82 pointsby saubeidl17 hours ago6 comments
  • fxtentacle17 hours ago
    "The European Commission is requiring Apple to make a series of additional changes to the App Store. We disagree with this outcome and plan to appeal."

    Reading that made me very happy. It clearly shows that EU bureaucrats - despite their bad reputation - still have teeth when it comes to reigning in overly greedy US companies. Back in '98, the EU versions of Windows were very desirable, as they were free of bloatware. Soon, history might repeat with US consumers pretending to be in the EU to free their hardware.

    • kshacker16 hours ago
      I guess it is a battle between EU bureaucrats vs American Daddies :)

      // I know it is tongue in cheek, but that is what this may end up being, especially if Apple is able to move non-trivial amounts of manufacturing to US.

      What is non-trivial? IMO if China, India and USA become 3 tiers with each tier being half of the previous tier, that would somehow be justifiable as "hey we are almost there, we can do it any time, but let's have the hatchet ready but keep the cheap devices for now"

      • saubeidl16 hours ago
        I will take to the streets and start rioting if necessary, should EU leadership bend to US pressure on this.

        It is our sovereign right to make laws that determine the rules of our society. Americans can either abide by them or get out of our market.

        • hatradiowigwam16 hours ago
          Us Americans have approximately zero to do with your rules or society. The idea of thinking Apple (or Microsoft, or Google) represents "Americans" is absurd. We don't vote for them to exist, we have no mechanism to stop their existence or oppose them in any way. We're as happy about EU forcing them to change as anyone else - our own attempts all failed. Jail break providers(for instance) were persecuted with legal process, gag orders, and seizure of their assets. Repairing iPhones as a side business? They put a stop to us doing that also.

          I'm all in agreement with your emotional sentiment, but please understand "Americans" do /not/ like the same things you do not like. Our country just takes away our ability to do anything about it. Land of the free and whatnot...

          edit: typo

          • croonan hour ago
            > I'm all in agreement with your emotional sentiment, but please understand "Americans" do /not/ like the same things you do not like. Our country just takes away our ability to do anything about it.

            I appreciate that this might be true for a large portion of US-americans, but the country isn't doing anything, the people continually voted into power takes that ability away, which can be adjusted bi-annually.

          • foolswisdom16 hours ago
            > Americans can either abide by them or get out of our market.

            I think GP was talking about Americans running companies.

          • 15 hours ago
            undefined
          • saubeidl16 hours ago
            Let me clarify: I don't mean individual American persons. I mean the American oligarchy and the political machine it controls.

            Individual Americans are often great people - some of which I am proud to call my friends.

      • bigyabai13 hours ago
        Except you can't do it at any time. America tried this logic with the motor vehicle (and offshored it), then the semiconductor (and offshored it), and now we're seeing it for pretty much every other manufactured commodity America is known for. What do we make, anymore?

        There's a simple explanation for why this happened: America really believes in free market competition. Even when we're getting reamed by global competitors in cost and quality, someone always presupposes that this manufacturing capacity can come back. But that's not how it works; products are worth what people will pay for them, and if the trade value goes down then the gross domestic product will follow.

        It's a blatant vulnerability of democratic capitalism. I'd like for you to be right, but I live in America. I don't know if anything on my desk was made in America; I don't even know if my desk itself was made domestically anymore. America isn't a rung on the manufacturing ladder, you could remove us entirely and only stand to increase your margins.

    • dlachausse16 hours ago
      As an independent developer, I wish the EU would reverse their decision to make me either doxx myself or not have paid apps in the EU App Store. Thankfully, right now my only app is free so I can get away with saying that I'm not a trader.

      I'll probably just have to bite the bullet and form an LLC with a rented address and phone number once I get ready to release a paid app, which unfortunately just increases my costs even more for what is most likely to remain just a small side hustle.

      I still don't see a good reason why independent developers like me should have to publish their personal address and phone number on the App Store. I'm not willing to put my family in danger like that.

      • tfourb16 hours ago
        >I'll probably just have to bite the bullet and form an LLC with a rented address and phone number once I get ready to release a paid app, which unfortunately just increases my costs even more for what is most likely to remain just a small side hustle.

