iOS 17 to Support App Sideloading to Comply With European Regulations

[dk001]

We'll wait and see about that.

Cause thankfully the legislation includes very explicit anti-circumvention clauses. 👏

"The gatekeeper shall not engage in any behaviour that undermines effective compliance with the obligations of Articles 5, 6 and 7 regardless of whether that behaviour is of a contractual, commercial or technical nature, or of any other nature, or consists in the use of behavioural techniques or interface design."

"The gatekeeper shall not degrade the conditions or quality of any of the core platform services provided to business users or end users who avail themselves of the rights or choices laid down in Articles 5, 6 and 7, or make the exercise of those rights or choices unduly difficult, including by offering choices to the end-user in a non-neutral manner, or by subverting end users’ or business users' autonomy, decision-making, or free choice via the structure, design, function or manner of operation of a user interface or a part thereof."

"The gatekeeper shall technically enable end users who decide to set that downloaded software application or software application store as their default to carry out that change easily."

Admittedly, this is the stuff that makes for disputes.
Will Apple try to make sideloading as difficult and convoluted as possible? Maybe.
But given that sideloading and third-party app store exist today and given how they work, I don't think the EU-mandated one can or will be more convoluted.

Personally I think this is going to be interesting. Especially once it has had time to evolve.
The default ability is the one I am watching most.

 

[dk001]

You don't get it, do you? The App Store enforces minimal standards, and like all efforts to enforce standards, it costs money (as does advertising and app serving infrastructure). The devs will want to maximise profit, so they will leave the app store and then there will not be any standards. Sure, companies will face market pressure if their apps are fraudulent, security risks, or privacy risks, but that is closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. And your claim that Apple does nothing for security seems to contradict the claims Apple are making (https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022...e-billion-in-fraudulent-transactions-in-2021/). Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Apple is lying or exaggerating about this, or are you just talking out of your hat?

Consumers did have a very clear choice before this EU lunacy: it's called Android and it controls ~70% of the market. What the EU has down is basically make iOS the same as Android. That's restricting choice, not enhancing it. Choice entails diversity of options. Again, the EU should have focused on making Apple guarantee the security of apps within its wall garden. That would have maintained diversity of choice.

Would we expect Apple to do anything else? In almost all cases we either hear nothing from Apple or we get something from them to spin their appearance in a positive manner. Sadly I generally expect silence from them.

 

[dk001]

Perhaps. I suppose we'll see. I wonder what Microsoft and other large companies will do.

I would expect similar to what we see on Android - Play Store or Google Web Store.
Wonder if we will see the same level of possible integration in iOS/iPadOS as we have on Android today.

 

[dk001]

I just don't see how making users sift through half a dozen app stores to find what they want is a good experience - especially since I doubt app prices will be any lower outside the AppStore. Reminds me of the bad old days of having to go to many, many websites to buy software for my old Palm PDAs.

Same way I do today. Google it or use Bing.

If I want a non-Adobe pdf editor for iPadOS I usually Google it. Trying to search in the App Store is an effort in frustration. In the possible future I will do the same however the proposed options will exist in the App Store and other locations.

Not seeing the issue. If this can get Apple to clean up and make the App Store useful … I am all for that.

 

[jlc1978]

Perhaps. I suppose we'll see. I wonder what Microsoft and other large companies will do.

I suspect a few will have their own store and only allow d/ls from it; especially since Apple is not going to let EPIC use their store to reach iOS users for free and use EPIC's payment system to collect IAP. I suspect the split will be "unavailable on Apple App Store" and "variable but still pay a fee" for, at least, apps from major companies such as EPIC.

MS probably will stay on the app store simply because Apple needs MS for Office365 and the App Store provides it for free for all most users.

 

[VulchR]

Would we expect Apple to do anything else? In almost all cases we either hear nothing from Apple or we get something from them to spin their appearance in a positive manner. Sadly I generally expect silence from them.

Sure, the link I cited could have been Apple propaganda. However, lest we just be cynical all the time about everything everywhere, I had hoped that anybody dismissing Apple's claim to be improving security by vetting apps and having the walled garden would have some some sort of evidence to justify the scepticism. For instance, I don't know if fraud occurs more frequently in Android than iOS, whether the proportion of dodgy installed apps is higher on Android phones than iPhones, etc. Like the lack of evidence estimating the proportion of iPhone customers wanting sideloading, it is a little frustrating not knowing what the actual state of affairs is.

 

[osxster]

I suspect a few will have their own store and only allow d/ls from it; especially since Apple is not going to let EPIC use their store to reach iOS users for free and use EPIC's payment system to collect IAP. I suspect the split will be "unavailable on Apple App Store" and "variable but still pay a fee" for, at least, apps from major companies such as EPIC.

