Apple announces changes to iOS, Safari, and the App Store in the European Union

Luckily, the EU included substantial anti-circumvention provisions in the DMA. I&#x27;m not a lawyer, but based on the excerpts from the regulations below, it seems likely the EU would have grounds to open legal proceedings against Apple&#x27;s new rules.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;eur-lex.europa.eu&#x2F;legal-content&#x2F;EN&#x2F;TXT&#x2F;PDF&#x2F;?uri=CELEX:32022R1925" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;eur-lex.europa.eu&#x2F;legal-content&#x2F;EN&#x2F;TXT&#x2F;PDF&#x2F;?uri=CELE...</a><p>&quot;Article 13: Anti-circumvention<p>4. 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.<p>7. Where the gatekeeper circumvents or attempts to circumvent any of the obligations in Article 5, 6, or 7 in a manner described in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of this Article, the Commission may open proceedings pursuant to Article 20 and adopt an implementing act referred to in Article 8(2) in order to specify the measures that the gatekeeper is to implement.&quot;

&gt; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;fee-calculator-for-apps-in-the-eu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;fee-calculator-for-apps-...</a><p>2,000,000 installs acquires a minimum of $45,000 in fees, even if you don&#x27;t make any money<p>That&#x27;s up from $0 USD.

&gt; Core Technology Fee — iOS apps distributed from the App Store and&#x2F;or an alternative app marketplace will pay €0.50 for each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold.<p>Can&#x27;t imagine that flying with the EU...<p>The regulator will argue that the technology in the phone has already been paid for by the buyer of the hardware (which came with a license for iOS)

My take is that Apple are doing the maximum possible to protest their disagreement with consumer protection laws interfering with their ability to do whatever they want. Their announcement has the tone of a spoilt child, with an air of punishment to be applied to EU users and particularly developers. It’s bad faith compliance.<p>Rather than protecting the interests of users, they are more interested in obstructing the DMA and its attempt to promote competition and protect consumers from monopolistic practices.

If I understand it right, Apple was clever.<p>The serious issue is for apps having more than 1 million installs (YouTube, Zoom, Slack, Outlook, Amazon, etc.). Strong &quot;coincidence&quot;: these are the companies you don&#x27;t want to allow to create alternative stores to, because they have their own payments methods: how long would it take Amazon, Google or Microsoft (the only one without a payment service, AFAIK) to run their brand new &quot;Google&#x2F;Amazon Store for iOS&quot;? Probably they have it already half baked there waiting to be released.<p>Now, they will have to either accept to use the App Store &quot;way&quot; (the current way, so all good) or pay huge fees for their own apps. Will they do it? Is it worth it? I am very curious!<p>Alternative, smaller stores for smaller apps, instead, will be there and should be OK, as long as the apps don&#x27;t exceed 1 million installs in a year (which is a lot, I guess).<p>EDIT: I missed Meta Pay, apparently another payment method from one of the companies with the most downloaded apps. Yeah, it seems really that Apple doesn&#x27;t want other stores from big companies.

This seems that Apple went to way too much thought to avoid a simple solution: Just let users sideload apps and put up a few warning messages like Android. Must have had a bunch of high-priced lawyers think this up.<p>Also, what is this Core Technology Fee for all apps? Maybe Apple has been losing money on the App Store infrastructure so they want to make it up? Or is this just a bid to try and keep as much control as possible? Seems that Apple wants to go into this kicking and screaming...<p>As someone in cybersecurity, I understand the need for secure apps, but I think Apple has been going about it in the wrong way.

&gt; Notarization for iOS apps — a baseline review that applies to all apps, regardless of their distribution channel, focused on platform integrity and protecting users. Notarization involves a combination of automated checks and human review.<p>Does anyone know if notarization is something you could turn off? If you can&#x27;t, then I&#x27;m pretty sure the EU won&#x27;t like this; obviously &quot;malicious compliance.&quot;

&gt;To qualify for the entitlement, your app must: Be available on iOS in the European Union only<p>kicking and screaming. i mean, yes, that is &quot;complying&quot;. but it is ridiculous. and, am i getting this right, just gonna create a bunch of &quot;[browser name] EU Edition&quot; apps, which is just gonna be wonderful. users can look forward to having something like Chrome (International) and Chrome EU (limited EU edition) be installed side by side, i guess. can we look forward to &quot;[browser name] [country name] edition&quot; per each country that&#x27;d fancy to have itself some regulation similar to that? that&#x27;d be so many browsers! dozens, hundreds! what an optimal solution.

Of note is that starting a marketplace takes a stand-by letter of credit of €1,000,000 [0], so no getting around the core technology free by just starting a bunch of marketplaces.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;alternative-app-marketplace-in-the-eu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;alternative-app-marketpl...</a>

&gt; Today, iOS users already have the ability to set a third-party web browser — other than Safari — as their default. Reflecting the DMA’s requirements, Apple is also introducing a new choice screen that will surface when users first open Safari in iOS 17.4 or later. That screen will prompt EU users to choose a default browser from a list of options.<p>Any idea if this means you can actually choose a different browser, or are you choosing a different WebKit wrapper (e.g. the current version of Chrome on iOS)?

I wish people would stop defending apple here.<p>The reason for apple doing something is not that it wants its users to be safe or to protect them. It just wants to make more money by preventing other companies from doing stuff on its phones. This is it. If it would be possible then it would ask for 50 or 79% of sales on the app store, if it could it would take a % of every transaction done in Safari

I don’t like the idea of having N different app stores no matter how bad the one App Store is. Just having one App Store and no silly monetization rules would be great.<p>I download the Netflix app for $0 and my business with Netflix is done directly with them after that. And Netflix can pay Apple some reasonable fee for hosting and reviewing the apps themselves. Apple have already lost the AppStore they just haven’t realized it yet. They should try to rescue the 1 good store before the app market is fractured with side markets. Eventually it’ll affect the perception of their hardware and that’s a worse place for Apple than just losing the entire app tax.

&gt; Core Technology Fee — iOS apps distributed from the App Store and&#x2F;or an alternative app marketplace will pay €0.50 for each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold.<p>This seems unusually high. I would expect that a large number of apps meet this threshold. Am I correct in thinking this applies to apps that aren&#x27;t monetized?

