EU Planning to Force Apple to Give Developers Access to All Hardware and Software Features

[macar00n]

Then the rest of your comment isn’t even worth reading. You don’t even know what you’re talking about. When you actually use an Android, if you ever do, we’ll discuss whether it’s crappy or not. In the meantime, keep quiet and don’t talk about what you don’t know.

Lmao I didn’t realize I had to purchase and actually use every bad phone on the market in order to be qualified to post opinions about it on a rumors forum. Is there anything else I can do for you, your highness? Maybe I can pass laws to make everyone else's iPhone work exactly the way that you want even though most want it exactly the way that it is?

Maybe some day we'll have the technology to know about things without actually buying and using them, for example some information sharing technology that lets others convey their experiences to us, but until that day comes I guess I'll just have to keep buying every garbage Android phone if I want to know about it

What if you buy a totally amazinggg Android phone with such a great app ecosystem where you can install apps from wherever you want which already exists today with no new laws required, I'll buy an iPhone which is different in a way that suits me and a billion other customers, and we call it even. Is that okay, or are you only able to buy our phone but it has to be exactly the way that you want

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Then the rest of your comment isn’t even worth reading. You don’t even know what you’re talking about. When you actually use an Android, if you ever do, we’ll discuss whether it’s crappy or not. In the meantime, keep quiet and don’t talk about what you don’t know.

And what I think is not the point. I have friends who are Samsung users and are just as happy with their devices as you are with your iphone. The difference is that they aren’t as narrowminded as you are: they’ve tested iphone several times and recognize its advantages, but every time they end up going back to Samsung after just a few months because they like it much better. That wouldn’t happen if Android were as bad as you purport it to be. If it were as you say then no one would go back to Android after having used an iphone once. It’s not the case and we know you spoke without knowledge and with bias like many other Apple fans: boasting about the iphone’s advantages without ever testing anything else.

Well to be fair iPhone models seem to continually hold the 3 top selling positions. But then again apple have a 20%~ market share

 

[Sophisticatednut]

What if you buy a totally amazinggg Android phone with such a great app ecosystem where you can install apps from wherever you want which already exists today with no new laws required, I'll buy an iPhone which is different in a way that suits me and a billion other customers, and we call it even. Is that okay, or are you only able to buy our phone but it has to be exactly the way that you want

It’s called iPhone with cydia impactor, and keeping practically everything else. Or even cydia to jailbreak it(impossible currently)

Android do not have the GUI, functions, smoothness, seamless integration, Apple Watch etc etc. millions of great things.

But the android have an open system but lacking everything else.

 

[lartola]

Well to be fair iPhone models seem to continually hold the 3 top selling positions. But then again apple have a 20%~ market share

That depends on which country you’re talking about. In the US, iphone is the king. Go to Mexico, however, and the top seller is actually Samsung.

In any case, my point is that if we’re going to criticize a platform we should at least take the time to test it first. This guy says Android is very crappy, but he’s never actually used it. How can he be so sure it’s so crappy?

 

[lartola]

Lmao I didn’t realize I had to purchase and actually use every bad phone on the market in order to be qualified to post opinions about it on a rumors forum. Is there anything else I can do for you, your highness? Maybe I can pass laws to make everyone else's iPhone work exactly the way that you want even though most want it exactly the way that it is?

Maybe some day we'll have the technology to know about things without actually buying and using them, for example some information sharing technology that lets others convey their experiences to us, but until that day comes I guess I'll just have to keep buying every garbage Android phone if I want to know about it

What if you buy a totally amazinggg Android phone with such a great app ecosystem where you can install apps from wherever you want which already exists today with no new laws required, I'll buy an iPhone which is different in a way that suits me and a billion other customers, and we call it even. Is that okay, or are you only able to buy our phone but it has to be exactly the way that you want

Well, then let me tell you how much I admire your ability to tell that a phone is bad or an OS is garbage without ever using it. I’m not saying Android or iOS is the best, they do have their advantages and disadvantages each, but calling either one garbage without ever using it seems excessively ignorant to me.

 

[lartola]

It’s called iPhone with cydia impactor, and keeping practically everything else. Or even cydia to jailbreak it(impossible currently)

Android do not have the GUI, functions, smoothness, seamless integration, Apple Watch etc etc. millions of great things.

But the android have an open system but lacking everything else.