MS probably will stay on the app store simply because Apple needs MS for Office365 and the App Store provides it for free for all most users.

All of the major gaming companies will have their own store. It will be a complete mess, much of how gaming is on Windows. You will need multiple id's, more passwords, credit cards in many different places. Games will not be cheaper, if the price changes, it will be more. Or they will raise their price on the Apple Store if they are in two stores to make a point. I agree Microsoft will remain on the Apple App Store because of the productivity apps. Many security apps will probably stop working if other stores are installed for obvious security reasons (like how apps won't work on jailbroken phones), so Microsoft will certainly still be on the Apple App Store. This is terrible for the consumer.

 

[Shirasaki]

I don't think Apple is more powerful than any government, but this does go to show the challenge of drafting a piece of legislation to have the intended outcome. It's one thing to go "I want you to do X" and it's another thing to make the contract as iron tight as possible, because you know the recipient is going to be a stickler for the rules and abuse every loophole they can find in order to give in as little possible.

Right now, the DMA appears to be watertight, but we really won't know for sure until Apple unveils their take on sideloading, and we can see how close or far from the intended spirit of the rules it is.

It will be as far away from the true spirit of the law as possible guaranteed. I don’t need to have a degree To realise that, even more so if such legislation hurts apple bottom line. Typical cold-blooded corporation that literally Care nothing but money.

 

[marking]

I would like to share my perspective as a an App Developer.

I believe it is in the best interests of app developers to keep their apps in the main stores, and I believe that most app developers will recognize this and keep their apps in the app store. The fact that almost all apps are available in the Google Play store, despite the fact that Android allows sideloading.

That being said, comparing Android to Apple is not really comparing apples to apples. I can easily see a developer leaving his app in the Play Store, but removing it from Apple's App Store. This is because Apple can reject apps because they don't like the style or the content of the app, while Google generally won't.

Apple can restrict apps from going in to the app store just because they don't like the style. Or because it violates some type of policy they have in place. Some of these policies are good, and some are bad. Some of the bad policies (browsers and virtualization) have already been mentioned here.

Because of Apple's restrictions, I can see app developers who have always wanted to implement some type of feature, but feared being banned from the app store for violating some policy, begin moving away from the app store, and instead go the sideloading route, while for Android, they feel comfortable that implementing the same feature won't get them banned.

If developers do start moving away from the app store, it will be entirely the fault of Apple. Some of their restrictions are quite bad, and serve only to protect themselves and are not in the best interests of their customers. Removing those restrictions, while still maintaining those that are needed for security, will ensure that developers stay with Apple, just like they stay with Google. Keeping those in place, might make a developer think about going down the sideloading route.

 

[Shirasaki]

All of the major gaming companies will have their own store. It will be a complete mess, much of how gaming is on Windows. You will need multiple id's, more passwords, credit cards in many different places. Games will not be cheaper, if the price changes, it will be more. Or they will raise their price on the Apple Store if they are in two stores to make a point. I agree Microsoft will remain on the Apple App Store because of the productivity apps. Many security apps will probably stop working if other stores are installed for obvious security reasons (like how apps won't work on jailbroken phones), so Microsoft will certainly still be on the Apple App Store. This is terrible for the consumer.

From not having apps on App Store to not having apps on App Store? Doesn’t look much different for me. For customer? They will be from having no way to play those games on iOS outside of safari (which is a terrible browser) to having a native app with better experiences. Microsoft, Sony, epic, Nintendo don’t want you to register an apple account to play games on their platform anyways. Remember, you still have to have multiple logins anyways because Apple hates them on their platform before sideloading.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Android controls something like 70% of the market for mobile phones. Don't be silly.

As far as I know, it doesn't control 70% of the market for mobile apps - let alone earnings from that. And the market for mobile phones isn't the primary target for this regulation - it's the market for "core platform services" such as mobile phone operating systems.

In any case, I was comparing Apple to having a "local" monopoly for app distribution - on their own operating system. And that is something this regulation is targeting: To limit the building of "local" monopolies on top of regulated core platform services.

Interestingly, it does not not require them to improve access

I think the ease of use will be compared to their own App Store and its ease of use though - and of course held against the justifiable security mechanisms Apple may implement for third-party apps.

You have to keep these stores running in the background all the time

Such thing doesn't exist on iOS.

Since the obvious security concerns, some iOS apps may not work with another store installed

Again, it's up to enable to sandbox apps - or app stores - against each other.

 

[robco74]

I would like to share my perspective as a an App Developer.

