U.S. Government to Investigate Sideloading and Web App Restrictions on iOS

[dk001]

1. They may own the platform, but they are selling their stuff to the public. They are using their products for internal consumption. That means they have to be regulated and the regulations can be anything the governing bodies feel could affect the public.
2. Please don't spread the FUD that it takes 20+ steps to install 3rd party app stores or sideloading apps, it takes exactly 2 steps.

Just to play devils advocate, I decided to install the Aptoide store on my 1+.
Here are the steps I had to perform in order:
1. Go to Aptoide site
2. Download Aptoide apk - got a “might be harmful” alert
2b. If it is your first install - you might have to grant your browser permission
3. Install apk
4. Open Aptoide and find the app you want
5. Grant Aptoide permission to phones storage and other areas as needed - get another “warning” - second
6. Get a third warning about installing app from Aptoide
7. Go to Settings and grant Aptoide permission to ”allow from this source”
8. Go back to Aptoide
9. Install app
10. If needed, when you open app you may have to grant it permissions (2 - 3 additional steps and possibly another warning)

Now to be fair, once you have downloaded and approved the 3rd party store, depending on the app you may have from 2 steps to 4 steps to install additional apps.

The original install of the 3rd party App Store could have been simplified.

 

[visualseed]

I remembered the case. It wasn't equal protection that was argued but instead "bill of attainder" - similar concepts but applied to the law itself rather than application of the law:

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ng.2331945/page-5?post=30791971#post-30791971

The 1997 case SBC v FCC (and a bunch of telecoms) was a weird one. Verdict was that certain sections of the Telcom Act were, in fact, BoAs and were unconstitutional, but because they were not general statutes (applicable to everyone) and were in context of a specific telecom bill they did not violate the EP rights of the companies so there was 'no harm.' The court really danced around the issue of BoAs actually applying to corporations, though, they admitted they existed in legislation targeting specific companies (Former Bells), but that the purpose of that legislation was of public interest. I'm not sure today's courts would hesitate to take the final step and rule that BoAs actually apply to corporations or at least to the level that legislative punishments could apply to companies. Instead of the "even if they applied, they wouldn't have been wrong' verdicts we see so much of.

This is an updated primer on BoAs in modern context.

Corporations Under the Bill of Attainder Clause | Duke Law Journal

Abstract The Constitution’s Bill of Attainder Clauses, found in Article I, Section 9 and Article I, Section 10, prohibit both Congress and state legislatures from passing targeted statutes imposing punishment on specified actors without trial. The Supreme Court has never decided whether the...

dlj.law.duke.edu

 

[GhostRaider]

As long as this makes my iPad Pro really a pro tablet I'm all in for sideloading.

 

[CthuluLemon]

Developers can kiss my money goodbye if you’re not on the App Store your not on my phone.

Just like how you already only download from the macOS AppStore, right? ?

I mean why not just threaten to move to Canada if politicians don’t keep things they way you like, it’s just as hollow; no need to reinvent the wheel.

The macOS AppStore is competing with side-loading alternatives just fine, and it was created after side-loading had long existed as the default, so it didn’t even have the iOS AppStore’s 14yr and ongoing head start.

The Google Play Store does just fine as well, and plenty of developers use it despite side-loading being a viable alternative.

You’ll still have the freedom to download from the App Store, and company’s that don’t want to sell on the App Store will have the freedom to sell to customers that aren’t as devoted to the App Store as you. If they’re aren’t enough customers like that, they’ll fail, if there are, they’ll do fine. If there aren’t any equivalent apps on the AppStore, that just means their aren’t enough customers like you to make selling through the AppStore worth that developers investment. If the demand is there, developers will be there, if it’s not, they’ll be where it is; that’s how markets work.

If Apple’s vision of privacy is what consumers want, the App Store will continue to be successful and the majority will continue to keep within the walled-garden; if they aren’t as concerned with privacy, or maybe just feel their is an alternative to privacy that doesn’t also conveniently also boosts Apple’s revenue, Apple will have to meet the markets needs, rather than bend the market to its benefit as Apple currently does.

Hey, side-loading could even benefit Apple in justifying AppStore fees; they’d have the benefit of comparing AppStore metrics to sideloading metrics, and if what Apple believes is true, the value of paying the fees over not should be evident.

If Apple truly cared about your privacy, they could say, “Hey EU, Hey US, we will forego any profit we make off of our privacy restrictions to ensure the appstores survival; we believe so strongly in security we do not want their to be any doubts to our motives against sideloading, to quell any fears that we may be trying to use privacy concerns in bad-faith to benefit our bottom-line.” The only reason they haven’t is because Apple is using privacy concerns in bad faith to bolster its revenue. Apple is fine with marrying privacy to profit— it’s a competitive advantage— but they’ll never put privacy over profit. At the end of the day, Apple only cares about the walled-garden as long as it brings in cash, i.e., considerably less than you do. Apple has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders, and every Apple policy, including those around privacy, ultimately have to serve that responsibility.

 

[ian87w]

Not at all. A developer has several options that don’t incur an Apple platform fee. Free apps, apps with ads, apps with external payment options. The latter was never an issue for larger, cross-platform dev shops and is now quite feasible with the elimination of anti steering rules.