        This is actually still not a valid solution. You'll have to provide an address where you can be physically reached, even if you publish your app as an LLC (at least under German law). A "rented" address won't fulfill that criteria. If you run your LLC out of your personal home, you'll need to publish your personal address (again, under German law, it may be different in other EU countries).

        This does make sense in principle, as it allows your customers to actually track you down in case they feel the need to sue you.

        You might get away with listing the address of a co-working space, if you are actually physically present at that address during normal business hours.

        You might also get away with listing your legal name and the address of your lawyer. But your lawyer would need to agree with this and you'd have to have an arrangement in place that they will represent you in any and all future cases, which might be difficult. This doesn't seem to be a settled question in german jurisprudence.

        Also, you could just chance it. Not listing an address will simply result in potential exposure to a cease and desist letter, which (under German law) only results in limited financial liability. I am not a lawyer, so please get a professional to check, but if you are really serious about not exposing your personal address, it might be simpler and cheaper to run the low risk of a cease and desist instead of making a big fuss about an alternative address.

        • lapcat15 hours ago
          German law is basically irrelevant unless you're in Germany. All that matters is what Apple makes App Store developers do, and Apple doesn't give a crap as long as you have some address and some phone number that Apple can verify.

          Apple doesn't even police the "trader" self-declaration. I've seen several (scam) developers in the App Store who are clearly traders but have declared that they're not traders in the EU. Apple's compliance here is mostly perfunctory.

        • Aloisius14 hours ago
          The company can be reached at a rented address. That's the whole point of them. There is an agent at the address that can receive things like legal correspondence.

          It appears Germany appears has similar services where you can get a virtual business addresses at business centers.

          • tfourb8 hours ago
            Under German law you need a “ladungsfähige” address, which a rented address is explicitly not. You need to be physically present at that address as a person.
      • mjr0016 hours ago
        > I still don't see a good reason why independent developers like me should have to publish their personal address and phone number on the App Store [for paid apps].

        Because if someone purchases an app and there's a dispute with the product, they need a business address and/or phone number to contact and resolve the problem. It seems like a very good reason to me.

        • 16 hours ago
          undefined
        • dlachausse15 hours ago
          [flagged]
          • wtallis15 hours ago
            The point is to have an avenue for recourse/accountability when the developer is not behaving.
            • lapcat14 hours ago
              What's the recourse?

              You've got a European consumer, a $5 App Store app, and some contact info in the United States, or some other country. What exactly do you think is going to happen in that situation?

              The accountability for App Store developers is via Apple, not via some address and phone number. App Store consumers request a refund through Apple, or if there's some other problem with the developer, the consumers report it to Apple, who has the developer's contact info regardless of whether the developer is a trader in the EU.

              • Aloisius14 hours ago
                The recourse is sometimes a lawsuit or criminal charges.

                If your app say, defrauds someone and steals money from their bank account, then you as the developer are liable.

                A refund of the app isn't going to cover it.

                • lapcat14 hours ago
                  > The recourse is sometimes a lawsuit or criminal charges.

                  Do you think a European consumer is going to successfully sue or prosecute someone on the other side of the globe from them?

                  > If your app say, defrauds someone and steals money from their bank account, then you as the developer are liable.

                  If an App Store app is defrauding consumers and stealing money from their bank accounts, then presumably Apple would get involved directly, like I already said. Going through Apple is the recourse and always has been.

                  Indeed you'd probably have better luck suing Apple itself rather than trying to sue some rando remote developer.

                • dlachausse14 hours ago
                  The lawyer could get a personal address from Apple if necessary in that scenario without publicly listing the individual developer’s home address.
      • pchangran hour ago
        I literally decided not to serve the German market so I could get away with not having to deal with German regulations
      • lapcat15 hours ago
        Where are you located? You can likely use Google Voice and a post office box rather than your home info.
      • loxs16 hours ago
        Can you elaborate? If you sell the app via a limited company do you have to doxx yourself personally?
        • tfourb16 hours ago
          At least under German law, if you offer services or products for purchase, you need to provide an address where you can be physically reached. For self-employed entrepreneurs the only address that will fulfill that criterium is your private domicile.
      • reassess_blind16 hours ago
        Probably fine to use a random BS address, until your app takes off enough to justify the LLC? Do they actually mail you anything?
    • gjsman-100016 hours ago
      > Soon, history might repeat with US consumers pretending to be in the EU to free their hardware

      Very unlikely. Phones have to identify the country they are operating in for wireless emission regulations, whether it be from SIM cards, GPS, sale region, account region, etc. They have been doing this for a very long time.