So, long story short, I won&#x27;t be able to simply side-load an app on iOS like I can do with Android today, can I?

Why don&#x27;t mac apps have a &quot;Core Technology Fee&quot;, just think these things fall completely apart when they have a whole platform sitting there without these things.

So Apple is going to continue gatekeeping all apps with an Apple-run review process and they will keep charging developers fees[1], even when distributing through alternative stores. In fact, it will be impossible for alternative stores to offer free apps because they will owe Apple €0.50 per install after the installed base passes 1M (updates count as &quot;installs&quot;).<p>They&#x27;re also going to gatekeep alternative stores with a vetting process that will probably exclude anything community-run.<p>Perhaps the most interesting thing is they appear to be cutting the App Store commission to 10%, giving the lie to their claims that their fees are reasonable due to the service they provide. Clearly they feel that their service <i>doesn&#x27;t</i> justify the fees in a competitive market (even though any competition will be minimal with the anticompetitive measures they&#x27;re still clinging to in these changes).<p>The most interesting thing that&#x27;s <i>not</i> mentioned here is exactly how the inevitable geofencing will work to enforce that the rest of the world doesn&#x27;t get to use alternative stores or browser engines.<p>[1] On top of the annual Apple developer program fee that they conveniently forget to mention, plus the requirement to do builds and signing on physical Mac hardware purchased from Apple.

While it will be nice to ship hobbyist apps through a third party channel, it will only be a matter of time until app users are bullied into installing third party stores. For the normal user it&#x27;s less of a &quot;choice&quot; than it is for the technical user. The average user wants to play games on their phone and will submit to any breaches of privacy in order to do so. These average users are the parents, siblings, and children of most technical users. The average app is spyware even on the App Store and I only see it getting worse with these loosened restrictions.<p>That said the content on the App Store is already pretty bad privacy-wise, this is more of a money issue and whether Apple deserves to get paid for their role as an app channel.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;dma-and-apps-in-the-eu&#x2F;#browser-alt-eu" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;dma-and-apps-in-the-eu&#x2F;#...</a><p>&gt; To help keep users safe online, Apple will only authorize developers to implement alternative browser engines after meeting specific criteria and committing to a number of ongoing privacy and security requirements, including timely security updates to address emerging threats and vulnerabilities.<p>This criteria seems arbitrary. Doesn&#x27;t this allow Apple to arbitrarily prevent competitor engines like Blink and Gecko?

Per install is the worst model and Apple knows that. This is definitely retaliation for being forced to allow sideloading.

Apple ambassadors comes in 3, 2, 1.. to defend even this ridiculous fee that Apple plans to introduce. &quot;..but what about Google..&quot;

A clear sign that good anti-monopoly regulations result in a better world. Less rent-seeking from Apple at the expense of smaller software developers, more agency for users when it comes to choosing their browser engine. I am sorry for non-EU consumers.

Apple loves to do the bare minimum to meet the regulations. I&#x27;m sure they hated having to do this.<p>But, this is still better than not doing it at all.

At this point Apple should release an phone which has an M2 chip and runs full blown OSX but with a phone sized form factor. Then just port a phone app and have some touch enabled features for developers to design a UX for phone sized screens.<p>Maybe call it the MacPhone Pro and have the same level of security&#x2F;customizability&#x2F;install your own store as a full Mac.<p>That way Apple can keep the iPhone&#x2F;iOS branding as the OS for customers that just want a phone that works, is fully iOS wall gardened and don&#x27;t want to tinker&#x2F;potentially see blue screens.<p>Then let the market decide. Perhaps the MacPhone would actually be more popular.

Man that read was insane with all the &quot;risk&quot; &quot;safeguard&quot;.<p>&quot;Sssh, Apple will take care of you. We know what&#x27;s best for you, don&#x27;t leave the house it&#x27;s safer inside. Don&#x27;t see your friends when I&#x27;m not there, I need to keep you safe, you know how you get&quot;<p>Christ, Apple&#x27;s literally turning into an abusive partner.

&gt; Developers who adopt the new business terms at any time will not be able to switch back to Apple’s existing business terms for their EU apps.<p>This seems like an understated gotcha.

So not really open. Still need Apple’s permission and pay their tax to run something on a device you purchased for ~$1000.

Highly recommend reading some of the actual text from the regulation: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commission.europa.eu&#x2F;strategy-and-policy&#x2F;priorities-2019-2024&#x2F;europe-fit-digital-age&#x2F;digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-and-open-digital-markets_en" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commission.europa.eu&#x2F;strategy-and-policy&#x2F;priorities-...</a>

Ah so their new tactic is to try to scare everyone into not using the new things they’re forced to enable. Guess that’s all that’s left.

Regardless of these changes or the pricing, I expect there will be very very few third party app stores created.<p>For a simple reason: Most iOS users don&#x27;t want it and won&#x27;t use them. If your app isn&#x27;t available in the main store, the vast majority of users simply won&#x27;t install it.<p>The exceptions would be perhaps extremely popular games like FortNite &#x2F; Epic.

Looking through the comments here and I didn&#x27;t see it. Does anyone have any idea how apple is going to track installs outside the app store?<p>Is iOS going to be sending data to apple on each app installed even people sideloaded it?<p>Also will iOS launch an un-notarized app that you side load? Probably not knowing apple, but if it won&#x27;t I am not sure I consider that side loading in my opinion. This is because then that code still has be reviewed by apple to get notarized. This still gives apple the power to reject apps it does not like which negates the whole point of side loading.

&gt; To qualify for the [MarketplaceKit] entitlement, you must:<p>&gt; [...]<p>&gt; Provide Apple a stand-by letter of credit from an A-rated (or equivalent by S&amp;P, Fitch, or Moody’s) financial Institution of €1,000,000 to establish adequate financial means in order to guarantee support for your developers and users.<p>Just let us sideload IPAs, <i>please</i>.

It looks like, while allowing sideloading, apps must still be signed by apple (notarized).<p>Why do playstation, nintendo, and xbox not need to allow sideloading?

Important to note -<p>&quot;New business terms available for apps in the EU — to reflect the DMA’s requirements for alternative distribution and payment processing, Apple is also sharing new business terms for apps in the EU. Developers have a choice to remain on Apple’s existing terms or adopt new terms that reflect the new capabilities.&quot;<p>So this is essentially Apple making the alternative so unappealing that no-one will switch and status quo is preserved.