Paid and IAP are the only mechanisms that incur platform fees.

The list of capabilities I listed are available for all now under the current rules. The fact that App Store distribution bundles them all just makes for easy admin and accounting. If side loading or other alternate distribution models (stores) are forced don’t be surprised to see other platform fee pricing plans put in place.

And no developer uses no Apple services.

I am not advocating for or against alternate distribution models in this post. Just that the current platform fees and distribution model gave been in place since 2008 or so. Fees have gone down over the years. Services provided have gone up. My gut feel is that smaller devs are getting caught up in the rhetoric of the larger devs and will get burned in the end. Platform licensing fees will be paid. How and at what rates are to be determined but probably higher than they currently are (assuming all services are used). I don’t envision most devs will see an increase in either top or bottom lines.

Good point.
Those who are pushing alternate app stores are mostly huge developers backed by giants. They have the resources to do everything themselves. If Apple were to accommodate them, there will be an increase in cost for Apple to put extra resources and support handling those external factors. The small developers who don’t have the resources will end up paying more as Apple’s cost is increasing.

 

[jakey rolling]

Does that explain why the largest and most innovative tech companies are based in the US?

What, do you not think that Porsche, Ferrari, ARM, Nintendo, Sony, Airbus, Siemens, Sumsung, TeleSat, BioNTech, Maersk count as innovative tech companies? Or are consumer electronics, skinny laptops, and social media apps the only things that count as "innovation" in your mind?

 

[genovelle]

The walls are closing in on Apple for once.

The only ones this benefits is multibillion dollar completing platforms and criminal who want to hack you. If you take away Apple’s ability to profit at their preferred rate they have little incentive to continue to invest. The only people who want this don’t even use apple devices or are blinded by the desire to get everything for free. Well nothing in life is free. There will be a cost for anything of value and the companies providing that value determines the price.

 

[genovelle]

What, do you not think that Porsche, Ferrari, ARM, Nintendo, Sony, Airbus, Siemens, Sumsung, TeleSat, BioNTech, Maersk count as innovative tech companies? Or are consumer electronics, skinny laptops, and social media apps the only things that count as "innovation" in your mind?

First, how many of these are on the level of Apple, Microsoft, Google etc. Ironically ARM which is responsible for the technology Apple is building their microprocessor business around would exist if it wasn’t for Apple.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

This is such a disingenuous argument. Forcing iOS to have a mechanism to allow third party app stores and sideloading introduces a very big security risk vector and potential vulnerabilities, forcing this on all users for the "benefit" of a vocal few that are completely welcome to "vote with their wallets" and go to Android, Fire (Android based), Tizen, or Linux phones (eg, Purism).

There is more competition in the smartphone and app store markets than there is in cell providers.

One word. macOS.

 

[ian87w]

Not on 11 or 12.
It’s. Bit more than that.

Not really.
All you need is host the APK. Direct the user to download the APK. Android will automatically suggest package installer to install the APK. There is then a dialog box telling the user to allow install unknown apps from the app used to download the APK (IE. The browser), and it's just a tap away as the dialog box gives the user the direct shortcut to the appropriate settings screen and highlights the switch the user need to tap. This is at least on OneUI 4.1. very easy.

 

[KevinN206]

With all due respect, if you do not like it, then buy Android. My issue with this crass government overreach is that once side-loading becomes available, the apps I normally trust will vacate the App store and I'll have to get them from the Wild West. Of course that is what normally happens for other operating systems, like Android, but then again I put much more sensitive information on my Apple devices than I otherwise would precisely because of the walled garden. Lawmakers should butt out, with the exception perhaps of making Apple guarantee security of all apps in the app store if there is a walled garden (the supposed justification for the iOS ecosystem).

What apps that you use right now do you think would vacate the App Store? The App Store also has unfair rules that put competiting apps at a disadvantage.

 

[Beautyspin]

Really? So how far do you want to take this? Should the government be allowed to tell Apple how to design the home screen as well? Obviously the government should be regulating certain things in the market to avoid abuse, corruption, etc. But the method of downloading apps to an iPhone is not one of those things. That's clear overreach.

Is that what the government has done here? Tell Apple how to design their home screen? However, if that is somehow hindering competition and therefore harming the consumers, then the government has a right to specify anything to ensure that level playing exists.
They are regulating the method of downloading apps because there is currently only one allowed method and Apple is abusing it.
None of the rules say how much Apple should charge as commission. All they are saying is that alternate app stores should exist and sideloading be allowed so that if Apple behaves in an arbitrary manner, both the developers and users have recourse to resort to. This would not have come to pass had Apple not misused its vertical integration with App Store.

 

[dk001]

Not really.
All you need is host the APK. Direct the user to download the APK. Android will automatically suggest package installer to install the APK. There is then a dialog box telling the user to allow install unknown apps from the app used to download the APK (IE. The browser), and it's just a tap away as the dialog box gives the user the direct shortcut to the appropriate settings screen and highlights the switch the user need to tap. This is at least on OneUI 4.1. very easy.

See post #251.

