8 ms·

Apple geofences third-party browser engine work for EU devices

43 points by Logans_Run 2y ago

doctorpangloss 2y ago
Is there a device I can buy that spoofs GPS?
- leshenka 2y ago
  You'd also need to spoof mobile data, effectively run in airplane mode all the time
  - fsflover 2y ago
    Not necessarily all the time, just when you need to hide your location.
    - leshenka 2y ago
      If you want to use geofenced features (while being outside the fence) you'd want to hide your location when your device checks it for the purposes of geofencing. Which is, I'd imagine, all the time.
lotsofpulp 2y ago
This should make for a nice controlled experiment.
leshenka 2y ago
this is still beyond me how EU treats iOS and iPadOS as two different operating systems. iOS was designated gatekeeper at the start of the whole DMA thing, iPadOS was just recently.
- izacus 2y ago
  What do you mean? EU is considering them as the same from the start. Are you talking about the process that happened because Apple appealed and wanted them separate?
  - dagmx 2y ago
    No, the EU considers them separately. Apple did successfully convince them that they are separate, however the EU then said that iPadOS would soon cross the threshold itself so would preemptively include it
    - leshenka 2y ago
      but in reality it's like two builds of the same OS with different features turned on (e.g. phone app vs split-screen support and such)
amelius 2y ago
Sour apple.
shkkmo 2y ago
The EU punishment of Apple for malicious compliance should include making the DMA apply to iMessage.
- realusername 2y ago
  iMessage is effectively dead in the EU and thus not a priority.
- raverbashing 2y ago
  Europeans have mastered the technology of installing a third part app instead of arguing about bubble colors
lmz 2y ago
I think you mean "Apple supports onshore EU browser development, gives opportunity for local champions", no?
mg 2y ago
I think a simpler and more logical law would have been to disallow the sale of products which are locked down beyond their owners wishes. It's a net negative for society when we add additional production steps to decrease the usefulness of the things we produce. So any computer (phone, tablet, laptop, desktop, watch) would have to allow installing whatever software the user wants. On the hardware level. That would mean alternative OSes like Linux could run on any computer. It would still be allowed to ask or even warn the user "Do you REALLY want to install an alternative OS?" but not to ultimately deny it.
- donatj 2y ago
  That would remove all insensitive to sell anything at below cost. Instantly kill the game console industry
  - Mavvie 2y ago
    Wouldn't it cause the cost of consoles to go up and the cost of games to go down, in a way that on average has no significant effect to consumers? As long as it applies to all companies, why is it an issue?
    - dagmx 2y ago
      Why would it cause the cost of games to go down? They still cost the same to make regardless, and they’d still need some form of distribution that would take a cut. PC games aren’t any cheaper at launch than console games. Console games don’t become any cheaper when the cost of manufacturing goes down over the course of a generation.
      - Nullabillity 2y ago
        Because you'd be paying for the games themselves, not also reimbursing the console manufacturers.
        dagmx 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
yazzku 2y ago
It's funny to watch companies go to such lengths to protect their own little turd. But hey, it's all for user "privacy", right? Or has the official slogan changed now?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
supriyo-biswas 2y ago
It's interesting to see how a company, instead of taking the hint and opening up its OSes to third parties and diversifying its business, keeps on trying to come up with bad-faith interpretations of the law. It'll hit them hard when the EU punishes them again for malicious compliance, and when other countries enact similar laws.
mvanbaak 2y ago
> It effectively geofences the development team. Anyone tried to think a bit back and see where this comes from? it's the EU laws that are demanding this. Since their laws are different (note: I'm not taking sides. I'm not saying there are better or worse, just stating they are as they are). Developers just have to confirm. I does not matter at all if it's apple or google or microsoft or whatever company is involved, the thing is multiple markets have different laws and developers have to follow suit.
- shashashasha___ 2y ago
  nonsense. EU law is meant for EU based users and not dev teams. dev team should be allowed to properly test for EU users and this is basically apple trying yet again block opening up ios. cant be more transparent