I believe it is in the best interests of app developers to keep their apps in the main stores, and I believe that most app developers will recognize this and keep their apps in the app store. The fact that almost all apps are available in the Google Play store, despite the fact that Android allows sideloading.

That being said, comparing Android to Apple is not really comparing apples to apples. I can easily see a developer leaving his app in the Play Store, but removing it from Apple's App Store. This is because Apple can reject apps because they don't like the style or the content of the app, while Google generally won't.

Apple can restrict apps from going in to the app store just because they don't like the style. Or because it violates some type of policy they have in place. Some of these policies are good, and some are bad. Some of the bad policies (browsers and virtualization) have already been mentioned here.

Because of Apple's restrictions, I can see app developers who have always wanted to implement some type of feature, but feared being banned from the app store for violating some policy, begin moving away from the app store, and instead go the sideloading route, while for Android, they feel comfortable that implementing the same feature won't get them banned.

If developers do start moving away from the app store, it will be entirely the fault of Apple. Some of their restrictions are quite bad, and serve only to protect themselves and are not in the best interests of their customers. Removing those restrictions, while still maintaining those that are needed for security, will ensure that developers stay with Apple, just like they stay with Google. Keeping those in place, might make a developer think about going down the sideloading route.

Thanks for articulating why this move isn't for the benefit of end users, but developers. Few users have been complaining about the App Store and its policies. Not to mention, but even with a much larger user base, Android is still nowhere near as lucrative as iOS. This applies not only to purchases, but ad revenue tends to be higher as well.

The EU has much stronger consumer protections, and at least has the GDPR. The US has very weak consumer protections and weak privacy laws (excepting CA with the CCPA). Apple has tried to balance the scales between the needs of their users and the needs of developers. Giving developers carte blanche to do as they will isn't the ideal solution. Rarely do corporations act for the greater good over their own self interests.

 

[makitango]

We (the people) want the device we purchased the way it is. The Government's want access to your devices. They simultaneously want Apple to protect the consumer while also banning apps they (the governments) don't like.

You don‘t represent me, and I voted with my wallet to work in a country whose taxes represent me, and who acts in my interest. Sorry to break it to you but as long as Apple wants to milk Europe, they have to adhere to our laws and adjust their products to our legal framework, just as it is the other way around.
Also, your shiny App Store does every government‘s bidding already. Sideloading would cut them off actually.

 

[djphat2000]

You don‘t represent me,

I wasn't trying to. Nor am I ever going to try and represent you.

and I voted with my wallet to work in a country whose taxes represent me, and who acts in my interest.

Ok, and did you vote with your wallet to buy an iPhone? Cause, that literally goes against what you seem to want.

Sorry to break it to you but as long as Apple wants to milk Europe, they have to adhere to our laws and adjust their products to our legal framework, just as it is the other way around.

Milk? C'mon. They are not even the dominant mobile device maker in the EU.
I'm sure they will either Adhere to the laws or they will figure out another way. Either way, the milking will continue....

Also, your shiny App Store does every government‘s bidding already. Sideloading would cut them off actually.

And yet the government (US) wants to do just that. Cut their nose to spite their face.

 

[deevey]

There will be NO discounts using someone else's store of the AppStore as they all change the same commission anyways.

Ah but think of the poor developers

</sarcasm>

If developers do start moving away from the app store, it will be entirely the fault of Apple. Some of their restrictions are quite bad, and serve only to protect themselves and are not in the best interests of their customers. Removing those restrictions, while still maintaining those that are needed for security, will ensure that developers stay with Apple, just like they stay with Google. Keeping those in place, might make a developer think about going down the sideloading route.

I reckon the only restrictions that will be lifted will be monetary ones and download locations. Apps will most likely still need to be signed by Apple to run and they could well use the same criteria as it does currently.

It will be as far away from the true spirit of the law as possible guaranteed. I don’t need to have a degree To realise that, even more so if such legislation hurts apple bottom line. Typical cold-blooded corporation that literally Care nothing but money.

It's either legal or it's not. If a law if written in such a way that it leaves grey areas open to interpretation then it's pointless, and on the law makers to revise to make it watertight.

The "spirit of the rules" might work in some sporting circles, but when youre dealing with multi-billion dollar orgainizations you should have your ducks in a row.

Also, your shiny App Store does every government‘s bidding already. Sideloading would cut them off actually.

I'd like to hear more ... care to expand on that?

 

[AppliedMicro]

If a law if written in such a way that it leaves grey areas open to interpretation then it's pointless

While you‘re free to have your own opinion, as well as share it publicly online, do be aware that it isn’t necessarily shared by the legal community and its scholars.

