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

[makitango]

That still doesn't point to a valid criticism of software development.

The act of gatekeeping alone helps to some degree with malicious apps. We constantly suffered with my Grandma getting attacked left and right with Windows 10. Once we got her a device with Windows 10 S (Microsoft Store Only apps allowed), the attacks stopped because she could not install a random exe from the internet. App review process prevents the most basic malware and can help with a little more complex malware items. Also, said grandma also had issues with Android that was resolved when we moved her to iPhone.

That is all I said and is really something so basic it shouldn't even be questioned.

I never once implied Apple should review your entire source code.

The act of gatekeeping is embodied in Apple's Gatekeeper, which is a program. The app review does not mirror any gatekeeping and it is not what kept your grandma safe. What kept your grandma safe was the requirement by the OS to use signed code of verified developers which has nothing to do with the Microsoft Store, the Microsoft store only happens to apply that ruleset also.
On macOS these days you also cannot just install a random app from the internet, and it is even more challenging when it's not signed.

App review does nothing but content curation, plus making sure that the developer has no mechanisms in place to circumvent in-app purchase taxation, which I assume is their primary task these days because shareholders.
There is no software engineer screening the code which means that no security is applied, and it never will because shareholders. How hard is that to understand?

 

[Ethosik]

On macOS these days you also cannot just install a random app from the internet, and it is even more challenging when it's not signed.

Yes you can. MakeMKV is not signed.

Knowing every operating systems capabilities is not a prerequisite for being a software developer. A windows only dev won’t know what macOS does.

 

[BaldiMac]

The act of gatekeeping is embodied in Apple's Gatekeeper, which is a program. The app review does not mirror any gatekeeping and it is not what kept your grandma safe. What kept your grandma safe was the requirement by the OS to use signed code of verified developers which has nothing to do with the Microsoft Store, the Microsoft store only happens to apply that ruleset also.
On macOS these days you also cannot just install a random app from the internet, and it is even more challenging when it's not signed.

App review does nothing but content curation, plus making sure that the developer has no mechanisms in place to circumvent in-app purchase taxation, which I assume is their primary task these days because shareholders.
There is no software engineer screening the code which means that no security is applied, and it never will because shareholders. How hard is that to understand?

It's hard to understand because it's wrong. App Store review absolutely has a role in the security of the OS.

 

[makitango]

It's hard to understand because it's wrong. App Store review absolutely has a role in the security of the OS.

The review has a role to play in security because some people say so? You mean the people who do it? That's like releasing my code saying "No, I don't need a code review because I already reviewed my code".

 

[BaldiMac]

The review has a role to play in security because some people say so? You mean the people who do it? That's like releasing my code saying "No, I don't need a code review because I already reviewed my code".

No, because it identifies and bans fraudulent apps and developers.

 

[Ethosik]

Can we stop the back and forth here? I completely disagree with most of what the other poster said, but he's right on this point for the latest versions of macOS. He posted the instructions directly from Apple. You have to approve unsigned apps individually in Settings the first time they are run. Heck, it even says so on the MakeMKV download page.

And I’m telling you I don’t need to edit the gatekeeper setting. Right click and open does this for you for that one app.

LMAO the Apple documentation page even states this. Come on people.

Direct quote from Apple themselves.

If you're prompted to open the app in Finder and you're sure that you want to open it despite the warning, you can control-click the app, choose Open from the menu, then click Open in the dialog that appears. Enter your admin name and password to open the app.

 

[BaldiMac]

Then you either installed a signed version or you are just misremembering. Here are the instructions directly from Apple. You can verify that you approved the app previously by checking the Security section in Settings.

If you want to open an app that hasn’t been notarized or is from an unidentified developer​

Running software that hasn’t been signed and notarized might expose your computer and personal information to malware that can harm your Mac or compromise your privacy.
If you’re certain that an app that you want to open is from a trustworthy source and hasn’t been tampered with, you might be able to temporarily override your Mac security settings to open it.*

1. Open System Settings.
2. Click Privacy & Security, scroll down, and click the Open Anyway button to confirm your intent to open or install the app.
   
3. The warning prompt reappears and, if you're absolutely sure that you want to open the app anyway, you can click Open.

The app is now saved as an exception to your security settings, and you can open it in the future by double-clicking it, just as you can any authorized app.

 

[Ethosik]

Then you either installed a signed version or you are just misremembering. Here are the instructions directly from Apple. You can verify that you approved the app previously by checking the Security section in Settings.

If you want to open an app that hasn’t been notarized or is from an unidentified developer​

Running software that hasn’t been signed and notarized might expose your computer and personal information to malware that can harm your Mac or compromise your privacy.
If you’re certain that an app that you want to open is from a trustworthy source and hasn’t been tampered with, you might be able to temporarily override your Mac security settings to open it.*

1. Open System Settings.
2. Click Privacy & Security, scroll down, and click the Open Anyway button to confirm your intent to open or install the app.
   
3. The warning prompt reappears and, if you're absolutely sure that you want to open the app anyway, you can click Open.

The app is now saved as an exception to your security settings, and you can open it in the future by double-clicking it, just as you can any authorized app.

Scroll down just a little more and you will see the statement about control click or right click. My god people.

 

[BaldiMac]

Scroll down just a little more and you will see the statement about control click or right click.

You are absolutely correct. Sorry! Apple could have worded that a lot better.

Here is a clearer explanation:

Open a Mac app from an unidentified developer

If you try to open an app by an unidentified developer and you see a warning dialog, you can override your security settings to open it.

support.apple.com

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Bad analogy. Developers know fully what the terms of the contract is when they produce an app for their store. Terms and conditions arent sprung on them after the fact.

