Tim Cook Meets EU Antitrust Chief Ahead of iPhone App Sideloading Deadline

[AppliedMicro]

It’s not beautiful. Free market by government regulation is an illusion.

Agree. Let‘s call it a more open market then.
Or one where there is at least potential for competition.

Monopolies are rarely in the interest of consumers - and it’s an illusion that they lead to more security.

I simply don’t trust the motives of the EU rulers, seems the same folks had a fit over apples encryption too

The two are more or less unrelated. Law enforcement want to undermine or prohibit encryption.
Competition regulators and legislators want more competition.
Data protection regulators want to regulate more privacy into being.

Apple current vetting process is a glorified monkey that is pushing buttons.

Let‘s give em some credit: They seem to be at least decently good at figuring out where apps violate the App Store with regards to monetisation - you know, catch the things where you may even give the slightest hint that you can pay for software/digital services elsewhere.

 

[makitango]

Point me to where I said Apple needs to review the actual source code of the app? All I said was they need to make their review process more thorough. Then you all just jumped on the bashing train when this logically makes the most sense to improve iOS safety.

There are hundreds of ways Apple can improve their review process that does NOT involve “reading source code”. Otherwise Apple review process is the best it can get and you cannot bash Apple for it.

The fact that you need to screen the source code is already a sign that they need to work on teh OS itself. It already does a lot, but not enough.
No work done on the review process (which is not even a code review, so the process loses all its value to me) can fix the issues that are already present at the OS level. Any security you would add, you add it there, with engineers. You don't let non-engineers carry the title of ensuring security, because that's just laughable.

You just said the operating system will become the vetting authority. It does that now and it’s not good enough on a closed system. How the hell will opening up iOS improve things?

Again, it does that now, but it is a work in process, as every software is. It also has nothing to do with being open or closed, iOS is neither. The bootloader is a closed system though.

 

[Ethosik]

The fact that you need to screen the source code is already a sign that they need to work on teh OS itself. It already does a lot, but not enough.
No work done on the review process (which is not even a code review, so the process loses all its value to me) can fix the issues that are already present at the OS level. Any security you would add, you add it there, with engineers. You don't let non-engineers carry the title of ensuring security, because that's just laughable.

Again what did I say that makes you all bash on my work experience instead of …. You know keeping things civil?

Either Apple can improve the App Store review process or it can’t. I’m saying Apple needs to improve. If you all say there is ZERO that Apple can do to improve App vetting, then you all can’t complain about it saying “lol just monkeys pressing buttons to approve apps”.

Regardless, opening up iOS to not having ANY vetting will make things worse. I’m not sure how these statements lead to “you are not a developer”. Or I’m just too old which again isn’t very nice.

Just keep things civil for goodness sake.

 

[I7guy]

Agree. Let‘s call it a more open market then.
Or one where there is at least potential for competition.

Monopolies are rarely in the interest of consumers - and it’s an illusion that they lead to more security.


The two are more or less unrelated. Law enforcement want to undermine or prohibit encryption.
Competition regulators and legislators want more competition.
Data protection regulators want to regulate more privacy into being.


Let‘s give em some credit: They seem to be at least decently good at figuring out where apps violate the App Store with regards to monetisation - you know, catch the things where you may even give the slightest hint that you can pay for software/digital services elsewhere.

Doesn’t matter what it’s called. It is still lipstick on a pig.

 

[1129846]

Yes, I was pretty clear in my verbiage this is my opinion, which I do not have to offer any proof of. Common sense seems to say (again an opinion) that opening up the app store to third parties with no independent verification, can potentially lead to a downward spiral of the ecosystem.

Ok it is your opinion but I can point to Mac OS that has allowed side loading since day one does not have a downward spiral. Nor do I see the same issues on Android as end of the day most people will still choose primary stores like today.

Your opinion is you want limited choice and Apple deciding want is best and other things that allow side loading right now does not have the issues.

Android malware does not strike if you stay only in the play store and in line with issues security wise as iOS App Store say bypasses.

 

[I7guy]

Where does common sense say that, and why? I'm sure you can add points as to why you have said opinion.

iOS is not the App Store. Very different people with very different qualifications and salaries work at each.

Because if as you claim apples vetting process is monkeys pressing a button, then it’s all downhill with a free for all.

 

[AppliedMicro]

These nanny regulations aimed at discretionary purchases of consumer electronic devised are far and away above what society “needs”.

The DMA does not regulate discretionary purchases of electronics. It regulates software and/or online platforms that are being used - regularly by most companies (and many developers/advertisers). This is not about hardware.

Or the opposite can happen and malware, phishware and scamware apps can be a permanent part of the landscape making finding legitmate apps much harder to find.

