This is nice to see. It's fully in line with a report [1] by a (relatively new) French "expert group" within the government found. They were looking specifically at the security implications. Of course, the report is short and written for political decision makers, so not super technical.
Money quote:
> The checks
made during the audits conducted by current application stores owned
by operating system developers are indeed all reproducible by third
parties.
This is a surprisingly well-written report that an intelligent reader with exposure as an end-user to the mobile phone ecosystem should be able to comprehend, that summarises the risks around malware and app stores and a possible approach to opening up side loading of apps structurally.
Masterful communication on top of solid analysis. I’m going to keep a copy just to review when I’m writing my own reports to stakeholders.
Apple literally begged for this hammer to fall, ignoring calls for openness for 15 years and openly mocking efforts to get them to play ball (like the recent Dutch case, to which they responded by amending rules on dating apps, blatantly ignoring the spirit of the ruling).
I expect they employ enough smart people that they prepared for this moment of reckoning despite the hubris of their leadership.
I very much want this to happen now. However I would not have wanted this 15 years ago when the platform was a baby and little was known on how to move it forward. Last thing you wanted at that time was layers of regulation and laws that would hinder the speed of development.
15 years is probably too long and this could have happened 5-10 years ago.
I suspect you already know that 44 years ago when Apple's system was a baby, it was what, today, you would call "open hardware." See the last two pages of the user manual for the schematics. [1]
At that time, Apple's system needed to attract developers, so instead of a walled garden, the company did what they could to encourage interoperability.
You are confusing the "norm" at the time, with Apple specific decision to open up their hardware. At the time, a lot of consumer electronics shipped with their schematics, including TVs, Radios, etc. You cannot find a single TV today that ships with how to talk over its diagnostics port let alone schematics.
The Apple computer you're referencing was more like an of IC of today, both in complexity (many $1 ICs today are orders of magnitude more complex than that entire computer), and the skills expected of the user of the computer. Both of which would require one to have intimate knowledge of the inner working of the device to be able to operate and maintain it. Users of that computer were like hobbyist of today, buying an electronics kit and rest assured, electronics kits come with detailed manuals, schematics and more.
Apple makes great hardware and the main thing that was holding me back from getting one was their heavy handed approach on what applications I am allowed to install on my device and from what source.
I fail to understand how this is affecting you.
Do you think that the existence of other App-Stores is reducing the quality of the apps in the Apple-Store?
Yes it will once it happens on iOS. Large companies like Facebook (not picking on Meta, just an easy example) really don’t want to follow Apple’s privacy guidelines, don’t want to ask users for permission to track their location, and don’t want to tell users what info they gather and how it’s used.
Once Apple has to allow third-party app stores, many major software companies will either create their own App Store (great now I have to download 15 different stores) or move to a third-party store where these rules are non-existent.
So what will happen is that there will be a major exodus of software from the Apple App Store and on to third-party stores, which for me means a rollback of all of the momentum and progress Apple has made by collectively bargaining on behalf of users against developers.
In addition, this will fracture things that are easy and convenient, like Apple Pay, or Sign-in With Apple being a privacy-focused mandatory alternative to other SSO options.
It’ll also long-term enable more dark patterns. Oh you signed up for this $14.99/month app? Well gotta call if you want to unsubscribe. Hell maybe even have to send a letter!
For some completely asinine reason people think that “allow third party stores” means “I get all the same stuff now but stuff will be cheaper and ‘more innovative’ because developers won’t have to pay the ‘Apple Tax’” but the reality is you’ll just get the same stuff, at the same prices, but it’ll be less convenient and you’ll lose any benefits that we previously had when Apple was able to collectively bargain for users. Companies will not lower prices.
> “This hasn’t happened on Android”
Yes. Because when companies start enacting these rules, users will flee to iOS. You need to be able to launch your store and dark patterns on both platforms simultaneously. Otherwise users have options.
> “I disagree, this won’t happen”.
Ok sure. What assurances do I have? What are you doing to make me feel better that my experience won’t get worse? Until then I’m firmly against third-party stores.
> “Apple enables oppression and a single point of failure for regulation - China for example can ‘control’ what’s on the store”
Any third-party App Store that’s not a complete scam will be forced to comply with any exact rules that Apple has to. There’s no difference.
> It’ll also long-term enable more dark patterns. Oh you signed up for this $14.99/month app? Well gotta call if you want to unsubscribe. Hell maybe even have to send a letter!
The same EU legislation explicitly bans this.
> Any third-party App Store that’s not a complete scam will be forced to comply with any exact rules that Apple has to. There’s no difference.
This is a misrepresentation. China's worst fear is the lack of choke points for application distribution. Once peer to peer distribution of applications happens without central distributors then their ability to lock down protests will take a significant hit.
Companies will find work-arounds as they always do.
> This is a misrepresentation.
It's an opinion, not a misrepresentation. I'm not misrepresenting anything.
> China's worst fear is the lack of choke points for application distribution. Once peer to peer distribution of applications happens without central distributors then their ability to lock down protests will take a significant hit.