      • peterlada16 hours ago
        Wrong.

        Apple long standing policy is to look at the country of billing address. As an American living in Europe this has been super to keep watching the Apple TV+ content.

        • rekoil16 hours ago
          What Apple TV+ content aren’t we getting in the EU?
          • rsynnott2 hours ago
            Sports, probably; the international rights for that tend to be a bit of a minefield.
        • 15 hours ago
          undefined
    • frizlab13 hours ago
      As someone in the EU I’m very unhappy that I have to pretend being in the US to actually be able to access all macOS/iOS can do. I know I’ll be downvoted to oblivion but I loathe these laws.
  • rcarmo16 hours ago
    Still waiting for the ability to compile and deploy my own apps on the hardware I own without having to re-sign and reload every week or so. If you don't intend to distribute an app, I don't see why you should be unduly penalized for it.
    • mslansn16 hours ago
      Because you can do this to install pirated apps, which is something they are trying to avoid.
      • rcarmo15 hours ago
        That is if you re-sign IPA files. If you locked a build to an Apple ID or set of devices and limited my deployments to the devices I own that would not be a problem--it is the periodic re-signing that I care about.

        At least make it last a year, the current limits are completely stupid.

    • pimeys16 hours ago
      That would finally make using these lifesaving apps much easier, if you don't want to use Android.

      https://loopkit.github.io/loopdocs/

      • wtallis15 hours ago
        Turning your iPhone into an unregulated DIY medical device really does not seem like the kind of use case that any serious business would be swayed by. What you're asking for would be pretty terrifying for the lawyers. You shouldn't expect any company to deliberately make accommodations for that use case; rather, you should expect them to at most add more disclaimers of liability for what you do with your phone.
        • msgodel14 hours ago
          God forbid we give consumers access to tools from a place like Lowe's (also a large public company btw [1].) Think of all the dangerous things people could build with them!!!!

          This is so unbelievably retarded.

          [1] https://elite.finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=LOW&p=d

          • saubeidl3 hours ago
            Please don't normalize the use of ableist language as a slur.
            • msgodel3 hours ago
              Don't make me call it gay too.
          • wtallis13 hours ago
            Obviously there's no point in trying to entirely prevent people from DIYing dangerous devices, medical or otherwise. But that's not what's at issue here. The problem here is the absolutely stupid idea of using a desire for dangerous DIY as the argument in favor of loosening restrictions already in place. It's pretty much the least-compelling argument possible.
            • msgodel3 hours ago
              Ah I see what you're saying, although now that I think about it that actually is a very good argument for Apple not reviewing apps at all. By trying to moderate all of the iOS software Apple takes responsibility for it and becomes liable, this doesn't just mean no medical apps but it also changes what's allowed with communication apps for example (and many more.) It's really just a terrible way to run things.

              Just let people do what they want, this makes no sense.

            • pimeys8 hours ago
              AndroidAPS has saved my life and countless of other lives. It is an absolutely amazing tool, so please be respectful before saying it is stupid.
              • wtallis6 hours ago
                Please do me the courtesy of not misrepresenting what I have said and clarified. I have not said that AndroidAPS or Loop or any other DIY medical device software is stupid. I have only said that it is something a reputable business would consider risky and dangerous.

                What I have said is stupid is: your attempt to use that software as an argument in favor of loosening Apple's restrictions on iOS applications. The apps in question are such a legal nightmare that they're not available in any major app store, for iOS or Android. No business with a competent legal department would want to be directly involved with those software projects, unless they were planning to incorporate them into their own product and get it certified by regulators like the FDA. If Apple or any other company in a similar situation decided to open up their platform and even mentioned that one of the benefits of that change was to enable this DIY medical device use case, that would probably put them at substantial legal risk.