Agreed, each OS has its advantages and disadvantages, but to call either one garbage is just too much ignorance. Even more if it comes from someone who has never used the platform they have the nerve to call garbage.

 

[Michael Scrip]

But then again Apple have a 20%~ market share

Well Apple is clearly a monopoly. ?

I know I know... it's about monopoly abuse.

But it's still funny.

 

[macar00n]

Well, then let me tell you how much I admire your ability to tell that a phone is bad or an OS is garbage without ever using it. I’m not saying Android or iOS is the best, they do have their advantages and disadvantages each, but calling either one garbage without ever using it seems excessively ignorant to me.

What does it matter what I think? I'm a stranger on the internet. We can all think whatever we want, but the fact remains that the choice to do what all of these whiners want already exists with Android. So my feedback to these people is to go buy an Android phone, but no - they have to have the iPhone and it has to be their way, at the expense of hundreds of millions of people that bought the iPhone in part because of its relative security and privacy.

 

[macar00n]

It’s called iPhone with cydia impactor, and keeping practically everything else. Or even cydia to jailbreak it(impossible currently)

Android do not have the GUI, functions, smoothness, seamless integration, Apple Watch etc etc. millions of great things.

But the android have an open system but lacking everything else.

So some people find the open system important and purchase an Android, and some people find the relative security and privacy Apple provides important and purchase an iPhone. The irony is that forcing open the iPhone system would remove several key "great things" / differentiators of the iPhone and make it less desirable for the majority of people that currently enjoy it this way.

Everyone has the facts before purchase. Need an open system? Go Android. Need relative security and privacy, though that comes with limitations? Go iPhone. Just need to make calls? Get a dumbphone. A bunch of tech-illiterate lawmakers and a screeching minority of Android/iPhone users should not be able to dictate the evolution of a platform that hundreds of millions of people rely on and have opted into specifically because it is the way that it is. If this was as big an issue as these threads on MR make it out to be, nobody would be buying the iPhone because you can't install malware from 100 app stores on it, and give your credit card information to 100 app stores. That's obviously not the case.

 

[Beautyspin]

So some people find the open system important and purchase an Android, and some people find the relative security and privacy Apple provides important and purchase an iPhone. The irony is that forcing open the iPhone system would remove several key "great things" / differentiators of the iPhone and make it less desirable for the majority of people that currently enjoy it this way.

Everyone has the facts before purchase. Need an open system? Go Android. Need relative security and privacy, though that comes with limitations? Go iPhone. Just need to make calls? Get a dumbphone. A bunch of tech-illiterate lawmakers and a screeching minority of Android/iPhone users should not be able to dictate the evolution of a platform that hundreds of millions of people rely on and have opted into specifically because it is the way that it is. If this was as big an issue as these threads on MR make it out to be, nobody would be buying the iPhone because you can't install malware from 100 app stores on it, and give your credit card information to 100 app stores. That's obviously not the case.

By the same token, Apple should have known before they started their business that countries change laws that benefit their people. Knowing this, they should have refrained from operating in all those countries that have anti-trust laws or operated in such a way that they do not attract the attention of anti-trust authorities. What is the point in crying now? They should have bought an island and operated from there and created all the laws that are required to maximize their profits. Nobody would have bothered with Apple then.

 

[I7guy]

By the same token, Apple should have known before they started their business that countries change laws that benefit their people. Knowing this, they should have refrained from operating in all those countries that have anti-trust laws or operated in such a way that they do not attract the attention of anti-trust authorities. What is the point in crying now? They should have bought an island and operated from there and created all the laws that are required to maximize their profits. Nobody would have bothered with Apple then.

And apple can vacate the premises as well.

 

[macar00n]

By the same token, Apple should have known before they started their business that countries change laws that benefit their people. Knowing this, they should have refrained from operating in all those countries that have anti-trust laws or operated in such a way that they do not attract the attention of anti-trust authorities. What is the point in crying now? They should have bought an island and operated from there and created all the laws that are required to maximize their profits. Nobody would have bothered with Apple then.

This law, if it passes, benefits a tiny minority at the expense of the majority of Apple customers.

It's cool that you want to go back in time and have Apple buy Apple Island and only sell Apple products there but that ship has sailed, I have no idea where you're going with this and I don't care enough to delve further

 

[Beautyspin]

This law, if it passes, benefits a tiny minority at the expense of the majority of Apple customers.