Why? The App Store will go nowhere, and legitimate apps can be on the App Store. Consumer can buy legitimate apps from Apple’s trusted App Store, if they desire so.

👉 And why should legitimate apps not want to be on Apple‘s App Store - as long as Apple provides fair rules and charges competitive commissions?

All I said was they need to make their review process more thorough. Then you all just jumped on the bashing train when this logically makes the most sense to improve iOS safety.

It doesn’t.

Hardening the system makes the most sense to improve iOS security.

 

[I7guy]

Ok it is your opinion but I can point to Mac OS that has allowed side loading since day one does not have a downward spiral. Nor do I see the same issues on Android as end of the day most people will still choose primary stores like today.

Your opinion is you want limited choice and Apple deciding want is best and other things that allow side loading right now does not have the issues.

Android malware does not strike if you stay only in the play store and in line with issues security wise as iOS App Store say bypasses.

Mac o/s is an entirely different niche paradigm, that does not have one billion users (or so or whatever the current iPhone stats are) and targeting campaigns against Mac o/s seems to steadily be increasing.

My opinion is to facilitate choice by allowing people the freedom to buy the platform that meets their needs. Not regulate the platform that doesn’t.

 

[I7guy]

The DMA does not regulate discretionary purchases of electronics. It regulates software and/or online platforms that are being used - regularly by most companies (and many developers/advertisers). This is not about hardware.

Why?

The App Store will go nowhere, and legitimate apps can be on the App Store. 👉 Why should legitimate apps not want to be on Apple‘s App Store - as long as Apple provides fair rules and charges competitive commission?

It doesn’t.

Hardening the system makes the most sense to improve iOS security.

I have a different opinion of what government should be doing than some others. We will likely never agree and will go around in circles on this debate.

 

[makitango]

Again what did I say that makes you all bash on my work experience instead of …. You know keeping things civil?

Either Apple can improve the App Store review process or it can’t. I’m saying Apple needs to improve. If you all say there is ZERO that Apple can do to improve App vetting, then you all can’t complain about it saying “lol just monkeys pressing buttons to approve apps”.

Regardless, opening up iOS to not having ANY vetting will make things worse. I’m not sure how these statements lead to “you are not a developer”. Or I’m just too old which again isn’t very nice.

Just keep things civil for goodness sake.

I did not refer to your work experience in that post at all.

"We" say there is zero point in improving the process because the process, in "our" view, is irrelevant and adds zero value, no matter how much they up the process (which they absolutely won't because their QA department is what is shrinking year-over-year and with clear intentions).
The only solution to guarantee the best security is to work on the security of the OS, because the OS is undiscriminative of where the app comes from. It doesn't matter if a process is good or bad, if a reviewer is drunk on the job, watching porn while "reviewing" or not, it doesn't matter. What matters is the OS, and we will all see if all the cool words that Apple threw on their digital whiteboard during their WWDCs are true to the word.

 

[Ethosik]

I did not refer to your work experience in that post at all.

You literally said:

I question your skillset because I don't know you and I don't believe you because I don't trust you, and any sane entity would do the same.

I’m not here bashing on your skillsets. So please stop doing that with me.

Fixing iOS will never be the solution. One of my companies still deals with Windows 11 malware and getting that fixed for our clients. Windows will never prevent bad apps. iOS won’t either.

 

[makitango]

Mac o/s is an entirely different niche paradigm, that does not have one billion users (or so or whatever the current iPhone stats are) and targeting campaigns against Mac o/s seems to steadily be increasing.

My opinion is to facilitate choice by allowing people the freedom to buy the platform that meets their needs. Not regulate the platform that doesn’t.

Let's just let people do and buy whatever they want and let every corporation do as they please, and see after a week what happened. Great principle to live by. I guess shootings in the US would no longer be limited to schools then.

You literally said:


I’m not here bashing on your skillsets. So please stop doing that with me.

I was questioning your skillset on a post before, not the post you were referencing. Please stop hanging on to outdated parts of the conversation, they are already the past unless you want to artificially keep them in the present for whatever reason.

 

[Ethosik]

I was questioning your skillset on a post before, not the post you were referencing. Please stop hanging on to outdated parts of the conversation, they are already the past unless you want to artificially keep them in the present for whatever reason.

It was a couple posts ago. Stop treating it like it was something years ago. I don’t believe you will not bash my experience again. There is no reason to have even brought it up in this first place. Very uncalled for.

 

[makitango]

You literally said:


I’m not here bashing on your skillsets. So please stop doing that with me.

Fixing iOS will never be the solution. One of my companies still deals with Windows 11 malware and getting that fixed for our clients. Windows will never prevent bad apps. iOS won’t either.

