Who would’ve thought? This isn’t going to fly with the EU.

Article 5.3 of the Digital Markets Act (DMA): “The gatekeeper shall not prevent business users from offering the same products or services to end users through third-party online intermediation services or through their own direct online sales channel at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper.”

Friendly reminder that you can sideload apps without jailbreaking or paying for a dev account using TrollStore, which utilises core trust bugs to bypass/spoof some app validation keys, on a iPhone XR or newer on iOS 14.0 up to 16.6.1. (ANY version for iPhone X and older)

Install guide: Trollstore

  • Black Skinned Jew
    link
    fedilink
    English
    61 year ago

    Good, charge those gossip wannabies… in the meanwhile I will use Android and I will not pay a flying fuck… LMAO…

  • Jvrava9OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    171 year ago

    Friendly reminder that you can sideload apps without jailbreaking or paying for a dev account using TrollStore, which utilises core trust bugs to bypass/spoof some app validation keys, on a iPhone XR or newer on iOS 14.0 up to 16.6.1. (ANY version for iPhone X and older)

    Install guide: Trollstore

    • LazaroFilm
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Another alternative is SideStore which allows to refresh apps from your phone without a computer. Just a WiFi connection. It has the benefit of working with any ios versions including the latest ones that TrollStore doesn’t support.

      • Jvrava9OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Yep, its a better AltStore so only 3 apps unless you are vunerable to MDC. For those without a pc, paying for a signing service like maplesign is an option too.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    151 year ago

    I’m not sure how this would work in practice. Developers distributing apps independently to be sideloaded wouldn’t be submitting them to Apple to review, and sideloaded code may not even have an identifiable developer to charge.

    I suppose Apple could implement some sort of rigid signing system, but I think the EU would see that as just another abuse of power.

      • JackGreenEarth
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Well they would have to allow unsigned code to run under the DMA, wouldn’t they?

          • @[email protected]
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            You can run unsigned code on macOS. Apple makes it seem scary and dangerous, but it is possible.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            This is most likely how they’re planning on allowing it. Gatekeeper is the macOS tech they use to keep unsigned code from running yet can be from anywhere on the web.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          I don’t know the details of the DMA, it’s definitely possible to provide code-signing to developers that does not go through the app store.

          • @[email protected]
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            An example of this in practice is Firefox addons. You need to get your extension signed for people to install it, but you can distribute it however. Mozilla of course doesn’t charge for signing though. It’s just to give them the ability to ban an extension found to be malicious.

    • Entropywins
      link
      fedilink
      171 year ago

      Apple is protecting the end user. Through charging a fee apple ensures the end user is really sure they want to sideload the app. This both creates more free storage space and helps the user sideload only the best applications… I’m still working on my corporate speech but that’s what I’d imagine them saying

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1071 year ago

    Who would’ve thought? This isn’t going to fly with the EU.

    Article 5.3 of the Digital Markets Act (DMA): “The gatekeeper shall not prevent business users from offering the same products or services to end users through third-party online intermediation services or through their own direct online sales channel at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper.”

    Apple has an annual legal budget of approximately infinity dollars. I assure you they are aware of this and they believe they are in compliance, even if just barely.

    If challenged, they will have no problem fighting it — they have nearly as much cash on hand as the entire EU budget.

    I hope the EU challenges this, and I hope the EU wins, but Apple isn’t going to be surprised by whatever happens.

    • Caveman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      261 year ago

      Apple has also been known to ignore laws and pay fines for breaking them. The store is a major revenue stream so they might just do that.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        151 year ago

        Yup. If the only penalty is a fine, and that fine doesn’t scale to the business’ profits? A profitable enough business could simply factor in the fines as a cost of doing business.