                Regardless of how useful you find such software, you're not going to get a corporation on board by drawing their attention to such a big legal risk. You're also unlikely to win over government regulators, since they're likely to be of the opinion that medical devices should be regulated.

                You've identified a reason why some customers may want Apple to change their strategy, but you've completely failed to provide a reason why Apple would want to change, or why a government would want to force Apple to change.

                • pimeys2 hours ago
                  This is the main reason I stay far away from any apple products. And hope EU will slap them hard and force them to allow this. I don't need them to want this, I want EU to force them to do this or put hefty recurring fines until they open the platform.
    • bowsamic16 hours ago
      I constantly complain about this, but they’ll never let you do it, because our hobby apps have no ads
    • archagon10 hours ago
      You should not be penalized for it even if you do intend to distribute an app. This endless rent seeking is utter bullshit.
  • rekoil17 hours ago

        Developers who opt for tier one will get access to a limited set of mandatory App Store services, including:
        * App distribution and delivery
        * Trust and safety features
        * App management
        [...]
        Developers who opt for tier two will get access to all services provided by the App Store today.
    
    Am I wrong or does it seem like apps in "tier 1" won't even have access to app notification delivery? That's wild...
    • saubeidl17 hours ago
      There's is absolutely 0% chance this will fly. Apple is begging for a fine at this point, with their bad-faith malicious interpretations of the law.
      • itake16 hours ago
        I think this is how Android Play store currently works? If you deploy your app via another means, you get to DIY your own push infrastructure. I remember Square had to do this for their POS units that run Android, but weren't managed by the play store.
        • veeti16 hours ago
          No, Firebase Cloud Messaging is a separate service from Play Store. As long as the device has Google Mobile Services installed the app can be installed from anywhere and doesn't need to be uploaded to Play Store.
          • itake12 hours ago
            Yeah that’s a big requirement. To get Google mobile services, you’re required to install Google chrome, Google play, and bunch of other bloatware.

            You don’t have to load the app via Google play but your device needs to be managed by Google.

        • rekoil16 hours ago
          Which would be fair game except to my knowledge there’s no API in iOS that enables the use of anything other than APNS for notifications. I could be mistaken though!
          • itake12 hours ago
            Again, I don’t see how that is different from android.

            For android, you need to buy into all the ecosystem of Google to access their push notification service.

            You can use android without google’s system, but you can’t use google push system.

        • jcdentonn16 hours ago
          [dead]
      • gjsman-100016 hours ago
        You're certain the EU didn't just approve this plan?
        • rsynnott2 hours ago
          I mean, it's _possible_ that they had some sort of informal pre-approval, but given that Apple's last few 'attempts' to comply with EU law have swiftly been met with a "yeah, no" from the commission, there's not that much reason to think that _this_ one is the pre-cleared one.
        • saubeidl16 hours ago
          Our leaders are sometimes spineless, so I unfortunately can't be certain.

          I am however pretty certain that said spinelessness wouldn't fly with the European public.

          • mslansn16 hours ago
            Doesn't really matter since the European commission is not voted by us - we have no choice in the matter.
            • saubeidl15 hours ago
              The European commission is nominated by our elected governments.

              It is as democratic as the US presidency, which is also nominated by electors.

              This is a tired talking point designed to sow doubt in the European project.

              • mslansn15 hours ago
                Adding layers of indirection makes it less democratic. We should be able to vote for them directly.
                • saubeidl15 hours ago
                  Sure it does.

                  But one layer of indirection is not crazy, that's the way any minister in any country works - or the way the US presidency does.

                  You can't directly elect every single official - it just doesn't scale. It also doesn't really make sense in the commissioner case as different commissioners have different portfolios and which country gets what is subject to negotiation between member states.

        • jcdentonn16 hours ago
          [dead]
    • msgodel14 hours ago
      Apple's complaint will likely be that it's a "technical limitation" because they run the only iOS notification gateway.

      Never mind that Mozilla manages to run one for Firefox completely free to users and devs despite being a comically mismanaged nonprofit and if it were really a problem for them they could allow users to enter the domain name for an alternative one.