As regards what else Apple does, that is beside the point. They've done some questionable things, as most firms have. The question is whether the proposed ruling is sound or not.

From the EU website:

Antitrust rules prohibit agreements between market operators that would restrict competition, and the abuse of dominance. European Antitrust policy is developed from two central rules set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union:

1. Article 101 of the Treaty prohibits agreements between two or more independent market operators, which restrict competition.
   The most flagrant example of illegal conduct infringing Article 101 is the creation of a cartel between competitors, which may involve price-fixing and/or market sharing.
2. Article 102 of the Treaty prohibits firms that hold a dominant position on a given market to abuse that position, for example by charging unfair prices, by limiting production, or by refusing to innovate to the prejudice of consumers.

Apples situation does not apply to either of these tenets, therefore to quote Jeremy Bentham, it's nonsense on stilts.

Re my location, yep I could say I am anything or anywhere online, but saying I'm from the UK hardly warrants suspicion.

Perhaps you should look what dominant position is defined as

 

[Sophisticatednut]

You are claiming that your sources say things that they don't. For example, your first picture simply says that developers can "communicate and promote offers" free of charge. That does not mean that they can't charge a 27% platform fee on sales.

Well it’s not the question if they can charge developers a fee. But how will they enforce it?

Apple isn’t allowed to obligate the use any identification services

7. The gatekeeper shall not require end users to use, or business users to use, to offer, or to interoperate with, an identification service, a web browser engine or a payment service, or technical services that support the provision of payment services, such as payment systems for in-app purchases, of that gatekeeper in the context of services provided by the business users using that gatekeeper’s core platform services.​

(19)	‘identification service’ means a type of service provided together with or in support of core platform services that enables any type of verification of the identity of end users or business users, regardless of the technology used;

Yes, I can judge what I like and discuss it on a globally accessible website, which is what I'm doing.

Market dominance is based on a company's market share, not whether the company controls its own app store or not. How can a company not have anything other than "dominance" over something that it itself created?

Wrong. Eu don’t consider dominant position as illegal. Only abuse of dominant position is illegal, and that doesn’t require a large market share.

Yet again: APPLE IS NOT A DOMINANT PLAYER IN THE EU. It therefore cannot abuse it position, by the very definition that the EU sets out.

No, MEP's voted for that, not its citizens. You dont know how the EU works so you?

Perhaps get up to speed with the legislation first.

Article 102 Investigations

Article 102 Procedures, Investigations, Decisions and Fines

competition-policy.ec.europa.eu

That can be said for all “Smart” devices or anything remotely having some computational abilities. My point has always been why is Apple iOS being singled out when other more sophisticated to basic “smart” devices aren’t under the same regulation.

We cannot deny Apple is being single out here.

Do they have a core platform? Google is also targeted for anti competitive behavior in the playstore

 

[Sebalto]

Wrong. Eu don’t consider dominant position as illegal. Only abuse of dominant position is illegal, and that doesn’t require a large market share.

Got you. So my business, which accounts for about 0.5% of its market, can according to your redefinition of "dominant" control that market. How? Clue...it can't.

In economics, Market dominance is the control of a economic market by a firm. Apple does not control the smartphone market.

Perhaps get up to speed with the legislation first.

Yes, I've read that. What's your point?

 

[BaldiMac]

Well it’s not the question if they can charge developers a fee. But how will they enforce it?

Apple isn’t allowed to obligate the use any identification services

7. The gatekeeper shall not require end users to use, or business users to use, to offer, or to interoperate with, an identification service, a web browser engine or a payment service, or technical services that support the provision of payment services, such as payment systems for in-app purchases, of that gatekeeper in the context of services provided by the business users using that gatekeeper’s core platform services.​

(19)	‘identification service’ means a type of service provided together with or in support of core platform services that enables any type of verification of the identity of end users or business users, regardless of the technology used;

In this context, the DMA is just saying that Apple can't require use of "Sign in with Apple" or similar identification service. Which has nothing to do with what you are claiming.

 

[I7guy]

The review has a role to play in security because some people say so?

Yes.

You mean the people who do it?

Yes. As opposed to it not being done at all.

That's like releasing my code saying "No, I don't need a code review because I already reviewed my code".

No it’s not.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Got you. So my business, which accounts for about 0.5% of its market, can according to your redefinition of "dominant" control that market. How? Clue...it can't.

In 2014 The EU commission found that Servier (a French company) had a dominant position in the market for hypertension and heart failure medication in the EEA. Market share:

• 5%-10% in 2006-2007
• 4%-8% in 2008-2009.

And their market share in the pharmaceutical industry was 1-2%

In economics, Market dominance is the control of an economic market by a firm. Apple does not control the smartphone market.

Yes, I've read that. What's your point?

Well luckily for us the relevant market isn’t smartphones. iOS only exists on

To determine the relevant market for iOS and the AppStore, the Commission would use the Hypothetical Monopolist Test (HMT). The Hypothetical Monopolist Test (HMT) is a method of defining the relevant market by asking whether a hypothetical monopolist of a group of products could profitably impose a small but significant and non-transitory increase in price (SSNIP) on those products.

If the answer is yes, then the group of products constitutes a relevant market. If the answer is no, then the group of products is too narrow and should be expanded to include more substitutes.

The HMT involves assessing the demand and supply-side substitutability of the products and services in question, as well as the potential competition from other players in the market.