Nothing will guarantee 100% protection, but the best way is at the OS level. Everyone in the field and even remotely involved knows that. That is why macOS' Gatekeeper is not run by humans or hamsters but by code they wrote (sceptical about the hamsters' involvement though). That is why integration and unit tests exist. Because they don't rely on humans to execute their work which is actual screening.

It was a couple posts ago. Stop treating it like it was something years ago. I don’t believe you will not bash my experience again. There is no reason to have even brought it up in this first place. Very uncalled for.

Believe what you want, I only questioned your skillset because you came across with the "omg I am a senior dev and have 30 years of experience on my back, everyone respect me and everything what I am going to say" in the hopes that it will improve your arguments, which it didn't. It is to be expected that if someone is not impressed by your arguments, that it would shed a bad light on the 30 years or the senior dev role.
I stopped questioning your skillset as soon as you dropped the senior dev attitude (which btw not even the worst senior devs I had came across with - it's really not a good entrance).
Again, it is my right to question someone's professionalism or experience but I have no urge to communicate that. But if you keep bringing that oen up, of course I won't lie to you and tell you how I think about it. So why not drop it? It's not the end of the world when not everyone thinks the highest of us, I should not be such a thorn in your eye, being a random person on the internet.

We can (and should) be civil here, and I just ask you to do the same. I cannot expect it from you but I can still hope.

I would go even as far as to say that even if you were part of Apple's social media squad, we could have a good conversation, even on the clock.

 

[SpaceJello]

How to demonstrate you don’t know what the difference is between the word you use 😂.

1. You are free to do that, nothing stopping you from inventing the first Game boy Tesla os
2. You can also already do that, nothing stops you from removing G#
3. And you can already do that. You can publish your own book without punctuation if you want 😂

Apple on the other hand is actively in your way to do what you want with your lawfully acquired property

😂 Obviously you failed to comprehend the nuance of what I was talking about.

We are all able to do to something we OWN after purchasing. But you missed the point that I was requesting those changes to be made at the time of purchase, just as what EU is enforcing.

And no one is preventing you to load any OS or cut your phone in half, but at the time of purchase, I want a piano delivered to me without any G# keys. It’s my choice. It’s my freedom. I want the freedom to get a piano however I want and why isn’t the EU enforcing that?

And I want the ability to run any OS prebaked into the Teslas I buy. Why am I forced to download their @#@## updates only? I don’t want to run over everyone is Africa.

 

[InvertedGoldfish]

Agree. Let‘s call it a more open market then.
Or one where there is at least potential for competition.

Monopolies are rarely in the interest of consumers - and it’s an illusion that they lead to more security.


The two are more or less unrelated. Law enforcement want to undermine or prohibit encryption.
Competition regulators and legislators want more competition.
Data protection regulators want to regulate more privacy into being.


Let‘s give em some credit: They seem to be at least decently good at figuring out where apps violate the App Store with regards to monetisation - you know, catch the things where you may even give the slightest hint that you can pay for software/digital services elsewhere.

Monopolies seldom exist without government interference

Also law enforcement or your regulators are all part of the same animal

It’s like how some people said stuff like “it’s not a tax, it’s a fee” same same

 

[I7guy]

Let's just let people do and buy whatever they want and let every corporation do as they please, and see after a week what happened. Great principle to live by. I guess shootings in the US would no longer be limited to schools then.

Classic strawman fallacy.

I was questioning your skillset on a post before, not the post you were referencing. Please stop hanging on to outdated parts of the conversation, they are already the past unless you want to artificially keep them in the present for whatever reason.

 

[Samplasion]

Could you prove how this actually improves security. Demolishing the gatekeeper and having iOS more open does not improve security. Only tightening the gate does.

For example, it allows me to use my own 2fa app instead of the online apps on the app store

 

[Victor Mortimer]

Hmmm. I doubt you're going to find a better service. We have a great test on the Android side of things, where what you're asking for is available, but very few alternate app stores exist, and the vast majority of developers simply use the play store. But, as I say, I get that this may be your preference for your own reasons, and that the EU is free to pass whatever laws and rules they want.

But...If you think this should be forced on Apple, but not on smaller companies, like Spotify, I wonder at the philosophical justification.

Spotify? What?

Does Spotify make a phone? Does Spotify make any hardware at all?

What you say makes no sense. This is about the ability to run the software you choose on the hardware that you own. Spotify is a software music player. It's not hardware.

If Spotify starts making phones this should absolutely apply to them. But they don't, so you're not making any sense.

 

[Samplasion]

Side loading means zero form of vetting at all.

Only if you start installing apps from less than reputable sources and/or developers does that become an issue. In your case, since you've proven you don't want to sideload, I don't see what's the problem for you?

 

[makitango]

Classic strawman fallacy.