        Imagine you could make $1000 and only get fined $200 after the fact. No extra penalties. Just a flat $200 fine for every time you violate it. So as long as you expect to be able to top that $200 fine, a business will elect to just pay the fine and continue doing the illegal thing.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          If the only penalty is a fine

          The regulator has the power to ban sales, so I don’t think that particular “cost of doing business” line applies to this dispute.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      101 year ago

      There’s the letter and there’s the spirit of the law. Even if Apple has found a brilliant loophole the courts can just say well it’s technically true but you’re still breaking the law nonetheless, lawyer budget be damned.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        91 year ago

        The EU court is a Roman court, not an Anglo Saxon court. The spirit of the law is what matters, not the technicalities.

        Second, the EU can change the laws that create the outcome they don’t like. By the people, for the people. Apple will play within the EU’s rules or Apple won’t play in the EU.

    • Jvrava9OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      371 year ago

      The fine would be approximately 10% of Apple’s total revenue and the fine increases by 10% every violoation so I doubt that Apple can not accept the regulations.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        221 year ago

        Unfortunately, Apple has the resources, both legal and financial, to tie that up in the EU courts for decades.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          131 year ago

          What if I told you one of those two can make new laws?

          In one afternoon the Commission+Parliament can change the basis of whatever case Apple wants to fight. And they are up against Vestager - she makes multinational software companies bend the knee twice before lunch.

        • Natanael
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 year ago

          You’re underestimating what EU can get gone when they’re motivated to get it done.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      I sure do love how global justice comes down to which party has more money to piss away rather than what’s right or wrong.

      Yup. I’m just gonna sip this coffee while it all burns down.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      They will get free publicity and show the users how they stand up to the overreaching government. Their users will eat it up.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    311 year ago

    So… frontloading?

    Apple is doing this thing where legislation applies to them and they just try not following it anyway. Trump is truly influential.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    28
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    of course Apple plans to charge fees for sideloading, a bunch of scumbags, but fear not, Apple fan boys cult members will regurgitate Apple’s propaganda as gospel

    • Jvrava9OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      Already happening, just look at some comments

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        The fanboys make me angrier than Apple. It’s so frustrating to discuss something with someone who is so brainwashed.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          think about this: to me, all you really toxic people (including the OP, for shame) against Apple are the ones looking quite brainwashed, culty, back-bitey and very small minded. probably because you are. think about that for a second before you snap reply - there ARE more than just your side to this buddy.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            What is your side to this? Can you explain it to me?

            A lot of the comments I’ve read who are on apples side, make claims that are not realistic or don’t give any reasons at all for being on apples side.

    • Jvrava9OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      Its restricted af, some people in my class don’t even know what a folder is because of their iPhones (gen z for context)

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    141 year ago

    Sorry, can’t be bothered with whatever issue this is.

    I’m busy shopping for a North Face tent so I’ll have it to camp in the next time a new ear pod case gets released.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    91 year ago

    I suppose they can charge to use their own side-loading software, or their alternative app store, but I’m not sure what happens if a third party offers a side-loading platform that doesn’t pay Apple.

    I suppose they can just refuse to allow such platforms to exist, but the EU may not feels that satisfies their grievances. Eventually they’re going to have to require side-loading.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    141 year ago

    It’s hard to imagine people who buy iPhones care about sideloading. Their priority is the convenience of iMessage and the Apple ecosystem.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      I care about sideloading and imessage. If imessage was available on android, I would be using a pixel at the moment. It’s just that I am from the US but don’t live their. So imessage is the easiest way for me to be in touch with 99% of the people I know.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The convenience of… texting?

      Lol. Sometimes I feel you ppl just regurgitate what you’ve seen before without realizing it.

    • Dyskolos
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Remember their slogan from back then? “does more, costs less!”

      Classic.

      Just like when google silently removed their slogan “don’t be evil”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Just like when google silently removed their slogan “don’t be evil”.

        They didn’t just remove it, they changed it to “do good”. I’m not sure what that means to Google but it sort of looks like “implement the neoliberal cyberpunk hellscape no one asked for”