Apple Opens Web Distribution Option for iOS Devs Targeting EU 35
Apple is opening up web distribution for iOS apps targeting users in the European Union starting Tuesday. Developers who opt in -- and who meet Apple's criteria, including app notarization requirements -- will be able to offer iPhone apps for direct download to EU users from their own websites. From a report: It's a massive change for a mobile ecosystem that otherwise bars so-called "sideloading." Apple's walled garden stance has enabled it to funnel essentially all iOS developer revenue through its own App Store in the past. But, in the EU, that moat is being dismantled as a result of new regulations that apply to the App Store and which the iPhone maker has been expected to comply with since early last month. In March, Apple announced that a web distribution entitlement would soon be coming to its mobile platform as part of changes aimed at complying with the bloc's Digital Markets Act (DMA). The pan-EU regulation puts a set of obligations on in-scope tech giants that lawmakers hope will level the competitive playing field for platforms' business users, as well as protecting consumers from Big Tech throwing its weight around.
Funny how this is only for the EU (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess politicians in the rest of the world do not mind their voters getting screwed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Can you or someone actually make a list out of things that users will gain from all of this...?
Why does anyone use F-droid? [f-droid.org] Why does anyone use F-droid to install NewPipe [newpipe.net]? Why does anyone use github? You bore me, go read this thread [slashdot.org]. The EU is leading the way, and Neelie Kroes [wikipedia.org] did a fantastic job.
Re:Funny how this is only for the EU (Score:4, Interesting)
I regret you found my citations unhelpful and you otherwise seem to struggle with technical stuff that's common here on the slashdots.
define:slashdots (Score:2)
noun
plural noun: slashdots
1. the cheap seats, also known as the comment section of the website known as Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice one!
Re: (Score:2)
Some day ... when search engines are invented, I won't have to write down your references to look up at the library next week.
Re: (Score:2)
Some day ... when search engines are invented, I won't have to write down your references to look up at the library next week.
I am sorry. I will clarify that I was referring to being able to install applications that are otherwise not approved by Apple. An example might be an open-source YouTube player hosted on github.com that respects all of the applicable YouTube APIs and licensing with none of the ads. This is known as side-loading [techtarget.com] on Android. Now Apple users in the EU can do what Android users have been able to do for many years. Or Linux users have been doing since Day 1 which is pertinent to the fine article.
Re: (Score:2)
Now Apple users in the EU can do what Android users have been able to do for many years.
Nope. Apple still requires ALL apps to be reviewed and notarized. [apple.com]
I'm not sure why people keep having this misconception that Apple has opened anything up. Apple still has final say on approving an app, which means that this is nothing like how it works on Android.
Re: (Score:2)
Now Apple users in the EU can do what Android users have been able to do for many years.
Nope. Apple still requires ALL apps to be reviewed and notarized. [apple.com]
I'm not sure why people keep having this misconception that Apple has opened anything up. Apple still has final say on approving an app, which means that this is nothing like how it works on Android.
Thank the FSM for that last sentence!
Re: (Score:3)
No, Apple is NOT reviewing any apps not using the App Store. Apple is notarizing apps, but that just means Apple is signing them.
Basically you send your IPA through Apple's page, and it comes back to you signed.
Apple will sign anything, without rev
Re: (Score:2)
Apple will sign anything, without reviewing it. If something turns out to be malware then Apple could potentially figure out whose app it is and ask the developer to fix it.
There's some vetting requirements a developer has to meet before they're allowed to even participate, and if they did sign malware (or just something Apple doesn't like - read the T&Cs), Apple can revoke the developer's signature.
Go here [apple.com] and click "Show Notarization Review Guidelines Only". There's still quite a bit Apple doesn't allow, such as apps that allow user-submitted DUI checkpoint locations (yes, seriously).
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone can compile and install iOS software (Score:2)
Anyone with a free Apple Developer account and a computer running Mac OS can compile, sign, and install any software they want on an iOS device. All you need is a USB cable and the ability to unlock the iOS device. It has been this way since at least 2009 and possibly before that.
This recurring BS that you Cann't side load on iOS is bizarre. How do you think developers test their software?
I myself have over 50 public GitHub repos full of iOS software that you can download, compile, and install on any iOS de
Re: (Score:2)
You've conveniently omitted the facts that self-signing apps with a free developer account [apple.com] is limited to a maximum of 10 concurrent apps per account, and the apps have to be re-signed every 7 days.