I have a free utility app for school kids with an install base in the multiple millions. I don’t make much off it, but many users find it helpful. It’s most popular in the EU.<p>So… if I’m understanding right, I need to take the app down, or start charging an up front fee to school children? Nice one Apple. I hope I’m allowed to add a pop up explaining to users why the app will now incur a mandatory charge.<p>The best way I can interpret this: it only applies to new downloads each year. In that case, it’s still concerning —- what happens if there is a surge of downloads? I’m on the hook for $50k overnight?<p>And if updates are included in this number like some comments here suggest, users aren’t going to get any bug fixes.<p>Wow. HN, please tell me I’m interpreting this wrong.

Sadly no information here about the mechanisms for how alternative app stores will work, which is the most interesting part for me. Will the .ipa format be standardized like .apk and will we be able to make iOS apps without having to use macOS?

&gt; If you take the EU iOS market share of 33.3% and the number of EU citizens (448 million), you get ~150 million<p>That seems way too low out of 2 billion devices as per Apple to cause any splintering of iOS, it seems to be.<p>Devs will be targeting the lowest common denominator and also iOS usually goes as the US goes, so other than the EU getting a couple of neat alternative apps - this won’t amount to much in the grand scheme.

I wonder if side-loaded apps with have green icons.<p>Seriously though, I expect Apple to do something to differentiate them.

Does anyone know if the letter of the law requires Apple to support users abroad who are EU citizens?

About time. Can&#x27;t wait to see this roll out worldwide!<p>With users able to access bleeding edge browser technologies like WASM and WebGPU, developers and users will finally get an alternative to native apps.

I don&#x27;t understand, with this core technology fee I can&#x27;t sell a game that is finished, only a service as it would otherwise have a possibility of it generating a continuous fee when selling it through the app store.

In notarization rules, no executable code download is allowed

This is fantastic. But why a reduction in Apple’s fee for AppStore distributed apps? I hope the rates drop to these globally.

What are the chances the United States (and others) follow suit? For startups, I assume most will continue to live on the App Store lest they force their users into two different experiences based on their location.

Interesting that they’ve attributed a quote to Phil Schiller!<p>Rolling out the big guns!<p>I’m guessing this has significantly rattled Apple’s cage.<p>&gt; “The changes we’re announcing today comply with the Digital Markets Act’s requirements in the European Union, while helping to protect EU users from the unavoidable increased privacy and security threats this regulation brings. Our priority remains creating the best, most secure possible experience for our users in the EU and around the world,” said Phil Schiller, Apple Fellow.

Classic Apple malicious compliance

A significant part of this announcement seems to be the €0.50 &quot;Core Technology Fee&quot; that Apple will now charge for &quot;each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold&quot;.<p>I think this essentially means that large developers pay €0.50 * (num apps they publish) * (num devices each app is installed on) per year. There are 2 billion active iOS devices [1], so I think that for the biggest apps like YouTube the fees could be in the hundreds of million USD per year.<p>4 of the top 5 most downloaded apps of all time [2] are published by Meta (Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp), and I think they will pay this fee for each app?<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.macrumors.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;02&#x2F;02&#x2F;apple-two-billion-active-devices&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.macrumors.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;02&#x2F;02&#x2F;apple-two-billion-activ...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;App_Store_(Apple)#Of_all_time" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;App_Store_(Apple)#Of_all_time</a>

What makes me almost certain that the DMA Commission will not approve of most of the requirements is the following reporting requirement on the DMA compliance report[1] that Apple will be required to file with the regulator:<p>&quot;n) where applicable, all actions taken to protect integrity, security or privacy (e.g., data access, data retention policies) pursuant to the relevant provisions in Regulation (EU) 2022&#x2F;1925 <i>and why these measures are strictly necessary and justified and there are no less restrictive means to achieve these goals</i>&quot;<p>As a bonus, just to really hammer it in:<p>&quot;o) any type of market analysis or testing (in particular A&#x2F;B testing), business user surveys or consumer surveys or end user consent rates that have been carried out to estimate the expected impact of the measure on the objectives of Regulation (EU) 2022&#x2F;1925&quot;<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu&#x2F;document&#x2F;download&#x2F;904debdf-2eb3-469a-8bbc-e62e5e356fb1_en?filename=Article%2011%20DMA%20-%20Compliance%20Report%20Template%20Form.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu&#x2F;document&#x2F;download&#x2F;9...</a>

It appears that these changes are not coming to UK. I wonder how UK users feel about it.

This is just such a sad state of affairs. In the end nobody wins and everyone loses - apple and developers.<p>Now Apple needs to provide the APIs for alternative markets which is a waste of time as well as making more vulnerability vectors and potentially confusing users. And app developers who decided for whatever reason to use their own distribution channel would still have to pay apple on every purchase.<p>What is the point of this change?

&quot;For users, the changes include new controls and disclosures, and expanded protections to reduce privacy and security risks the DMA creates&quot;<p>Jesus. Not only is Apple serving us a shit sandwich with this press release, they&#x27;re telling us it&#x27;s filet mignon, for our own good.<p>Is <i>anyone</i> who has been in tech for the past 25 years or so not completely disillusioned with the state of tech as a business? The &quot;tech optimism&quot; of the late 90s seems like another universe. It feels like every single big tech company is only worried about their business and profits, service to the user be damned. They&#x27;re <i>all</i> &quot;evil&quot;, rotten to the core, 100%, across the board.<p>New technology (and I&#x27;m not talking about how we usually refer to it as Internet&#x2F;silicon tech these days) used to be about making people&#x27;s lives better. I think the piece of tech that I most value these days is probably my dishwasher. So much other tech is just actively hostile - think of the HP CEO&#x27;s recent announcement that we should all owe HP money per page. Like there is a person on the planet who wants that.<p>As someone who&#x27;s worked in tech since the .com boom, my disillusionment is on the verge of depression. I&#x27;m honestly ashamed at the forces I&#x27;ve contributed to, even if only a minuscule bit.