Practically speaking though, who will create app stores that will be "safe", and functional? Most people will use a few major app stores (maybe as many as 6, as few as 2) because they are positive feedback loops. Any major company operating one of these will have enough exposure to China that they'll comply with local laws, as they do now. If a company doesn't have exposure that the CCP can leverage, they'll just ban the app store from ever entering the market. Unless of course you think that we'll wind up with hundreds of app stores, like "Bob's Great Apps", but then you have a much worse problem which is the entire ecosystem has turned into a pile of dogshit. Maybe globally there could be 50-100 app stores, but they'll be localized.
If what you're saying is true, that China wants choke points, then why is the Great Firewall so successful? Wouldn't the distributed Internet, and VPNs, and other web-based peer-to-peer applications win out?
Yep, much of this experiment already happened: Android, Windows, etc. If it is so easy / steady-state to have both experiences simultaneously on one platform, why didn't it happen on either of those two? It will absolutely devolve into the lowest denominator.
Yes it will once it happens on iOS. Large companies like Facebook (not picking on Meta, just an easy example) really don’t want to follow Apple’s privacy guidelines, don’t want to ask users for permission to track their location, and don’t want to tell users what info they gather and how it’s used.
Note though that in the EU they have to ask for permission to track their location and tell users what info they gather, thanks to the GDPR.
Sure but they’ll just outrun regulation and find ways around it. This is even a problem with the App Store now when it comes to technologically sophisticated companies, but there’s a balance because if they’re too aggressive Apple will give them the boot. Once XYZ Tech Company has its own App Store it’ll be able to hide more nefarious activity, create legal fictions to avoid responsibility, and hide how it circumvents GDPR. Using the third-party store might require consenting to location tracking even. So users who want to use XYZ app will agree to a bunch of terms and conditions before being able to even use the app, and then it’ll just be open season.
I do not trust GDPR to handle this effectively. It’ll be like a lion trying to squash ants, and now there’s no single company that the EU can go to and say “fix this”. Apple will say “not my problem”.
This will lead to fragmentation where apps can only be bought in some app stores. Some will stay in the Apple app store, because people trust it. Others will flock to other stores to pay a lower commission fee.
Regardless, I am in favor of this legislation. The iOS and Android ecosystems have become crucial infrastructure in modern life. So either Apple and Google act more like they are a utilities companies with lower fees and a more fair, equal market [1] or they should be regulated.
Though I would have preferred if they EU had just set upper bounds for the commissions, etc. The result would have been less messy.
[1] No more private APIs that only they can use, etc.
This doesn’t really apply because the Play Store doesn’t have half as strict rules. If you’re point is “Apple will have to give up all the annoying for publisher but good for user rules to keep apps from leaving” then we’ve really gained nothing.
I really don’t get how people on a tech forum seem to believe that software is fungible. If I’m an Instagram user then I have to go to where it’s offered which will be the Meta store. As a user I can’t just download it on the App Store if it isn’t there. All of this legislation has been about publisher choice. Users do not not gain any choice in this — that’s all marketing.
It's a shame that apple has been so obstinate for so long. Their behaviour is very clearly about money and not consumer protection, which is just used as a convenient excuse to hide behind.
They could have allowed third-party payments through vetted providers. They could have reduced their rates to match those providers and no one would be so keen to use them anyway. They could mandate subscriptions must be cancellable with one click and even mandate using an api to make these all appear in the settings app. They could have ensured that their review staff were better trained to prevent capricious rejections.
They instead decided to ride the wave of the apple tax for as long as they possibly could and then deal with whatever that caused later. And this is what it's caused.
There are those of us that would prefer to be protected, and those of us that would prefer to be free to make those decisions for ourselves. I've been an Android user for over a decade because of the latter.
> World is about to get a little worse on this front.
I think you underestimate the talent at Apple. The reason things are locked down isn't just that it makes them secure, spam free, etc. That's true of course, but it's not the only way to do it. It is however, the easiest way and in absence of external force, there is little reason to complicate it.
If EU succeeds in forcing Apple to open somethings up, then the brilliant folks at Apple will rise to the challenge and will innovate to either keep the quality as is or even make things better.
It doesn’t allow people to install abusive and spyware apps on their spouse’s, girlfriend’s, coworker’s, roommate’s, and children’s devices… not to mention harmful ones on your own… that’s a feature.
If you really want some nasty stuff on your phone for some reason you can always write it yourself or find something open source and install it with Xcode. You are free to do this; the idea that you are not is a myth regurgitated by haters who don’t think for themselves. Just good luck doing it on someone else’s iPhone without their permission.
It's a feature that can be implemented, with similar if not better effectiveness, in various ways that doesn't completely lock down a platform. Don't ask me how because I'm no match for brains at Apple but if EU succeeds in forcing Apple to open things up, Apple will rise to the challenge and will figure it out, just the same way they figure out how to roll out an ECG monitor that complies with local regulations of multiple countries. In other words, Apple already works under large amount of constraints of existing laws and regulations when creating products and that requires a lot of constant innovation in itself. This will just be another constraint they have to follow.
Nobody ever said Apple was static. They roll out updates all the time, of course. No different here. It helps to understand the reasons behind some of the lockdown.
Some people at Apple are getting a headache right now. Other companies that have been dabbling with the idea to lock down their OS probably too.
If this happens my next phone might even be an iPhone.