

I don’t think that’s true. Apple said web sites were the way to add functionality to the first iPhone, but “can be installed on device”?

Jobs framed it that way, but IIRC, all you could do is create bookmarks. Creating an icon on the Home Screen? Impossible. Reliably storing data on-device? Impossible. Backing up your on-device data? Impossible. Accessing your on-device contacts, photos? Impossible.

Also, Jobs made a vision statement about web apps in June 2007, but Apple announced a SDK only four months later (in October 2007) and shipped it in March 2008.

⇒ I’m fairly sure he knew about that SDK when he made that statement.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#126

Post by pjmlp » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:03 AM UTC

agust wrote: post #107

jeroenhd wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I hate Apple's anti-consumer practices as much as anyone, the PWA platform is a system set up by Google first and foremost. Take-up has been limited outside of Google Chrome. I wouldn't say Apple's PWA approach is necessarily an example of Apple's fuckery. This wouldn't be much of an issue, of course, if Chrome would just run on iOS like it does on any other OS, so Google can implement PWAs themselves.

Mobile web apps that can be installed on device were invented by Apple. This was the way developers were supposed to develop apps for the iPhone when it was released, before Apple introduced the App Store.

Another Apple myth, Symbian had a Web runtime before anyone at Apple came up with the idea.

Also that was precisely the idea behind Windows 9x Active Desktop apps.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#127

Post by alt227 » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:07 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #124

alt227 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people are getting annoyed with Apple over these issues, and they are bleeding into the mainstream media more frequently. I have a few die hard Apple friends (Non-professionals) that have recently got so frustrated with being pushed into corners that they have given up the fruity ecosystem altogether. In no way am I suggesting that Apple are on the way out, but they have definitely started to turn the same corne…

Apple has always been like this, they were only humble during the few years they almost went bankrupt and needed all the help they could get.

Not in the view of the general public. The 'colourful era' of Mac G3s, and fancy iPod ads went a long way into making the average consumer see them as trendy, cool, and disrupting the normal boring tech industry we were used to. That reputation got them really far by riding the wave into the launch of the iPhone.

Since then their reputation has been slowly eroding with the average consumer with the combined stagnation of product design, and the string of high profile anti consumer and anti competitive moves highlighted in the media. We have seen this before in big tech, and I look forward to the next cool disruptor taking their place.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#128

Post by grishka » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:07 AM UTC

amelius wrote: post #78

isodev wrote: post #53

As a developer for apple platforms, it's extremely difficult to keep a positive mindset to all this. Year after year, Apple finds ways to continue unbounded fuckery. Making apps for iPhones is not that profitable anymore either, at this point is more about addressing a painful necessity - Apple is the phone company and you have to make it work if you want access to that "unmovable" infrastructure.

I'm seriously at a loss about why people would support this increasingly developer-hostile ecosystem and essentially work towards their own demise and perhaps even the rest of their profession. I'd suggest switching to a different source of income while you still can, even if only out of self-respect.

Because as a developer, you often don't get that choice, for example, if your product is an online service. Either you have an iOS app and play by Apple's stupid rules, or you don't, and your iPhone users go to a competitor that does have an iOS app, or at the very least complain quite loudly.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#129

Post by Y_Y » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:08 AM UTC

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #19

The greatest gem is found in the footnote, IMO > "They managed to convince the courts that iPadOS is a separate operating system to iOS (it's not), which delayed iPadOS being designated as a gatekeeper for almost a year. They are currently challenging all of the rest: the iOS, Safari, and App Store designations, and successfully managed to avoid iMessage being designated at all. They have taken the DMA law to court f…

Glad to see Apple standing up for human rights in Europe.

Maybe they are just different-thinking, artistic, humanist underdogs after all.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#130

Post by itopaloglu83 » Fri, Jul 11, 2025, 10:10 AM UTC

bzzzt wrote: post #104

jjcob wrote: post #57

I think at this point we should change the law so that Gatekeepers aren't just required to enable competition, but are somehow forced to actually support competition. I'm not sure how we could enforce that, but maybe the law could stipulate that a certain minimum percentage of users must use 3rd party app stores, or use web apps. They should pay a fine if less than say 5% of apps are distributed outside the app store…

First they have to enable competition, you're saying they have to support it but seemingly you want to enforce it. Where does it stop? Should Apple just pay out a part of their profits to their competitors? If a competitor wants market share they have to build a better service. Forcing users to go with a bad deal gets the incentives all wrong and is actually bad for consumer choice.

I think the EU started with the correct intentions. They saw a need to increase the competition in the digital marketplace and reduce the power iOS-Android duopoly has.

However, instead of defining the market rules, the process has been more about competitors and companies (who’re not happy with Apple’s success) trying to take a chunk of their business.

An iPhone is not a general computation device, it’s not an open ecosystem. Neither PlayStation, but there’s enough competition in the gaming console sector so nobody comes up with complains about not being able to install any app they want.

Edit: spelling and clarity.