Wish list:<p>A push notification app that allows users with self hosted stuff to send push notifications for free without Apple’s blessing.<p>Open source browser with ublock origin

Separate any discussion about the &quot;tone&quot; of the article, could someone who is better at reading between the lines better than I explain the changes to Out-Of App Store payments?<p>Is it a 10-max 20% fee to Apple, no matter the distributor, in the EU? Or are those rules only for the App Store, and anything else won&#x27;t be touched by commissions to Apple?

I’m curious how iOS 17.4 may affect side loading currently.<p>“ These safeguards will be in place when users download iOS 17.4 or later, beginning in March, and include:<p>Notarization for iOS apps — a baseline review that applies to all apps, regardless of their distribution channel, focused on platform integrity and protecting users. Notarization involves a combination of automated checks and human review.<p>App installation sheets — that use information from the Notarization process to provide at-a-glance descriptions of apps and their functionality before download, including the developer, screenshots, and other essential information.<p>Authorization for marketplace developers — to ensure marketplace developers commit to ongoing requirements that help protect users and developers. Additional malware protections — that prevent iOS apps from launching if they’re found to contain malware after being installed to a user’s device.”

Possibly stupid question, but if I install an &quot;alternative app store&quot;, approved by Apple, can i not just use that store to install yet another app store (assuming there would be one) that isn&#x27;t approved by apple and doesn&#x27;t care about their restrictions (and doesn&#x27;t pay apple anything?)

I suspect they&#x27;re charging $0.50 on alternative app stores as well as their own to be able to give something during the inevitable negotiations with the EU: &quot;OK we&#x27;ll stop taxing other stores, just let us keep taxing ours&quot;<p>Straight out of the claim-enormous-damages playbook to anchor the figure higher.

This malicious compliance shows the problem with the regulator superpower fantasy when it comes to software and platforms.<p>With hardware, the EU can demand adherence to standards like USB-C.<p>With software and terms of service, the EU can ban specific things, and Apple can come up with other terms to keep control of the platform.

Apple provided a fee calculator so that people can run their own scenarios: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;fee-calculator-for-apps-in-the-eu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;fee-calculator-for-apps-...</a>

Maybe this has already been answered in a downstream thread, but I think it deserves its own thread... For applications delivered via a 3rd party store, how is Apple going to (a) identify them, and (b) count their installs so that it can charge its 0.50 per install fee?

Very blatantly trying to circumvent the spirit of the law. Nothing a lawsuit for 10% of global annual revenues can&#x27;t solve, though. I truly hope the EU puts down the law here and let Apple know how the find out-phase of their little gambit feels.

They are way too kind, they should disable iMessage and iCloud for any alternative App Store due to &quot;security issues&quot; and call it a day, we don&#x27;t need a meta store, they should have just let us install IPAs to avoid all that

Are they going to explain why this is only coming to the very latest version of iOS? They still operate the same appstore on devices that can&#x27;t run that iOS version. Devices which still even get security updates occasionally.

There&#x27;s a lot of talk about Apple trying to circumvent this, but there actually are some good things from this. For instance, Firefox on Mobile can now use the Gecko engine instead of WebKit! (I think it&#x27;s still Gecko?)

Related article from theverge.com<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=39132487">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=39132487</a><p><i>Apple is allowing alternative browser engines in iOS 17.4 – but only in the EU</i>

this is malicious compliance no doubt about it, I hope that the European Union brings down the hammer on Apple for this.

This is the epitome of malicious compliance, and it doesn&#x27;t even seem very compliant in how the &quot;core technology fee&quot; and the built-in hard dependency on Apple notarizing is handled.<p>Apple will get slapped for this.

&gt; This change is a result of the DMA’s requirements, and means that EU users will be confronted with a list of default browsers before they have the opportunity to understand the options available to them. The screen also interrupts EU users’ experience the first time they open Safari intending to navigate to a webpage.<p>How will users be able to understand the options in front of them unless they are presented with it in the first place?

&gt; […] enabling developers to use browser engines, other than WebKit<p>I&#x27;m afraid this announcement will turn out to be disastrous for the open web as we know it. Even if some enthusiasts now will be able to use Firefox proper, the real change is that WebKit usage will more than half over night. After this I guess the rendering engine market share will be roughly 80&#x2F;20 Chromium&#x2F;Webkit with Gecko as some rounding error.<p>For how long will it be defensible for the average company to test their site on anything but Chromium?

Am I crazy, or does this mean the possibility of actually having WebXR on Apple devices in the not-so-distant future (without relying on Mozzila&#x27;s outdated WebXR Viewer app)?

Sounds like the hypothetical AppStoreKit idea I suggested-<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=30199125">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=30199125</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?dateRange=all&amp;page=0&amp;prefix=true&amp;query=apocryphon%20appstorekit&amp;sort=byDate&amp;type=comment" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?dateRange=all&amp;page=0&amp;prefix=true&amp;que...</a><p>If only Apple had deigned to try this before regulators appeared.

Hey I’m confused, why does everyone hate Apple now? Did I miss a memo? I like their computers and phones. I’m not an iOS developer. Do I still need to get on this band wagon?

So if Mozilla wanted to ship Firefox with Gecko on iOS, they would need to maintain that, but only for the EU, while maintaining a WebKit version for all other markets. Oof.

Can anybody explain: do the possibilities of alternate distribution modes and fees (optionally) apply to all developers worldwide or only to EU based developers? I.e. is it developer based or App based?<p>And furthermore, I - as an EU based developer - have an App that is currently distributed worldwide. After agreeing to the alternate fees, they are only applied to the portion of sales from EU customers. Customers in the rest of the world are handled with the standard fees?

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;contact&#x2F;request&#x2F;download&#x2F;alternate_eu_terms_addendum.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;contact&#x2F;request&#x2F;download&#x2F;alterna...</a><p>One of the requirements for third party App Store use by developers is maintaining a standby letter of credit of 1M euros from an A rated financial institution<p>Edit: was mistaken, this is a requirement for the operator of a third party App Store.

If I buy a product from company A, then want to use it to do business with company B, then what does company A have to do with it? Am I not the owner of my device?