      This issue right here is actually why there have been so few usable open source federated chat apps on the iPhone: the client maintainers must also maintain infrastructure for notifications and are not allowed to delegate this to people hosting their own infrastructure. This is actually the core complaint many people have with how Apple runs their app store and it's very visibly made the internet less usable for everyone.

    • lapcat17 hours ago
      Here are the new tiers: https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/reference...

      The document says manual updates are included but not automatic updates (which is just a setting in the App Store that I personally disable).

      Whether there will be update notifications is unclear. Is that what you meant by "app notification delivery", or something else?

      As an App Store developer myself, I would love to have Tier 1 in the United States, mainly due to no user ratings and reviews. I hate them, and I hate trying to solicit them. As far as I'm concerned, ditching ratings & reviews would be a bonus!

      • jmole17 hours ago
        "No user ratings and reviews" - that just means you rank last in app store search, right?

        Apple will do whatever they can to ensure that developers that don't pay will suffer the costs.

        • scottyah16 hours ago
          Ratings and reviews cost money to maintain. Anti-spam, compute, distribution, security concerns, etc. Apple should do whatever they can to ensure that developers who aren't paying don't degrade the service for everyone else.
        • lapcat17 hours ago
          Tier 1 has only exact match search.

          That's fine with me. All of my empirical evidence over the years suggests that my customers are coming mostly from the outside, and Apple is not bringing me many customers from inside the App Store.

          • OptionOfT15 hours ago
            With the web becoming more fuzzy it has become acceptable to other products when you're searching for a specific brand.

            But when I want to buy Grey Poupon Mustard, I don't want to see Heinz etc. If you don't have Grey Poupon, I don't want to see anything.

        • cyral16 hours ago
          This sounds kinda like what they did when they were forced to allow outside payments in the US. It could only be one link, with a big scary warning, and a 27% cut. They "comply" with the ruling by making another alternative deal that nobody would ever take. Fortunately this backfired in the US and they were actually forced to get rid of all the restrictions in May.
        • jajko17 hours ago
          I swear there must be somebody properly petty in higher management of apple to keep coming with these childish moves that harm image of the company as some sort of serious reliable manufacturer.

          I guess to each their own

          • danieldk16 hours ago
            Yep, I have been a Mac user since 2007 and iPhone user since 2009. But all the malicious compliance and pettiness has me looking at alternatives (at least for iPhone, since it has good alternatives).

            I don't recognize the fun, playful Apple of the 00s and early 10s anymore. Its soul has been replaced.

      • rekoil5 hours ago
        No I meant like APNS, which is what iOS uses to send notifications to iOS devices. It's the only way to get iOS to display a notification currently, and it isn't possible to register your own backend for it, so if you want notifications shipped to your users (as in, alerts that happen while users do not have your app open) then you must (to my knowledge) go through Apple.
        • lapcatan hour ago
          In that case, then, I think you're wrong. You were quoting a list of store services. APNS is an iOS feature but not an App Store service. And indeed, APNS is not listed as a Tier 2 service either.
    • bigyabai17 hours ago
      It would make sense to provide an alternative if Apple's priority was the privacy of their users. Unfortunately, we have testimony from American congressmembers that suggests they have ulterior priorities: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-...
      • 165944709116 hours ago
        That article is a spun version from what appears to be the source article from reuters[0]. Being that they lifted quotes from there and then added a clickbait title by forgetting to add that Google is also compelled by governments to give them the data.

        The only "ulterior priorities" I could pick up on was that Apple was most likely following the Government restrictions in a more discerning way than Google by not breaking out the push notifications in their aggregated data for request disclosures. Once it was made public by a Senator, Apple updated their policy and started to break it out to its own section. How long Google did this before Apple is not stated and the DOJ declined to comment on the push notification surveillance or whether it had prevented Apple or Google from talking about it.

        [0] https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/governments...

        • bigyabai15 hours ago
          I'm not treating this as a relative comparison, it's a criticism specifically of Apple's service architecture. When you prioritize privacy while refusing transparency, you end up in situations like this very often. That would not be the case if Apple held themselves to their advertised standards for the infrastructure they build.
  • martinald16 hours ago
    No automatic updates surely makes tier one a non starter, unless this can be automatically triggered by the app? For regular users it will mean horrendous version fragmentation that will just get worse and worse over the months/years. Or significantly increases churn by forcing users to manually go into the app store to update before accessing the app?
    • tfourb16 hours ago
      Couldn't the developer simply run a version check when the app starts and throw up a popup with the link to the app store to update the app? Sure, it will introduce some friction, but maybe it's worth it for some developers to pay a lower commission, i.e. if they plan to only rarely update their app.

