5 ms·

Yes, the EU. It forces Apple to allow sideloading - that means installing apps with no restrictions, from any sources such as any random website. A store is jus

by throwaway22056 3y ago

Yes, the EU. It forces Apple to allow sideloading - that means installing apps with no restrictions, from any sources such as any random website. A store is just an app, thus there will be no way for Apple to force alternative stores to anything. There doesn't even need to be a person that could be held responsible, or they could be easily masked behind anonymity of the web or layers of white horses / phished identities.

Y-bar 3y ago
But from my perspective sideloading is not necessarily a separate on-device store. An on-device store would be equivalent to Steam which first need to be installed on the device for example via the regular iOS App Store or sideloading or another already installed app store. Sideloading would be downloading from a web page or secondary device or similar method. Separate stores would be a decent middle-ground for my part when less tech-savvy people inevitably ask me "can I trust this app" I can reply with "are you about to install it from store X or Y or download elsewhere?". If the answer is "that store from Epic Games" I could sigh quietly and say "it's likely okay".
- throwaway22056 3y ago
  Yes, and you if sideload a store app from a website (a random one, or Facebook, MS, etc), Apple is out of control in that case. They could ban the altstore from their own App Store, but not from the web. My problem is exactly with these "safe stores from well known companies". Apple helps me. EpicStore and MetaStore helps them sidestep the anti-tracking and anti-spam rules of App Store.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    > Apple helps me. That's a bit of a stretch. Apple, much like every other business, cares about you insofar as you're a paying customer. That's why they don't let you use... well, stuff like third-party payment processors.
    - throwaway22056 3y ago
      Which is great, I much prefer Apple Pay and their overview of all subscriptions etc and them actually enforcing what changes I make there, as opposed to the situation on Android where I was charged by custom payment gateway implementations after cancelling the subscription many times and Google just told me to take it up with the app vendor who never responded.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        Hey, more power to you. The good news is that after the DMA rolls out, Apple doesn't have to stop offering any of that. You can keep using it until Apple stops providing the function, same as you would have without the DMA. I'm glad we have passionate Apple enthusiasts helping us prove how harmless market regulation actually is.
        throwaway22056 3y ago
        The problem is that app vendors will no longer be forced to use it. That seriously hurts my sense of security as a user of the platform - the very thing why I chose it.
        eitally 3y ago
        But it doesn't affect Apple's 1P app store, app review process, or other security processes at all, so if you are content exclusively using Apple's App Store then there's no impact. If you look at the Android ecosystem, there have been all kinds of app stores for years. Some run by hardware OEMs, some open source (FDroid), and some that are run by app review sites that basically function as sideloading hubs for pre-GA versions of apps. Arguably, things generally work and overall I don't believe system security has been negatively affected. The real issues here are with the payment processing captured by Apple & Google, and why their gatekeeping (net negative to competition) should be a profit center for them while at the same time being a net negative (arguable) to consumers.
    - bee_rider 3y ago
bee_rider 3y ago
Is that what they are planning to do? I definitely can see a “store is just an app, you must allow third party apps” as a sort of maximal approach. But treating app stores as a sort of special thing that requires extra permission and coordination doesn’t seem totally impossible. It could be sort of nice if each store was isolated inside a different sandbox and had it’s own filesystem. (I wouldn’t be that surprised if something like that happened because it is both justifiable from a security point of view, and also mildly annoying for people who want to use third party stores, which I guess Apple would prefer).
- throwaway22056 3y ago
  It's what they did, the law is approved and will come into effect soon. A store is just an app like any other apps - e.g. your browser. If you can download an app from the web, you can download a store, and the store can download other apps.
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    That’s unfortunate
    - bee_rider 3y ago
      I find it weird that this comment was downvoted while my comment up two was upvoted. If you agree that a store should be something other than just another app, then you ought to agree that it is unfortunate if this is their plan. If you agree but downvoted because you think it isn’t their plan, maybe you can show us why the person I responded to here was wrong? That would be reassuring!

Y-bar 3y ago

But from my perspective sideloading is not necessarily a separate on-device store. An on-device store would be equivalent to Steam which first need to be installed on the device for example via the regular iOS App Store or sideloading or another already installed app store. Sideloading would be downloading from a web page or secondary device or similar method. Separate stores would be a decent middle-ground for my part when less tech-savvy people inevitably ask me "can I trust this app" I can reply with "are you about to install it from store X or Y or download elsewhere?". If the answer is "that store from Epic Games" I could sigh quietly and say "it's likely okay".

throwaway22056 3y ago
Yes, and you if sideload a store app from a website (a random one, or Facebook, MS, etc), Apple is out of control in that case. They could ban the altstore from their own App Store, but not from the web. My problem is exactly with these "safe stores from well known companies". Apple helps me. EpicStore and MetaStore helps them sidestep the anti-tracking and anti-spam rules of App Store.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > Apple helps me. That's a bit of a stretch. Apple, much like every other business, cares about you insofar as you're a paying customer. That's why they don't let you use... well, stuff like third-party payment processors.
  - throwaway22056 3y ago
    Which is great, I much prefer Apple Pay and their overview of all subscriptions etc and them actually enforcing what changes I make there, as opposed to the situation on Android where I was charged by custom payment gateway implementations after cancelling the subscription many times and Google just told me to take it up with the app vendor who never responded.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      Hey, more power to you. The good news is that after the DMA rolls out, Apple doesn't have to stop offering any of that. You can keep using it until Apple stops providing the function, same as you would have without the DMA. I'm glad we have passionate Apple enthusiasts helping us prove how harmless market regulation actually is.
      - throwaway22056 3y ago
        The problem is that app vendors will no longer be forced to use it. That seriously hurts my sense of security as a user of the platform - the very thing why I chose it.
        eitally 3y ago
        But it doesn't affect Apple's 1P app store, app review process, or other security processes at all, so if you are content exclusively using Apple's App Store then there's no impact. If you look at the Android ecosystem, there have been all kinds of app stores for years. Some run by hardware OEMs, some open source (FDroid), and some that are run by app review sites that basically function as sideloading hubs for pre-GA versions of apps. Arguably, things generally work and overall I don't believe system security has been negatively affected. The real issues here are with the payment processing captured by Apple & Google, and why their gatekeeping (net negative to competition) should be a profit center for them while at the same time being a net negative (arguable) to consumers.
  - bee_rider 3y ago

bee_rider 3y ago

Is that what they are planning to do? I definitely can see a “store is just an app, you must allow third party apps” as a sort of maximal approach. But treating app stores as a sort of special thing that requires extra permission and coordination doesn’t seem totally impossible. It could be sort of nice if each store was isolated inside a different sandbox and had it’s own filesystem. (I wouldn’t be that surprised if something like that happened because it is both justifiable from a security point of view, and also mildly annoying for people who want to use third party stores, which I guess Apple would prefer).

throwaway22056 3y ago
It's what they did, the law is approved and will come into effect soon. A store is just an app like any other apps - e.g. your browser. If you can download an app from the web, you can download a store, and the store can download other apps.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  That’s unfortunate
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    I find it weird that this comment was downvoted while my comment up two was upvoted. If you agree that a store should be something other than just another app, then you ought to agree that it is unfortunate if this is their plan. If you agree but downvoted because you think it isn’t their plan, maybe you can show us why the person I responded to here was wrong? That would be reassuring!