I like the aggression. This is how Apple has how always worked. Difference is these days you don&#x27;t have the iconoclast high vis leader who&#x27;s announcing these policies and a rationale. Just have <i>Apple</i> -- the machine -- doing it, same as it&#x27;s ever done.<p>If Steve Jobs was still around there might be a PR blitz with some YouTube videos of him doing a very persuasive ad about why the EU is wrong. And why Apple is right. Hahaha! :)

Whoever was in charge of the language for this did a great job. I know some may disagree, but if I were Apple that’s exactly how I would word this announcement.

Just imagine Microsoft charging $1 for every .exe installer clicked on in Windows 95.<p>Apple&#x27;s total failure to build popular new products has forced it to defend&#x2F;grow it&#x27;s services revenue in unethical and anti-user ways. The only winners here are $aapl stock holders and at great cost to global progress and fairness.<p>Tim Cook of all people should sympathize with developers everywhere getting it in the ass without consent.

All I want for Christmas is…<p>A different browser engine on my iPad Pro (UK).<p>(Don’t pitch it as a go between from iPhone and Mac, while giving it a essentially a mobile browser engine)

Will Apple Users also have the option to use other search engines in Safari than the default ones? Or is this something that the DMA does not cover?

On one hand Chrome on the iPhone is a win for choice.<p>On the other hand Chrome gaining further marketshare and having a browser monopoly seems bad.<p>I guess we’ll see what happens.

I think this is an interesting by Apple. They bid to remain the gatekeeper, ensuring a degree of control against malware on the platform. Either the EU says yes, or when the EU says no, Apple can tell consumers who are cross because they have been infested with a nasty &quot;well, we <i>wanted</i> wanted to provide protection, but we weren&#x27;t allowed to - tough luck&quot;

€0.50 for each first annual install per year is extremely expensive for many applications to handle. Especially if people just do installs to check and remove.<p>We had this discussion with Unity already.<p>Could be ok for fortnite though, epic should be pretty happy.<p>Also, who needs apple pay, Poland uses blik payments everywhere and it is just fine (and you have to autorise each payment with an alert from your bank app).

So obviously the new terms are worse for almost all business cases. That said, it&#x27;s interesting to look at cases where they might be better.<p>If you have a F2P game app averaging 50€ revenue per user per year and you introduce a limitation to 1M users, you can avoid the Core Technology Fee and end up with 0€ fees, as opposed to 15M€ yearly fees under the current terms.

Are there any decent alternatives to iOS that won&#x27;t force me into the cold embrace of Google or some huge Chinese corporation?

Do these changes apply only within the geographical borders of the EU, or do they apply to EU citizens everywhere? EU data protection laws, if I&#x27;m not mistaken, apply to all EU citizens, so I&#x27;d imagine that these do too. If that&#x27;s the case, I wonder how Apple plans to selectively enable access based on citizenship.

Of course this is only available in the EU. Why would Apple compromise its monopoly position everywhere else? Just like how Windows also only allows you to override Edge in the EU.<p>It&#x27;s starting to get on my nerves that these basic freedoms are being locked to specific regions. It&#x27;s obvious why it happens, but it upsets me as a consumer.

Looking forward to being required to use Chrome for basic browsing.<p>I already see numerous sites that with chrome variations on the old &quot;we only support IE&quot;, but at least until now devs had to at least allow at least one other browser. Now they&#x27;ll just say &quot;here&#x27;s a link explaining how to install chrome&quot;.

It would be cool, if Apple extended this (or a similar new scheme) worldwide. Then it would be possible to rigorously throw out all garbage and badly implemented Apps from its own store, i.e. make it real shiny quality. Any rejected developer may then still publish their Apps in alternate ways.

&gt; iOS apps on the App Store will pay a reduced commission of either 10 percent (for the vast majority of developers, and subscriptions following their first year) or 17 percent on transactions for digital goods and services.<p>So we’ll still not be able to purchase Kindle books from the app, it seems.

Is the &quot;Core Technology Fee&quot; applied to free Apps?<p>Example: I make a free App that gets very popular but has a rather seasonal character. Then there is a possibility, that many users will reinstall the App each year for a short time. Then I would have to pay the 50ct per install each year?

If I were in Apple&#x27;s shoes, I would have taken another tack...<p>&#x27;Your iPhone is currently in Apple-only mode. To allow installation of apps not reviewed by Apple, you must disable this mode. Doing so requires a device reset and some apps may only function in Apple only mode&#x27;.

I can&#x27;t test my web app on safari as apple won&#x27;t let install mac os on any other PC. They won&#x27;t even release safari for other os like android and windows.<p>Now those in non EU countries won&#x27;t be able to acess other browser&#x27;s too which will present similar challenge.

If I’m a dev in the us and the app goes to the EU AppStore will I be charged with per install fee?

So I want to release an open source software app that does a better job at tracking browser history. The frontend and backend are both open source. However, I want to charge money to use my backend if they don&#x27;t wanna run own. Could I be impacted by this?

I love how they keep crying all over the news about LE SECURITY RISKS!!11 yeah man, every single person knows there&#x27;s security risks in anything online, don&#x27;t care.<p>Do you also complain about security risks related to roads hence why you don&#x27;t even cross a road?

I’m confused at the all comments here that suggest Apple didn’t vet these changes with the EU before announcing. Tim Cook met with the EU regulators at Apple Park last week. The changes that are being implemented have been in the works for literally years.

Time to split software from hardware. I think that is entirely reasonable step for EU to take.

As a user, for now I am glad this is only in the EU. I am not looking forward to how this will degrade the user experience in favor of &quot;choice&quot; for User, when in reality its choice for the developers and Users have to follow.<p>I have yet to see a convincing argument that this was really necessary from a User prospective. The only argument I will buy is the limitations in what could be on the store like Adult apps, emulation, and similar. Which is valid, but not something requiring a separate store.<p>The day that an app requires me to install a separate App Store to use is the day my smartphone becomes less useful and I stop using that particular app. Being on the App Store has benefits to me as a User, particularly when it comes to privacy and billing. Do we really need to bring up just how much companies like Facebook pushed back on the app tracking bulletin and the scary popups many apps put up to try to convince you to allow them to track you?<p>Or the dark patterns that many companies continue to engage in regarding billing? Right now we are dealing with Cable companies complaining about yearly notices of renewal and being able to easily cancel, and you are going to try to tell me that companies won&#x27;t find a way to abuse this?<p>Literally today I was trying to cancel a task management app that I mistakenly signed up on the web instead of through the app, and I have to email them to do so. But they are more than happy to let me increase the cost of my subscription with a single click.<p>So no this is not about choice for Users as this continues to be framed as, my choice was to go with an iOS Device in the first place for this walled garden. In the coming years the choice will be more and more made for me by developers. There is basically zero chance that Facebook, maybe Amazon, and companies big enough to try it won&#x27;t jump at this chance when they have a big enough name to be able to leave the App Store and other developers can just piggy back on that.