It's cool that you want to go back in time and have Apple buy Apple Island and only sell Apple products there but that ship has sailed, I have no idea where you're going with this and I don't care enough to delve further

I am not going anywhere. This is a response to all those who keep saying that it is Apple's business and hence Apple can do whatever it wants and if you are not satisfied with that, go buy Android. Yes, there is a choice for everybody, even Apple. Just as you want governments to change laws so that Apple benefits, we want governments to make laws so that consumers benefit.

 

[Philip_S]

If this passes, Apple should just send an email and notification to every customer in the EU saying something to the effect of, “due to your government’s heavy-handed overreach, they will be blocking Apple from providing safe and secure services, like our App Store. As a result, we can no longer legally offer these services in the EU and will cease operations within 30 days.”

Just the threat of millions of devices losing iMessage, FaceTime, and the App Store framed properly will get the public on their side. I guarantee it’d turn this whole thing around within 48 hours.

Unless the people are unhappy enough about foreign businesses trying to throw their weight around and make demands against the government.

If you pull out, don’t need to pay the fine. Or just say, “waive the fine or we will walk regardless.”

To “walk” and escape the fine they’d have to offload all their assets within the EU and every country that would cooperate with collecting the fine (something that in theory even the US has agreed to do, even if we all know they won’t).

Apple leverages their App Store controls to force developers to adhere to their privacy requirements,

Contracts and inspections should be backups to technical controls, not the primary security measure.

What's the EU going to do? Send a goon squad to the US to seize assets? They have no jurisdiction over American companies or property.

America does have treaties about enforcing foreign judgements, becuase they don’t want criminals in the EU thumbing their noses at America. Similarly many other countries have agreements of that kind too.

Honestly, I don’t think any of this would be an issue if Apple allowed sideloading.

They allow a highly crippled version of side loading, with developer certificates, but the free certificates are highly crippled, and deliberate restrictions make it impossible to work around some of their limits. Eg, you’re not allowed to use Apple’s notification server, but you can’t keep a notification watchdog running yourself to use any other server either.

Oh yeah. Nokia really pushed the envelope.

Have you forgotten the N-gage

There is no possible way for apple to prevent developers from using them. If any iOS app uses it, then any developer can use it. Right now apple just actively can deny a developer access to the AppStore for using it

They can monkey with dyld to restrict what it will link to, and run each app in a jail/chroot, but since your app won’t load without an Apple-approved certificate and they won’t give that to you if you use those APIs it doesn’t really make any practical (or legal) difference.

I don't think any of this restricts Apple's right to charge developers. It may convolute their ability to collect it, but every company has the right to charge for their IP.

The EU seems to be edging towards a position that dynamic linking is not a derivative work, and of course there’s the first sale doctrine for patents. That would remove the difference between the GPL and LGPL, but on the whole od say it is a good policy choice.

In principle it wouldn’t stop you using a trick like Epic use with the Unreal engine, where you have to agree to pay for linking to their library as a condition of using their software, including if you gain access to their libraries, and you have to ensure that the contracts make that viral, but I suspect the Competition Commissioner would be seriously unhappy.

what if there's a name collision between the two - if you regularly get messages via iMessage from John Smith, your boss, and you get a message from your long lost college friend, John Smith, via WhatsApp, in Europe, clearly you don't want those two message streams combined

One’s John.Smtih@whatsapp, the other is John.smith@mac.com, and it is up to you to decide if they’re the same person? That’s how pidgin does it, and how Messenger.app used to do it when it was still multi-protocol, and how Contacts.app does it.

Facebook / Meta has't managed to successfully provide interoperability between three messengers where they own all the users and source code in over four years.

They used to have an interoperability layer in Facebook that allowed you to connect via a crippled version of XMPP, but that was removed ages ago.

 

[I7guy]

Unless the people are unhappy enough about foreign businesses trying to throw their weight around and make demands against the government.



To “walk” and escape the fine they’d have to offload all their assets within the EU and every country that would cooperate with collecting the fine (something that in theory even the US has agreed to do, even if we all know they won’t).




Contracts and inspections should be backups to technical controls, not the primary security measure.



America does have treaties about enforcing foreign judgements, becuase they don’t want criminals in the EU thumbing their noses at America. Similarly many other countries have agreements of that kind too.



