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

Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#211

Post by alwayslikethis »

bsaul wrote: post #109

i don't understand how the EU didn't put up a very simple rule : users owns their phones and should be able to install any software they want without apple putting artificial restrictions or gateways exclusivity. Period. That should remove all the possibilities of apple trying to find the loopholes with shit measures such as those "options".

Or alternatively, that the manufacturer shall have no special privileges when it comes to software. The OS APIs needs to be public and if Apple can do something, someone else unauthorized should be able to do it also. This would also apply the play store privileges on Android, but that is a much less egregious violation than what Apple does.

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#212

Post by cjpearson »

nerdjon wrote: post #157

It really bothers me that so much of this is focused on the developers, and that is the problem here. How many users actually want this? I am sure some, but I doubt it is a significant number. I have said this before here, but I am not looking forward to when this likely eventually comes to the US and as a user I have less control over my phone, not more. The walled garden is why I chose an iPhone and continue to sta…

I find the situation is similar to right-to-work laws. If you find the walled-garden/closed-shop beneficial, you will not want it to be forcibly cracked open. Even though an individual can opt to remain with the App Store (or union), the influence of Apple (or the union) has diminished relative to the employer (or Facebook, Epic etc).

In the end, despite all the marketing, neither issue is about user or worker freedom. It's about which entity has more power.

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#213

Post by tdb7893 »

nerdjon wrote: post #157

It really bothers me that so much of this is focused on the developers, and that is the problem here. How many users actually want this? I am sure some, but I doubt it is a significant number. I have said this before here, but I am not looking forward to when this likely eventually comes to the US and as a user I have less control over my phone, not more. The walled garden is why I chose an iPhone and continue to sta…

I think most users don't care about the app store and would love a significant discount. Like if you have companies and users the choice people wouldn't willingly pay more for it

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#215

Post by EMIRELADERO »

alwayslikethis wrote: post #168
EMIRELADERO wrote: post #105

Apple is still non-compliant with the requirements of the DMA, especially in regards to Article 6(7), which provides: "The gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software featur…

The rules aren't really strict enough it seems. The gatekeeper should not be able to have any control over app distribution at all. Notarization and other forms of code signing must be possible to turn off and should not place the gatekeeper in a privileged position (for example, it should be possible to enroll other certificates).

The DMA says this about it:

> The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking strictly necessary and proportionate measures to ensure that interoperability does not compromise the integrity of the operating system, virtual assistant, hardware or software features provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper.

> The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking, to the extent that they are strictly necessary and proportionate, measures to ensure that third-party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper.

> Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall not be prevented from applying, to the extent that they are strictly necessary and proportionate, measures and settings other than default settings, enabling end users to effectively protect security in relation to third-party software applications or software application stores, provided that such measures and settings other than default settings are duly justified by the gatekeeper.

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#216

Post by nomius10 »

jcfrei wrote: post #129
CaptainMarvel wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't. This is a stark realisation that I have had over the past few years. I would once staunchly recommend iPhones for their strong security, in particular app isolation, on-device AI, and physical device security. However, over the years there have been more and more instances where Apple decides what I can do with my phone. From restricting APIs to give their first-party apps advantage, to, most recently, not h…

Yup, this is the choice: Either a walled garden run by Apple that has a price premium. Or a discounted device by Android that allows Google to snoop on all your data if you want to use a single one of their services (App Store, Gmail, Google Maps) - and correct me if I'm wrong but without play services enabled an Android is not really usable. I rather pay the premium.

GrapheneOS runs the google play services as a containerized app instead of a system level app, allowing you to disable access as needed. The downside is that it's only available for pixel phones.

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#217

Post by andy_ppp »

Etheryte wrote: post #84

The terms and conditions for web distribution [0] are concerning to say the least. In short, you have to have at least one million first installs annually on iOS to even qualify, in addition to other terms such as "good standing in the Apple Developer Program for two continuous years or more". I doubt Epic and the like would be considered in good standing as far as Apple is concerned. Also, quote unquote, developers…

Charging per install rather than per subscription is hilarious, almost as if all of this is designed to wind up the EU and cause the largest possible fine.

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#218

Post by jimmaswell »

concinds wrote: post #128
andersa wrote: post #93

What the hell is going on at Apple? It's starting to become really funny to see one obviously non-compliant malicious compliance attempt being made after another. Do they really not understand that they're no longer involved in the relationships between users and developers?

Don't overcomplicate it. They want to preserve their Services revenue, because Tim Cook is a bean-counter and wants to maintain the profit margin. "After Steve" by Tripp Mickle provides some background. Many Apple indie devs and fanboys are literally screaming. I bet many people @Apple are too. There are so many things the company could do to regain geek-cred. Package manager and windowing on macOS. Align Mac App Sto…

> VPs seem to think they're making products only for the stereotypical technophobic grandpa, rather than power users.

Hasn't Apple always been "computers for people who don't want to think about computers", while power users finding the tech interesting is just an accident?

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#219

Post by ED_Radish »

dangus wrote: post #150
CaptainMarvel wrote: post #110

My tolerance for Apple's walled garden expired with what they've pulled in reaction to the Digital Markets Act. It's become blatant (to me) they are landlords of their digital empire seeking to squeeze rent from everyone. I wouldn't mind paying for their expensive and yet still-profitable hardware if not for the antics they pull on the software side. Everyone should be able to run whatever legally-obtained program th…

I just wonder how products like game consoles would be viable under a law like this. I assume they would have to cost much more and there would be far less incentive for their development in the first place. Then again, we are at the end stages of game consoles. Microsoft in particular seems to be considering the idea of not even bothering with hardware. Software is where the money is, Chinese hardware companies can…

The Steam Deck iirc is sold below cost and seems to have been a reasonable success.

The market for consoles would still exist. It would just be that the bar for console manufacturers would be set higher from "make a good console then extract value" to "make a good console, then make the best digital marketplace for it, then extract value" which seems fair to me. Make the big three sweat a lil.

Re: Apple announces ability to download apps directly from websites in EU

#220

Post by arghwhat »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #215
alwayslikethis wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rules aren't really strict enough it seems. The gatekeeper should not be able to have any control over app distribution at all. Notarization and other forms of code signing must be possible to turn off and should not place the gatekeeper in a privileged position (for example, it should be possible to enroll other certificates).

The DMA says this about it: > The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking strictly necessary and proportionate measures to ensure that interoperability does not compromise the integrity of the operating system, virtual assistant, hardware or software features provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper. > The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking, to the…

That is to say, they are allowed to provide certain mandatory security services where justified for free.
Post reply on HN