Just had a glance so far, but it’s great to see Apple pulling no punches in public here.

My only hope is that some of the Apple fans start to see through the thick veil of PR bs and realize Apple is just as bad (if not worse) than the other tech assholes &#x2F; technofeudal lordship wannabes of Microsoft, Google et al.

Is there any record of another browser <i>engine</i> being summited to the app store and the outcome? AFAIK when I worked at Mozilla I&#x27;m not aware that Gecko was ever submitted even though I saw a working local build.

Marketplace developers will need to pay €0.50 for each first annual install of their marketplace app. First annual installs included in your Apple Developer Program membership can’t be used for marketplace apps.

This won&#x27;t make a major difference for consumers, especially in the app stores. Even if Apple opened the flood gates with no restrictions for alternative stores on their platform, little if anyone is going to migrate away from the App Store.<p>Look at Android, where alternative app stores have existed for years with little adoption. You have three kinds:<p>1. Open Source Markets (F-Droid), These are great for free apps but if you sideload this on your dads phone all you&#x27;ll get are texts like &quot;Where do I get YouTube&quot;<p>2. Megacorporation Bazaars (Amazon App Store), this means nothing to developers except who you pay your exorbitant fee to, with the added problem of less eyes on your actual product (which users will go out of their way to install an alternative app store?)<p>3. Sketchy Side Markets &#x2F; Piracy Stores (APKPure): These will be the main ones people choose to download under the promise of &quot;free apps&quot;, and Apple is right to be nervous of the security of these. People will brick their phones trying to get free Robux.<p>If you don&#x27;t understand how bad these get I recommend downloading APKPure and using it as your primary app source for a month.<p>Aurora store does not count, since it is simply an alternative UI for apps hosted on Google Play.<p>Maybe, maybe, if people can buy apps directly in browser on a developers site, people will do that. But not many.<p>I appreciate the EU moving towards more open market legislation but this in particular is just window dressing. It&#x27;ll be just like Cookie Notices - ignored, and everyone moves on.

I think that providing hardware as well as gatekeeping installs with fees is double dipping. Users want to use your hardware because of the great software that runs on it. Don&#x27;t bleed your developers.

There is nothing &quot;secure&quot; or &quot;private&quot; about a &quot;smartphone&quot;. This is the company that has pushed the hardest for &quot;smartphones&quot;. And it continues to do so, making computers people buy from Apple connect Apple&#x27;s own own computers, the mothership, 24&#x2F;7, from the moment a buyer turns on the computer for the first time. By default.<p>There is no &quot;security&quot; or &quot;privacy&quot; for the _owner_ of a computer that is locked down so that the _owner_ of that computer cannot control it. There could be &quot;security&quot; and &quot;privacy&quot; for whomever is controlling the computer. That would be Apple. This could even be &quot;security&quot; and &quot;privacy&quot; as against the computer&#x27;s owner.

Apple needs to have two versions of iOS, &amp; sell their phones with a choice for users. One phone is iOS as is, with perhaps even more security baked-in. The other is open, Wild West like so many here are demanding. The kicker is that the version on the phone cannot be changed to the other: the Wild West phone has to be regarded as compromised from the start, &amp; Apple can easily market it that way. &quot;They&#x27;re both the same great phone. But you can only trust one of them.&quot; Let the market decide. I&#x27;m pretty sure which way consumers would decide, a direction which would in no way please the state actors looking to get a toehold on the data in every iPhone. [Edited typo]

I’m wondering if these new regulations apply to Switzerland as well.

What does this mean in practice?<p>1. Will banned categories like emulators, apps with adult content, or apps competing with apple’s products be available for iOS?<p>2. One step further, what about apps using internal apis?

I&#x27;m wondering why internet providers don&#x27;t charge a &#x27;Core Technology Fee&#x27; for every link we open on the internet. First 100,000 links free, then just €0.10.

Sure, there are some risks with this DMA : <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;paJP1T7" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;paJP1T7</a> ;-)

<i>Request</i><p>Backport to iOS <i>15</i>.<p>Apply generally the same rules for computer manufacturers. Pre-Installing Windows and forcing them to use it? No.<p>Lenovo allows me to order a system without any operating-system or Linux. And I can spend the saved money to GNOME or other people in need. That should be standard, default shall be operating-system.<p>And for Google. Visiting Google or YouTube and they try lure me to install Chrome. Android must ask if I want a better browser. Like Safari or Firefox. I appreciate a port of WebKitGtk (needs more developers).<p>Actually I would appreciate if the EU generally stops thinking in “free markets” and thinks instead of “free citizens”. If I own something it is <i>mine</i>.

Apple must be crazy with their per install charge fee. I am impressed at how obtuse Apple is, and the level they are going to be petty. The hammer will only fall harder.

I wish I was European, or I could move there, but the most likely route would probably be committing some crime in the states and then seeking asylum unfortunately

I expect Apple to continue to provide a secure platform. I will not use any other app store for that reason. I like the wall around Apple&#x27;s garden.

This seems like something that the EU org pushing for opening up the iphone to more stores as egregious and they would commence with fining apple. No?

Google and MS should offer support. While both of them operate app markets they have not went hardcore into ban all other markets, lock platforms.

And where are the pitch forks now that came out when Unity tried to charge per install fees?<p>If you accidentally went viral on the AppStore you could go bankrupt

How well does the EU respond to malicious compliance?

It was already hard to make money on iOS, especially for low priced apps.<p>This seems like it would completely eliminate popular ad-free and low cost free apps?

How do they collect the money from the external payment option and external app stores? How do they know how much those transactions are?