They allow a highly crippled version of side loading, with developer certificates, but the free certificates are highly crippled, and deliberate restrictions make it impossible to work around some of their limits. Eg, you’re not allowed to use Apple’s notification server, but you can’t keep a notification watchdog running yourself to use any other server either.



Have you forgotten the N-gage



They can monkey with dyld to restrict what it will link to, and run each app in a jail/chroot, but since your app won’t load without an Apple-approved certificate and they won’t give that to you if you use those APIs it doesn’t really make any practical (or legal) difference.



The EU seems to be edging towards a position that dynamic linking is not a derivative work, and of course there’s the first sale doctrine for patents. That would remove the difference between the GPL and LGPL, but on the whole od say it is a good policy choice.

In principle it wouldn’t stop you using a trick like Epic use with the Unreal engine, where you have to agree to pay for linking to their library as a condition of using their software, including if you gain access to their libraries, and you have to ensure that the contracts make that viral, but I suspect the Competition Commissioner would be seriously unhappy.



One’s John.Smtih@whatsapp, the other is John.smith@mac.com, and it is up to you to decide if they’re the same person? That’s how pidgin does it, and how Messenger.app used to do it when it was still multi-protocol, and how Contacts.app does it.



They used to have an interoperability layer in Facebook that allowed you to connect via a crippled version of XMPP, but that was removed ages ago.

Apple has something to think about. (No doubt they have been). Potentially billions in revenue and hundreds of billions in brand image and brand value. It losses exceed revenue it may make sense from their point of view to pull out. Let the EU use android or Linux.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

They can monkey with dyld to restrict what it will link to, and run each app in a jail/chroot, but since your app won’t load without an Apple-approved certificate and they won’t give that to you if you use those APIs it doesn’t really make any practical (or legal) difference.

Well it’s a big difference, if you use cydia impactor you get around these restrictions as you are handed the certificate . This allows you to run any application that doesn’t need root access.

The EU seems to be edging towards a position that dynamic linking is not a derivative work, and of course there’s the first sale doctrine for patents. That would remove the difference between the GPL and LGPL, but on the whole od say it is a good policy choice.

As it stands now, APIs aren’t recognized as copyrighted under EU laws. And the fact first saw doctrine are immediately in effect for a sale of a copy of a goods and all its content.

In principle it wouldn’t stop you using a trick like Epic use with the Unreal engine, where you have to agree to pay for linking to their library as a condition of using their software, including if you gain access to their libraries, and you have to ensure that the contracts make that viral, but I suspect the Competition Commissioner would be seriously unhappy.

Well it would as you don’t need to use Xcode to produce iOS applications, unreal engine doesn’t take a fee for you linking to their library, but the actual use of their assets in your products. Assets you can’t use without downloading and installing UE5.

But iOS program’s can be written in a notepad without downloading or using any of apples assets. They only need to link to existing assets on the iPhone, assets that existed before you download an application

One’s John.Smtih@whatsapp, the other is John.smith@mac.com, and it is up to you to decide if they’re the same person? That’s how pidgin does it, and how Messenger.app used to do it when it was still multi-protocol, and how Contacts.app does it.

Indeed a problem solved a decade ago.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Well Apple is clearly a monopoly. ?

I know I know... it's about monopoly abuse.

But it's still funny.

Well it’s actually about market abuse. Not monopoly abuse xD as it’s not a thing as monopoly is completely legal.

 

[mrat93]

They allow a highly crippled version of side loading, with developer certificates, but the free certificates are highly crippled, and deliberate restrictions make it impossible to work around some of their limits. Eg, you’re not allowed to use Apple’s notification server, but you can’t keep a notification watchdog running yourself to use any other server either.

I agree with you there. I think Apple’s free “sideloading” solution doesn’t really count as “Apple allowing sideloading.” Even with a paid Developer account, it can be annoying.

I guess I meant that if Apple didn’t make it a hassle to simply download and install .ipa files for all of these years, there wouldn’t be so much demand for seemingly greater unrestricted access.

I did mention on another thread that sideloading could force Apple’s hand on certain things. If somebody makes a popular app that couldn’t make it into the App Store due to some restriction, Apple could find ways to loosen or change the restrictions so more apps can safely be distributed within the App Store vs outside.