Re: (Score:3)
They will be able to get tricked into downloading and installing malware.
I think you missed this part:
Developers who opt in -- and who meet Apple's criteria, including app notarization requirements
Re: (Score:2)
Some people want the wider ecosystem, and for their phones to be treated essentially like desktop computers - the wild west, with endless possibilities. And that's fine. That's not what Apple is selling. Apple is selling a controlled environment - a massively capable device that is decidedly NOT a desktop wanna-be. The fact that the hardware could do it isn't actually relevant. Ferrari isn't selling dump trucks, even if their cars have four wheels and a trunk.
For the vast - VAST - majority of users, this me
Re: (Score:2)
Some people want the wider ecosystem, and for their phones to be treated essentially like desktop computers - the wild west, with endless possibilities. And that's fine. That's not what Apple is selling.
If you want a smartphone platform which doesn't restrict which apps you're allowed to run, you have one choice: Android. That grants Google a de facto monopoly.
Now, the question is, what do you do when there is a competitor but for some bizarre reason, they choose not to offer a truly competitive product? Hell, that's the situation with broadband service in my neighborhood. AT&T has basically ceded to Spectrum and they now only provide service to legacy customers who are grandfathered in.
It seems tru
Re: (Score:2)
Why is Google's monopoly a thing we should use to judge Apple? What's important is whether or not Apple has a monopoly. And not only is iOS not the world's largest platform, Samsung recently passed Apple as the world's largest provider of devices.
We should not be mandating equivalence. That's not necessary for things to compete. As a matter of fact, market differentiators are where competition should happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is Google's monopoly a thing we should use to judge Apple? What's important is whether or not Apple has a monopoly.
Google and Apple both share the blame of muscling out all the competition in the smartphone OS market. Ideally, there should be more competition so (to re-use your car analogy) consumer choices aren't limited to choosing between either a dump truck or a sports car.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Funny how this is only for the EU (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you or someone actually make a list out of things that users will gain from all of this...?
What the users should've gained was the ability to use iOS in the same manner as most other computing platforms, where the owner of the device ultimately has the final say over which apps are allowed to run. However, as implemented by Apple, this change makes little difference since iOS app developers still need permission from Apple to distribute an app. The fact that the app download itself is hosted outside of the App Store is basically a formality, since iOS will still refuse to run any apps which hav
Re: (Score:2)
They are only addressing the economic argument, not the human rights argument.
Typical for EU bureaucrats.
ECB, World Bank, EU, BIS, IMF, NATO - one big incestuous club.
Re: (Score:2)
The irony being that most smartphone apps are free anyway, so 30% of $0.00 is still $0.00. Even if Apple did take a smaller cut, it's not as if freemium app developers are gonna knock that same percentage off the price of your in-app purchase of Smurfberries, or your monthly subscription to their app-as-a-service - they're just going to pocket their extra profit. So, from an end-user perspective, nothing changes.
Re: (Score:3)
"Can you or someone actually make a list out of things that users will gain from all of this...?"
As usual here, you don't understand where the EU Commission is coming from. For them it is always about economics, its about opening competition for some players in some segments under some conditions. In this case its about dismantling the walled garden. Its about giving vendors (not just developers, though that may be a first step) the ability to sell apps to iPhone users. It is about making the applicatio
Re: (Score:2)
"The EU is doing what it always does. For them it is about stealing from America what they won't or can't create for themselves.
That's all they have done for the last almost twenty years now.
If you or anyone else actually wanted a phone that worked like a desktop, you would have gone and built it. But they won't."
This is, obviously, nothing to do with the capabilities of the phones. Its only to do with the policies Apple is following. There already is "a phone that works like a desktop" in that its a phon
Re: (Score:2)
Can you or someone actually make a list out of things that users will gain from all of this...?
Whenever I want to use the app to interact with an organization, I *never* use the app store. That's because (1) advertising takes top spot, (2) it's hard to distinguish which are the scummy exploitative apps, vs the real ones. Instead I start from the organization's website, search for an "open in app store" link, and follow it, to be sure I'm getting to official proper trustworthy app. This rule change will save me the hassle of indirection.
For instance: search for "seattle center" in the app store to fin
Re: (Score:2)
Simple. It will make apps less expensive to develop, and the users will benefit.