These forced changes feel like adding a “disable ABS and traction control” button to a car. Great from the perspective of race car drivers. But my 70 years old parents ARE going to press that button and they ARE going to have a digital car crash because of this.<p>I’m already looking forward to the “I lost my bookmarks!” call because they chose a different browser and the “my battery is dying so fast!” call because they sideloaded the new Facebook app with unprecedented crap in it from Facebook’s marketplace.

Do you need to use an app store?<p>Can you install software yourself?

&gt; Notarization for iOS apps — a baseline review that applies to all apps, regardless of their distribution channel, focused on platform integrity and protecting users. Notarization involves a combination of automated checks and human review.<p>&gt; Authorization for marketplace developers...<p>&gt; Core Technology Fee — iOS apps distributed from the App Store and&#x2F;or an alternative app marketplace will pay €0.50 for each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold.<p>Amazing. All this regulation and hand-wringing to just to make it <i>exactly</i> the same developer experience as before but now you can click the download button in another app. Plus now <i>every app</i> not just ones that use IAP for digital goods is gonna get a $500k annual fee once they hit 2M users. The EU really showed em who&#x27;s boss.

Was the EU decision that people should be able to install other app stores, or that they could install apps the way they wanted ?

If I wanted hellstew, I would switch to Android

It seems good intended EU regulations on the tech sector tend to follow the cookie modal path when implemented.

Am I the only one that thinks the EU is gonna take one look at this, determine that it&#x27;s anticompetitive and completely at odds with the spirit of the law, and take a giant shit on Apple&#x27;s head? I don&#x27;t think governments like when anybody but them internalises externalities-- particularly not crawling bureaucratic horrors of over-regulation like the EU. (I&#x27;m an EU subject, incidentally.)

1. Is the UK considered part of the EU? 2. Can I sideload my own apps or do I still need a developer license?

Okay, so Apple&#x27;s doing a bit of the ol&#x27; switcheroo with the rules, and the EU is like that strict teacher who sees everything. It&#x27;s like when you were in school and thought you could sneak a text under the desk, but the teacher had eyes like a hawk. Now, Apple&#x27;s trying to be sneaky and the EU&#x27;s like, &#x27;I don&#x27;t think so, buddy.&#x27; It&#x27;s all legal jargon and big words, but basically, it&#x27;s a game of cat and mouse, except the mouse is a tech giant and the cat&#x27;s got a whole continent backing it up. Gonna need more than cheese to get out of this one, Apple.

Why is this article timing out for me on Firefox and in South East Asia?<p>EDIT: It was the CloudFlare DNS issue. NVM.

Does this mean I will now be able to install a random .app just like I can on Android with .apks?

It seems Apple has misunderstood their role here. They are to not be involved <i>at all</i> in transactions between other businesses delivering software to people&#x27;s phones, just like we have done for every other general purpose computer.<p>They will need a second, even stronger slap to finally understand it. Actually insane that they believe they will get away with this garbage.

So I won&#x27;t be able to install a non-WebKit browser on my device outside of the EU?

If we buy a phone in the EU and bring it to the USA, do we get sideloading in the USA?

Weak. What happened to Schrems 2 de facto banning GAFAMs (and other companies from rogue states like the USA) in the EU ?<p>Instead they are legitimizing these companies ?!?<p>(Also, we&#x27;ll never see serious competition from EU companies as long as these giants are allowed to operate here... and also just buy any potential competition.)

Protective compliance.<p>Not malicious.<p>Protecting their users in as much as is possible given the ill-conceived DMA.

This is a bad move from Apple. Developers, developers, developers. Remember!?

Apple should also offer the converse: App Store for non-Apple devices.

Could this mean that third-party apps will be able to use MAP_JIT?

What happens if Google or Meta pulls all its apps from the store?

Providing hardware and gatekeeping installs with fees is double dipping. Users want your hardware because of the cool software that runs on it. If you depend on 3rd parties to make attractive software don&#x27;t harm the developers!

Is this going to make web Bluetooth work via Chrome on iOS?

I hope this also opens up all the PWA capabilities as well

&gt; <i>For users, the changes include new controls and disclosures, and expanded protections to reduce privacy and security risks the DMA creates</i><p>Wait a minute, did the EU tried enforcing key escrow or something?<p>&gt; <i>The new options for processing payments and downloading apps on iOS open new avenues for malware, fraud and scams, illicit and harmful content, and other privacy and security threats.</i><p>Ah, I see. Apple gate keeps everything for our own good. Nothing to do with money. Nothing at all…<p>Now I have a relative that for some reason always gets their computer full of malware. Had to reset their Android phone last week, presumably for this very reason. Nobody has any idea how that stuff gets in, but with him, it always does. We started to jokingly accuse him of getting to shady web sites, but he won’t admit to anything. Anyone knows someone like him, and how they might be helped?<p>Besides locking his computer like we would a child, that is.

Can EU users opt-out from all that stuff?

My take? This whole situation is like a game of 4D chess where everyone&#x27;s trying to be the smartest in the room. Apple&#x27;s playing the long game, the EU&#x27;s laying down the law, and the rest of us are just here munching popcorn, watching the drama unfold. It&#x27;s like, &quot;Oh, you&#x27;re gonna charge for that? Cool, cool, cool, but remember, there&#x27;s always a bigger fish.&quot; And let&#x27;s not forget, in the end, it&#x27;s usually us, the consumers, who end up footing the bill, one way or another. So grab your popcorn, folks, and let&#x27;s see how this corporate soap opera plays out!

i.e. they will keep two product versions around in order to keep screwing the people outside the EU.

So disappointed with the per install charge. Now the hoards of censored&#x2F;banned apps still won&#x27;t see the light of day on IOS.

Does this apply to iPad OS too?

Make jailbreaking great again

Does this include ipadOS?

Why is Apple subject to these rules but not game consoles?

This reads like a masterpiece of passive aggressive malicious compliance.

Wording of press release seems more like anti-regulation propaganda, and fear mongering.<p>Look past it all and will see it’s just a desperate attempt to hold on to their profits in wake of the App Store exodus.

