Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#31

Post by MaysonL » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 3:57 PM UTC

Tepix wrote: post #18

nazgu1 wrote: post #6

I wonder how it is that we, as the users, allow it when iOS started allowing third-party. After that we accepted that macOS is more and more closed platform. And I'm hearing constantly something like "Yes, that's wrong, but at least platform is secure". For me security is less about how much platform is closed and more about how educated users are. On the side note that is interesting, that when first iOS version was…

> allow it when iOS started allowing third-party Did you mean "allowing"? Or "prohibiting"

First iPhone had no App Store: no third-party apps.

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#32

Post by benoau » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:16 PM UTC

qubex wrote: post #30

Oh the hoops I had to jump through to get UTM with JIT enabled on my 17 Pro Max with iOS 26…

The article claims Apple said the OS doesn't control that feature lmao...

> But Apple rejected the request from the developer and said JIT for non-browser apps was not a feature controlled by iOS.

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#33

Post by nothinkjustai » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:19 PM UTC

inetknght wrote: post #12

nazgu1 wrote: post #6

I wonder how it is that we, as the users, allow it when iOS started allowing third-party. After that we accepted that macOS is more and more closed platform. And I'm hearing constantly something like "Yes, that's wrong, but at least platform is secure". For me security is less about how much platform is closed and more about how educated users are. On the side note that is interesting, that when first iOS version was…

> I wonder how it is that we, as the users, allow it It's not like we have a choice. Either allow it or... what? Buy a different computer? With what money? Spend time installing a new OS? With what time? And for most users: with what skills? So long as businesses make choices about the devices you own, you don't really have a choice about "allowing" it to happen.

What? Obviously we can purchase a different computer, install Linux, etc. Apple doesn’t have anything close to a monopoly market position. I buy Apple because I don’t care about customizing my device, I just want something reliable that works and has a good design. Don’t paternalise me by implying I don’t have a choice here.

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#34

Post by nothinkjustai » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:22 PM UTC

Are people honestly surprised that companies being forced by the EU to give up parts of their competitive advantage would be maliciously compliant? That’s honestly baked into the regulatory system. Make better legislation next time LOL

I stand with Apple here :)

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#35

Post by JustExAWS » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:57 PM UTC

nazgu1 wrote: post #6

I wonder how it is that we, as the users, allow it when iOS started allowing third-party. After that we accepted that macOS is more and more closed platform. And I'm hearing constantly something like "Yes, that's wrong, but at least platform is secure". For me security is less about how much platform is closed and more about how educated users are. On the side note that is interesting, that when first iOS version was…

People have been saying that Apple was going to require apps to be sold through the Mac App Store since 2010. You can install anything you want on your Mac.

And if only mean old Apple is suppressing PWAs, then why are the same companies who make apps for iOS also making apps for Android instead of telling Android users to use the web?

Second point, Apple could care less about random indie developers using a PWA. It came out in the Epic trial that 90% of App Store revenue came from loot boxes and other in app purchases for pay to win games.

Third point, users no more wish they could have shitty PWAs than Electron apps. It’s just what we are stuck with on the desktop

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#36

Post by JustExAWS » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:59 PM UTC

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #24

CharlesW wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nowadays Apple do everything to suppress PWA ;) Incorrect, see https://pwascore.com/ for a non-religious take. Nobody cares about PWAs, but that's not Apple's fault.

"nobody cares about PWAs" says commenter in reply to post that seems to care about PWAs also, I care about PWAs glad we could make your day by introducing you to something new I think if it were a viable option on an iphone, a nonzero number of people would choose the more privacy-preserving aspects of a PWA over installing a random app

This is completely illogical. There are a lot more dark pattern tracking that websites can do across websites than native apps without a user’s permission

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#37

Post by Someone » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 5:05 PM UTC

benoau wrote: post #20

intothemild wrote: post #15

I wonder how much this will change now that Tim Apple, is out and John Apple is in. (probably none)

The status quo is insanely profitable for Apple and Cook is still going to be "engaging with policymakers around the world" so I don't think they'll deviate from malicious compliance and stalling tactics any time soon. The perjury, contempt and referral for criminal investigation in the US carried no consequence, Japan and Brazil's regulations have been undermined by massive fees, as has the EU but they're afraid to…

> 3 years since the DMA came into effect, and nothing has changed.

Not nothing. In the EU, there are settings now to set default apps for browser, email, navigation, contactless payments, calling and messaging, for example.

And there are alternative app stores now, AFAIK.

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#38

Post by retired » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 5:13 PM UTC

nothinkjustai wrote: post #34

Are people honestly surprised that companies being forced by the EU to give up parts of their competitive advantage would be maliciously compliant? That’s honestly baked into the regulatory system. Make better legislation next time LOL I stand with Apple here :)

Reminded me of being a CS student. I got a list of 10 requirements for the software design. Most people implemented 9, struggling with the 10th. I implemented 6. Professor asked why I only did 6. Well, if I implemented 6 features and those would all pass testing that would have been enough for a 6/10 grade, which is enough to pass the class. The rest of my precious time I could spend on classes that I found more interesting.

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#39

Post by tpmoney » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 5:13 PM UTC

benoau wrote: post #32

qubex wrote: post #30

Oh the hoops I had to jump through to get UTM with JIT enabled on my 17 Pro Max with iOS 26…

The article claims Apple said the OS doesn't control that feature lmao... > But Apple rejected the request from the developer and said JIT for non-browser apps was not a feature controlled by iOS.

Whether or not you agree with their position on JIT, their claim is more complete and nuanced than that. Their actual denial states:

    We have reviewed your submission and determined that your request falls outside the scope of
    Article 6(7) DMA because it is not seeking interoperability with a software feature accessed or
    controlled by iOS or iPadOS and used by an equivalent Apple service. Apple does not itself
    oﬀer emulation functionalities on iOS or iPadOS and it does not oﬀer JIT compilation for non-
    browser apps on iOS or iPadOS.

Specifically they are arguing that since the only application on iOS that is allowed to do JIT is safari and that since they already have access to that JIT capabilities for other browser apps, the DMA does not require them to create a broader JIT capability for all applications.

That’s not a wholly unreasonable stance though I can certainly see how the EU might argue that the capability existing for browsers at all implies it should be available for all applications regardless of their purpose. This does make me wonder about the swift playground app. Is that not using JIT to execute the swift code?

Re: Apple ignores DMA interoperability requests and contradicts own documentation

#40

Post by skybrian » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 5:24 PM UTC

nazgu1 wrote: post #6

I wonder how it is that we, as the users, allow it when iOS started allowing third-party. After that we accepted that macOS is more and more closed platform. And I'm hearing constantly something like "Yes, that's wrong, but at least platform is secure". For me security is less about how much platform is closed and more about how educated users are. On the side note that is interesting, that when first iOS version was…

Educating billions of nontechnical users is far harder than technical fixes. It’s not going to happen at scale, so that’s basically an excuse to do nothing.

Mobile phones are mostly for nontechnical users. There are some accommodations for power users and I’m glad they’re there, but we’re not the primary audience.