43 points by Logans_Run 2y ago

doctorpangloss 2y ago

Is there a device I can buy that spoofs GPS?

leshenka 2y ago
You'd also need to spoof mobile data, effectively run in airplane mode all the time
- fsflover 2y ago
  Not necessarily all the time, just when you need to hide your location.
  - leshenka 2y ago
    If you want to use geofenced features (while being outside the fence) you'd want to hide your location when your device checks it for the purposes of geofencing. Which is, I'd imagine, all the time.

lotsofpulp 2y ago

This should make for a nice controlled experiment.

leshenka 2y ago

this is still beyond me how EU treats iOS and iPadOS as two different operating systems. iOS was designated gatekeeper at the start of the whole DMA thing, iPadOS was just recently.

izacus 2y ago
What do you mean? EU is considering them as the same from the start. Are you talking about the process that happened because Apple appealed and wanted them separate?
- dagmx 2y ago
  No, the EU considers them separately. Apple did successfully convince them that they are separate, however the EU then said that iPadOS would soon cross the threshold itself so would preemptively include it
  - leshenka 2y ago
    but in reality it's like two builds of the same OS with different features turned on (e.g. phone app vs split-screen support and such)

amelius 2y ago

Sour apple.

shkkmo 2y ago

The EU punishment of Apple for malicious compliance should include making the DMA apply to iMessage.

realusername 2y ago
iMessage is effectively dead in the EU and thus not a priority.
raverbashing 2y ago
Europeans have mastered the technology of installing a third part app instead of arguing about bubble colors

lmz 2y ago

I think you mean "Apple supports onshore EU browser development, gives opportunity for local champions", no?

mg 2y ago

I think a simpler and more logical law would have been to disallow the sale of products which are locked down beyond their owners wishes. It's a net negative for society when we add additional production steps to decrease the usefulness of the things we produce. So any computer (phone, tablet, laptop, desktop, watch) would have to allow installing whatever software the user wants. On the hardware level. That would mean alternative OSes like Linux could run on any computer. It would still be allowed to ask or even warn the user "Do you REALLY want to install an alternative OS?" but not to ultimately deny it.

donatj 2y ago
That would remove all insensitive to sell anything at below cost. Instantly kill the game console industry
- Mavvie 2y ago
  Wouldn't it cause the cost of consoles to go up and the cost of games to go down, in a way that on average has no significant effect to consumers? As long as it applies to all companies, why is it an issue?
  - dagmx 2y ago
    Why would it cause the cost of games to go down? They still cost the same to make regardless, and they’d still need some form of distribution that would take a cut. PC games aren’t any cheaper at launch than console games. Console games don’t become any cheaper when the cost of manufacturing goes down over the course of a generation.
    - Nullabillity 2y ago
      Because you'd be paying for the games themselves, not also reimbursing the console manufacturers.
      - dagmx 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

yazzku 2y ago

It's funny to watch companies go to such lengths to protect their own little turd. But hey, it's all for user "privacy", right? Or has the official slogan changed now?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

supriyo-biswas 2y ago

It's interesting to see how a company, instead of taking the hint and opening up its OSes to third parties and diversifying its business, keeps on trying to come up with bad-faith interpretations of the law. It'll hit them hard when the EU punishes them again for malicious compliance, and when other countries enact similar laws.

mvanbaak 2y ago

> It effectively geofences the development team. Anyone tried to think a bit back and see where this comes from? it's the EU laws that are demanding this. Since their laws are different (note: I'm not taking sides. I'm not saying there are better or worse, just stating they are as they are). Developers just have to confirm. I does not matter at all if it's apple or google or microsoft or whatever company is involved, the thing is multiple markets have different laws and developers have to follow suit.

shashashasha___ 2y ago
nonsense. EU law is meant for EU based users and not dev teams. dev team should be allowed to properly test for EU users and this is basically apple trying yet again block opening up ios. cant be more transparent