Dont use Sammy.

 

[Beautyspin]

Companies don’t loose the right to develop and sell products for mass consumption to the public using their own design guidelines and requirements as long as all necessary laws are followed and approvals received.

After the fact to have the government mandate the nfc chip must be opened up or the App Store should allow sideloading is government overreach.

I wonder how many here advocating this would not mind additional overreach laws for example allowing the police to enter your residence at any time for any reason.

The government wants NFC access to be available to 3rd Parties because Apple is using it as a means to differentiate. They do not have any right to. It is a chip on a user's phone and it should be available to all without prejudice. In the EU or for that matter in any country, the data protection laws are stricter for banks compared to what Apple's so called laughable data privacy efforts. They can actually be fined in Billions for data breaches.
If Apple had not been abusing its App Store monopoly, there would not have been the need for sideloading and alternate app stores. It is all Apple's fault that they are being regulated in such a way.

 

[Beautyspin]

The only ones this benefits is multibillion dollar completing platforms and criminal who want to hack you. If you take away Apple’s ability to profit at their preferred rate they have little incentive to continue to invest. The only people who want this don’t even use apple devices or are blinded by the desire to get everything for free. Well nothing in life is free. There will be a cost for anything of value and the companies providing that value determines the price.

Apple will get used to profits at a different rate and prefer it to being fined repeatedly 10% and 20% of their annual revenues every year and then being broken up into small pieces after 7-years of repeated violations. Apple has to be taught a lesson in a language it understands. Apple will make phones and sell them everywhere because 2% (or some other small percentage) profits is better than no sales. I think, with these changes, iPhone sales will increase a lot as the incentive to buy high priced Android phones will no longer be there so most of them start gravitating to iPhones.

 

[Beautyspin]

Not really.
All you need is host the APK. Direct the user to download the APK. Android will automatically suggest package installer to install the APK. There is then a dialog box telling the user to allow install unknown apps from the app used to download the APK (IE. The browser), and it's just a tap away as the dialog box gives the user the direct shortcut to the appropriate settings screen and highlights the switch the user need to tap. This is at least on OneUI 4.1. very easy.

This is correct.

 

[ian87w]

See post #251.

Dont use Sammy.

Samsung is the largest market share in Android world. OneUI is the face of Android. Next would be Xiaomi MiUI and Oppo’s ColorOS. That’s reality.

 

[KevinN206]

As if Biden wasn't already in trouble politically. Now his executive order is going after Apple, one of the US's greatest success stories? My lord... the guy just can't get out of his own way lol.

It's crazy that he hasn't blocked Elon Musk from buying Twitter! /s

Collect taxes. Build infrastructure. Support and direct the military. You know, the usual run-of-the-mill stuff...

You can't build infrastructure without regulations.

 

[KevinN206]

This is great they’re taking input from the public. I just left a comment. I urge others to do the same.

FYI- I said in my comment that I am pro-closed ecosystem because I don’t want an app that I need, to be only available in some third party app store that I don’t trust to value my privacy, which would pretty much inevitably happen.

Shouldn't the app developer be able to make this choice for their apps?

 

[usagora]

They are regulating the method of downloading apps because there is currently only one allowed method and Apple is abusing it.

How is Apple "abusing" the App Store?

 

[KevinN206]

Not on 11 or 12.
It’s. Bit more than that.

Just installed Amazon App Store on my S22 Ultra. So it took about 7 steps to install the Amazon Store App.

1. Downloaded the apk from Chrome.
2. Clicked on the notification from Chrome to open the file.
3. Warning dialog asks to click Settings button to allow unknown source.
4. Scanned the list to find Chrome and tap the toggle to enable.
5. New dialog opens up with the Install button
6. Click install
7. Click open to run app

 

[KevinN206]

How is Apple "abusing" the App Store?

They have arbitrary rules on how much commission they get based on categories that they invent. Then they have rules that make competing apps at a disadvantage.

 

[dk001]

Samsung is the largest market share in Android world. OneUI is the face of Android. Next would be Xiaomi MiUI and Oppo’s ColorOS. That’s reality.

Sammy is around 30%, Xiaomi around 15% and all the rest drop from there.
There are a lot of players and it varies by region.

Either way, it could be standardized and streamlined. Not all Android versions ( OEM ) allow it.

 

[dk001]

Just installed Amazon App Store on my S22 Ultra. So it took about 7 steps to install the Amazon Store App.

1. Downloaded the apk from Chrome.
2. Clicked on the notification from Chrome to open the file.
3. Warning dialog asks to click Settings button to allow unknown source.
4. Scanned the list to find Chrome and tap the toggle to enable.
5. New dialog opens up with the Install button
6. Click install
7. Click open to run app

Thanks!
Finding it varies by quite a bit depending on OEM.

For those who have done it a bit it is not a real issue. However for the first timers … ugh.

 

[usagora]

They have arbitrary rules on how much commission they get based on categories that they invent.

Their platform, their rules. I don't see how that's abuse.

Then they have rules that make competing apps at a disadvantage.

Are you saying Apple is giving an unfair advantage to one app developer over another app developer of the same type of app? Example?