      But in the general sense I agree: it would be a much better user experience and contribute to safety if automatic app updates would be included in all tiers.

      • martinald14 hours ago
        Yes that's what I meant in the last sentence of my post. But this is serious friction and will result in churn for a lot of apps, especially on those with poor 4G or low data limits. Normally apps update mostly when the phone is charging, which is much more likely to have wifi. Now if you're out of your house and need an app you'd have to update it there and then.
      • OptionOfT15 hours ago
        There are apps that already do this. They force you to download the new version before using it.

        From an API manageability point of view it makes sense.

    • croisillon16 hours ago
      on the other hand i still don't understand why airbnb requires ios 17, although my iphone 7 works fine
      • zelphirkalt4 hours ago
        We need that data we extort from you to be up to date with the current schema. It is mandatory for you to update! Or else!
  • lofaszvanitt17 hours ago
    Apple is already a big, festering, malignant growth. The EU needs to jump in with both feet to let all that pus out.
    • mslansn15 hours ago
      Or maybe don't buy Apple products if you don't like them. Seems that would work fine and you would save some money too.
      • owebmaster14 hours ago
        Should we all also quit the software development market now that a company is gatekeeping 50%+ of the it and don't allow the device owners to install apps they want if Apple does not approve?
      • lofaszvanitt15 hours ago
        I like their products, without all the detours they force on me.
        • frizlab13 hours ago
          Not how it works though.
          • archagon10 hours ago
            It's OK, we'll make it how it works through legislation.
            • frizlab38 minutes ago
              Why? On what grounds? “Oh they are too powerful, I don’t like what they do! Let’s legislate!”

              It’s honestly pathetic. You don’t like it you don’t buy it, period.

              • lofaszvanitt8 minutes ago
                Nah, they got rich by selling their products while brainwashing their customers, literally turning them into cultists. And in the process they just raising and raising their prices. So in essence shitting on those who elevated them.

                If anyone dares to speak up gets strong armed. Instead of giving ordinary people a chance to earn some extra income by creating a market for them, they squeeze them out. They force their fucking, non customisable, shitty ui/ux on people and they also do everything in order to hinder diy fixing of their products. They also skim the developers because they can. They create a soulless society in the process, and they just don't give a fuck. They just love their oppressing rules, so

                F U C K T H E M!

                What kind of inherently evil shitfaced scum comes up with ideas like these? Those, who like to remain anonymous, hiding behind a corpo obelisk.

                Well, screw these greedy bottom-feeders. Do they think that hiding behind a facade, a faceless corporate entity, means they can do whatever they want? Pull them out into the sunshine, let them burn.

    • scottyah16 hours ago
      But they're basically the only large scale consumer computational hardware company driving actual, stable innovation?
      • simplyinfinity15 hours ago
        What have they innovated in the last 10 years?
        • saubeidl15 hours ago
          I'm not an Apple fan by any means. But I think it's fair to say that Apple Silicon and actually useful ARM-powered laptops was a major hardware innovation.
          • bigyabai14 hours ago
            It kinda feels like Apple Silicon was the exception to the rule. And even then, a lot of the innovation is hardly Apple's to claim:

            - ARM is not Apple IP, it's owned by SoftBank and licensed to Apple at rates low enough that it's impossible to undercut them.

            - TSMC's 5nm manufacturing capacity was entirely bought-out for Apple Silicon, blocking other OEMs from competing on equal footing.

            - The SOC team, who arguably did the most innovation of all, was gutted with the founding of Nuvia immediately after Apple Silicon's launch.

    • IncreasePosts17 hours ago
      Maybe they need to come in with a scalpel. I feel like using your feet is just kind of gross for that task.
    • owebmaster17 hours ago
      And I hope Brazil joins
  • jcdentonn16 hours ago
    [dead]