 

[jlc1978]

I believe it is in the best interests of app developers to keep their apps in the main stores, and I believe that most app developers will recognize this and keep their apps in the app store. The fact that almost all apps are available in the Google Play store, despite the fact that Android allows sideloading.

The size of Apple's user base in the App Store makes leaving it difficult. Competing app stores likely won't offer the same advantages nor lower costs; so while they may put apps on them they'll also stick with Apple, similar to what happens with Google. To me, it's simply you have to be where the customers are; and most are probably not going to use a third party App Store.

Because of Apple's restrictions, I can see app developers who have always wanted to implement some type of feature, but feared being banned from the app store for violating some policy, begin moving away from the app store, and instead go the sideloading route

I've seen Mac developers offer App Store and d/l versions with the d/l version offering features not available in the App Store.

 

[jlc1978]

While you‘re free to have your own opinion, as well as share it publicly online, do be aware that it isn’t necessarily shared by the legal community and its scholars.

Oddly enough, the article you reference details how judges deal with ambiguity in a law as written.

 

[dk001]

The size of Apple's user base in the App Store makes leaving it difficult. Competing app stores likely won't offer the same advantages nor lower costs; so while they may put apps on them they'll also stick with Apple, similar to what happens with Google. To me, it's simply you have to be where the customers are; and most are probably not going to use a third party App Store.



I've seen Mac developers offer App Store and d/l versions with the d/l version offering features not available in the App Store.

You see a decent amount in the Android world where a dev has it in the Play Store, their own site, and in several 3rd party stores.

Widest possible coverage.

 

[marking]

Thanks for articulating why this move isn't for the benefit of end users, but developers. Few users have been complaining about the App Store and its policies. Not to mention, but even with a much larger user base, Android is still nowhere near as lucrative as iOS. This applies not only to purchases, but ad revenue tends to be higher as well.

The EU has much stronger consumer protections, and at least has the GDPR. The US has very weak consumer protections and weak privacy laws (excepting CA with the CCPA). Apple has tried to balance the scales between the needs of their users and the needs of developers. Giving developers carte blanche to do as they will isn't the ideal solution. Rarely do corporations act for the greater good over their own self interests.

Few users know what the App Store policies are. If an app doesn't have a feature that its Android counterpart does have, users chalk it up to the ios app lagging behind the Android app, not to the policies of the Apple App Store.

Regarding your second point, I don't think developers should be given carte blanch, I am not saying their privacy policies are bad, rather I am saying that some of their policies are bad, and this will keep developers away.

 

[jlc1978]

Few users know what the App Store policies are. If an app doesn't have a feature that its Android counterpart does have, users chalk it up to the ios app lagging behind the Android app, not to the policies of the Apple App

An Android app could enable something such as support for emulation along with other features allowed by Apple, thus the App Store version would lack emulation but still have other features; due to Apple’s rules.

Such situations exist already in the MacOS world.

 

[jlc1978]

You see a decent amount in the Android world where a dev has it in the Play Store, their own site, and in several 3rd party stores.

Widest possible coverage.

I agree. I meant to say only use a third party store; very few will abandon Apple for a different channel. I suspect the bulk of their revenue, and profit, will be from Apple as well.

 

[dk001]

Few users know what the App Store policies are. If an app doesn't have a feature that its Android counterpart does have, users chalk it up to the ios app lagging behind the Android app, not to the policies of the Apple App Store.

Regarding your second point, I don't think developers should be given carte blanch, I am not saying their privacy policies are bad, rather I am saying that some of their policies are bad, and this will keep developers away.

I see that with MS apps between iOS and Android. Android I can get much better integration than I can in iOS.

 

[Shirasaki]

Never do corporations act for the greater good over their own self interests.

There, fixed for you.

 

[djphat2000]

So, by this logic, Apple is more powerful than law

No. The product they made follows all the laws as they existed. And for almost 2 decades, without any issue. The law is changing to make what they have no longer viable. They either comply with it. Figure out another way to work around it. Or not offer the product as it is today. Whatever choice they make, will be within the laws as they exist.

, cause it can “decide how it works” rather than design products based on customer need (decided by customer)

Customers don't design products. Companies design products, and customers either like it or they don't. Buy or not. And yes, Apple decides how its products works. They made the thing.

, comply with regulatory requirements (decided by government) while deliver the maximum amount of profit to all of its shareholders (decided by investors).

yes, that its correct. Comply with the laws. Make money, and profit. So we can make more products that comply with laws, and continue on and on forever. That's what business do.

Yeah, Apple makes the product, it’s theirs to decide how it works.

Yes. And if their product doesn't comply with laws. They have to make another product that will. Or they don't sell anything. And then they are no longer in business.