Is that a fact somehow? You understood the point perfectly but I guess you keep that to yourself. But again: The point is that as citizens, we enjoy rights. And they are not to be touched by other citizens who don't want us to have those rights. Among those rights are the ones that allow us to execute the principle of choice as well as not being told what to do with our owned objects. The active blocking of sideloading apps that are not part of Apple's vision of what the user is allowed to do on the device falls under that right which is hindered, and it will not be hindered for much longer.

In my example, I was giving a nod to what could happen if there was zero regulation. I think it's quite on topic because it is an example of what can happen if you don't regulate one area and have another area regulated only by a company, who also happens to be the owner of the platform.

If Apple were to sell houses and would say everything is allowed in them, it would still be illegal to commit crimes in them because those houses would need to be somewhere, in some country. And countries have laws, easy as that.

How hard is it to understand that Apple cannot do as they please anywhere they want? Zero uproar for all the China stuff where there is zero security but now that it affects shareholders, voices go up. Who are these voices then, really?

 

[I7guy]

Is that a fact somehow? You understood the point perfectly but I guess you keep that to yourself. But again: The point is that as citizens, we enjoy rights. And they are not to be touched by other citizens who don't want us to have those rights. Among those rights are the ones that allow us to execute the principle of choice as well as not being told what to do with our owned objects. The active blocking of sideloading apps that are not part of Apple's vision of what the user is allowed to do on the device falls under that right which is hindered, and it will not be hindered for much longer.

In my example, I was giving a nod to what could happen if there was zero regulation. I think it's quite on topic because it is an example of what can happen if you don't regulate one area and have another area regulated only by a company, who also happens to be the owner of the platform.

We as citizens enjoy rights. And one of those rights is the freedom of purchasing those products that work for you and don't purchase those that don't. It's okay there are different views of this matter, even though it will come to pass in the EU doesn't mean it was a good, right or correct decision in the long run.

Zero regulation is totally different than government interference from micro-regulation.

 

[Victor Mortimer]

My preference doesn't need to be explained to you. Or justified to you. The point is I disagree with you. I grant that your preference is valid for you. Can you grant me the same? Or is your preference the only "right" way to think about this issue?


OK. How does that invalidate my preference for the Apple Eco System, as is?



If the EU were trying to force Google to change their business model to a closed, walled garden approach, I'd be on the side of Google. I understand that there's room for both methods.

Not all business models are, or should be, legal. If you set up a business where the model is "Ponzi scheme" then the government can and will shut you down.

"Walled garden" is a business model that should be considered contrary to public policy and stopped. And that's the case whether it's Google or Apple using the unscrupulous business model.

 

[Ethosik]

Believe what you want, I only questioned your skillset because you came across with the "omg I am a senior dev and have 30 years of experience on my back, everyone respect me and everything what I am going to say" in the hopes that it will improve your arguments, which it didn't. It is to be expected that if someone is not impressed by your arguments, that it would shed a bad light on the 30 years or the senior dev role.
I stopped questioning your skillset as soon as you dropped the senior dev attitude (which btw not even the worst senior devs I had came across with - it's really not a good entrance).
Again, it is my right to question someone's professionalism or experience but I have no urge to communicate that. But if you keep bringing that oen up, of course I won't lie to you and tell you how I think about it. So why not drop it? It's not the end of the world when not everyone thinks the highest of us, I should not be such a thorn in your eye, being a random person on the internet.

Because another person was “lol you know nothing about software development”. Again let’s be civil here. I wasn’t the one that started it.

 

[makitango]

We as citizens enjoy rights. And one of those rights is the freedom of purchasing those products that work for you and don't purchase those that don't. It's okay there are different views of this matter, even though it will come to pass in the EU doesn't mean it was a good, right or correct decision in the long run.

Zero regulation is totally different than government interference from micro-regulation.

Is micro-regulation even a word? And who says this is micro-regulation? As someone who emits an opinion that is 100% in line with Apple PR, you cannot expect any real person here to swallow that as a real fruit.

No one except big players is defending Apple, that should teach everyone already far enough as to what people want, or if they see their choices artificially hamstrung by Apple who is controlling a platform of massive influence, and who basically controls all the economy therein, unsupervised.

Freedom is not our only right, at least not in the EU, we also have rights of consumer protection, the protection of competition, and the prevention of bad actors executing their monopolistic control.
Apple will comply because losing a market means losing money, and they would rather lose integrity than money. They followed all the laws in the US, China and Russia and I think it's fair to follow a very simple request from the EU to follow our laws as well.

You don't like the laws, fine, but I and everyone I know do like the laws, and that also includes people outside of the EU. I even know people who wanna buy an EU model going forward because it will allow the sideloading.

We also both know that it will not even affect aunt Dolores because aunt Dolores won't know how to turn on sideloading.