 

[DblHelix]

Unless the people are unhappy enough about foreign businesses trying to throw their weight around and make demands against the government.



To “walk” and escape the fine they’d have to offload all their assets within the EU and every country that would cooperate with collecting the fine (something that in theory even the US has agreed to do, even if we all know they won’t).




Contracts and inspections should be backups to technical controls, not the primary security measure.



America does have treaties about enforcing foreign judgements, becuase they don’t want criminals in the EU thumbing their noses at America. Similarly many other countries have agreements of that kind too.



They allow a highly crippled version of side loading, with developer certificates, but the free certificates are highly crippled, and deliberate restrictions make it impossible to work around some of their limits. Eg, you’re not allowed to use Apple’s notification server, but you can’t keep a notification watchdog running yourself to use any other server either.



Have you forgotten the N-gage



They can monkey with dyld to restrict what it will link to, and run each app in a jail/chroot, but since your app won’t load without an Apple-approved certificate and they won’t give that to you if you use those APIs it doesn’t really make any practical (or legal) difference.



The EU seems to be edging towards a position that dynamic linking is not a derivative work, and of course there’s the first sale doctrine for patents. That would remove the difference between the GPL and LGPL, but on the whole od say it is a good policy choice.

In principle it wouldn’t stop you using a trick like Epic use with the Unreal engine, where you have to agree to pay for linking to their library as a condition of using their software, including if you gain access to their libraries, and you have to ensure that the contracts make that viral, but I suspect the Competition Commissioner would be seriously unhappy.



One’s John.Smtih@whatsapp, the other is John.smith@mac.com, and it is up to you to decide if they’re the same person? That’s how pidgin does it, and how Messenger.app used to do it when it was still multi-protocol, and how Contacts.app does it.



They used to have an interoperability layer in Facebook that allowed you to connect via a crippled version of XMPP, but that was removed ages ago.

You like quoting everyone in one post? Makes it hard to read. Nokia n-gage was not interesting. The design was bland and the audience too niche to even remotely make any sense.

 

[BaldiMac]

Quite literally from the legal text explicitly stating. Reasonable security standards. What you described have nothing to do with security.

I'd love to see a quote from a law that says Apple can't restrict API access, moral, or visual standards in any way. That's the kind of law that needs to be revoked.

As long as it’s on users hardware they can.
Just how emulators are legal as long as users provide the game/program etc

iMessage isn't on users' hardware. Again, it's a messaging protocol that relies on Apple servers. Accessing Apple's servers without permission is illegal.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I'd love to see a quote from a law that says Apple can't restrict API access, moral, or visual standards in any way. That's the kind of law that needs to be revoked.

whell when it comes to the USA, the law is fairuse

How the Supreme Court saved the software industry from API copyrights

The Supreme Court surprised everyone with its API copyright ruling.

arstechnica.com

In Europe, the Software Directive (2009/24/EC) states that ideas and principles underlying any element of a computer program, including those underlying its interfaces, are not protected by copyright and was ruled by the EUCJ in 2012 in SAS Institute, Inc. v World Programming Limited (C-406/10) to rule that APIs are not protected by copyright because they are functional in nature

iMessage isn't on users' hardware. Again, it's a messaging protocol that relies on Apple servers. Accessing Apple's servers without permission is illegal.

sure not accessing the servers, but would just need the ability to communicate with their servers.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Kindly remember this set of proposed regulations is not Apple specific.

Kindly remember that this set of proposed regulations are defined specifically to affect particular companies. The definition of “affected companies” is just short of “Companies founded by Steve Jobs that start in A and end in E”. See, we’re not naming any company names, just using a description

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Kindly remember that this set of proposed regulations are defined specifically to affect particular companies. The definition of “affected companies” is just short of “Companies founded by Steve Jobs that start in A and end in E”. See, we’re not naming any company names, just using a description

well, it's many companies that aren't apple.

 

[I7guy]

well, it's many companies that aren't apple.

What other “many”? 5-10? 30 or more?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

What other “many”? 5-10? 30 or more?

at least 20 companies have been listed as example of different companies that will be covered by the DMA. So I would guess 50 something companies are likely affected. But Spotify and Netflix won't be covered, etc.

Table 4: Core Platform Services provided by selected companies by Bruegel .org - Infogram

infogram.com

But this is from december 2021.