Alright, let&#x27;s break it down. Apple&#x27;s new rules are like when you finally get the freedom to eat ice cream for breakfast, but then realize you have to buy the ice cream yourself. Everyone was excited about alternative marketplaces, but now it&#x27;s like, &#x27;Surprise! There&#x27;s a cost attached.&#x27; It&#x27;s a classic &#x27;be careful what you wish for&#x27; scenario. You wanted more options? Great, but now you&#x27;ve got to deal with the real world where things aren&#x27;t always as free and easy as they seem. It&#x27;s like discovering Santa isn&#x27;t real all over again. Welcome to the grown-up table, alternative marketplaces.

This comment is a needle in a haystack!

...it seems DHH is Chuck Norris class badass?<p>He rants one day, few months later EU creates policy and Apple conforms. Nice reality bending powers.

Everybody in this comment section that has bought an Apple device is complicit in this bullshit. Every single person.

Monopolist scum being monopolist scum, I really hope the ecj grow a backbone and remove apple from our lovely union

The EU has a haphazard record on technical regulation, but their requirement for alternative app stores is decent IMO.<p>Apple and Google have a chequered history of cherry-picking which social networking apps are allowed on their platform, based on content in those apps.<p>Some apps may, for cultural reasons, have the lion&#x27;s share of toxic content, such is the nature of a free society where cultures are allowed to differ. But users should be free to decide what apps they consider &quot;toxic,&quot; because peoples&#x27; definitions of &quot;toxic&quot; differ.<p>Free speech is a first amendment right because it&#x27;s a fundamental pre-requisite of a free society.<p>Why should two corporates in California (subject to all the political biases that exist in that state) be gatekeepers of freedom of expression and association for the rest of the world?<p>If a corporate chooses what opinions and discussions are &quot;appropriate&quot; for us, then our thoughts and worldviews are subtly shaped by the whims of that corporate.<p>It wouldn&#x27;t be so bad if there were multiple corporates who differentiated their approach, but unfortunately we&#x27;ve seen Big Tech acting in concert on certain issues (certain apps that were banned), and that should concern us all.<p>They may suppress rightwing views today, but we can&#x27;t predict what Big Tech will deny us access to tomorrow. Tomorrow&#x27;s target might be something we value (but is inconvenient for the Big Tech establishment)<p>If you&#x27;re on the left-hand side of politics, try to imagine a world where two companies in Wyoming controlled your access to information and discussion. And an app was banned if it was seen to be too leftwing... too &quot;risky&quot; and &quot;disruptive&quot; to &quot;public order?&quot;<p>I understand Apple&#x27;s arguments about the integrity of its ecosystem, and for what it&#x27;s worth, I value Apple&#x27;s vertically-integrated and curated approach. But I lost a lot of faith in Apple when they started cherry-picking social networks. Now I recognise that users need a side-channel so they can choose to sacrifice a degree of safety in order to retain access to free speech.<p>Reading Apple&#x27;s announcement doesn&#x27;t fill me with confidence though. &quot;Authorization for marketplace developers — to ensure marketplace developers commit to ongoing requirements that help protect users and developers.&quot;<p>Inevitably, this means that if a developer dares to build a marketplace that hosts a free speech app, Apple can simply refuse to allow the marketplace to run on their phones.<p>Big Tech will not relinquish control without a fight.

&quot;Developers who adopt the new business terms at any time will not be able to switch back to Apple’s existing business terms for their EU apps.&quot;<p>from <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;dma-and-apps-in-the-eu&#x2F;#distribution-eu" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;developer.apple.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;dma-and-apps-in-the-eu&#x2F;#...</a><p>I have not seen this important aspect mentioned yet. Once you have opted in to Apple&#x27;s new business terms, you will be locked in to those terms forever.<p>Because of this restriction, given the ridiculous €0.50 per year per install fees, no developer who hopes their new app will one day have more than 1M installs will choose these new terms, and I have no doubt that is exactly Apple&#x27;s intention here.

&quot;Yay, finally! Thanks EU!&quot;<p><i>&lt;checks where he lives&gt;</i><p>&quot;... Fuck Brexit with a rake ...&quot;

It feels like there is an almost unprofessional level of snark in the way this is written. I assume Apple is banking on consumers siding with them on it but I have to wonder about the wisdom of doing that. The EU seems to be very unafraid to take on big tech, and i wouldn&#x27;t want to be the company that triggers them to decide to make example to deter future malicious compliance.

Microsoft&#x27;s: &quot;We look forward to continuing to work with the European Commission to finalize our compliance obligations.&quot;<p>Google: &quot;While we support many of the DMA&#x27;s ambitions around consumer choice and interoperability, the new rules involve difficult trade-offs, and we&#x27;re concerned that some of these rules will reduce the choices available to people and businesses in Europe.&quot;<p>Apple: “The changes we’re announcing today comply with the Digital Markets Act’s requirements in the European Union, while helping to protect EU users from the unavoidable increased privacy and security threats this regulation brings.&quot;<p>Android and Windows have lived in the chaos of open platforms so much that they can shrug off most of these regulations. Apple&#x27;s entire business model is being a walled garden.

So to summarize: You can create your own app store, but Apple controls it, and it will cost you. You can create your own app store, but only you can publish to it. You can use your own payment method, but Apple must be allowed to collect data and a large fee from every payment. You can distribute apps that Apple approved in your app store, but you have to give Apple the data and pay per install.<p>Not even Google is close to that amount of data collection and greed...

Yet another win for Brexit

Apple needs a Microsoft-2000s-era slapdown to put them in their place. Regardless of your thoughts on the situation, a mega&#x2F;giga-corp flaunting the spirit of the rules is a bad sign for the future.

&gt; Across every change, Apple is introducing new safeguards that reduce — but don’t eliminate — new risks the DMA poses to EU users.<p>It&#x27;s hilarious how much a trillion dollar company can act like a petulant child when they get worried about losing their financial grip.

I remember when Riccitiello announced per-install pricing for Unity last year and it, quite literally, cost him his job

Apple had a chance to embrace the DMA, even to save face, and become a (albeit mandated) champion of these changes.<p>Instead, they&#x27;ve gone for hostility and pettiness and, no doubt, fully intend to maliciously comply.<p>&gt; The screen also interrupts EU users’ experience the first time they open Safari<p>And it will be the last time.

I love Apple, and I&#x27;m frankly shocked that they would put out this statement in its current form. In the opening paras, their barely-contained rage is palpable, and sentences like<p>&gt; Today, iOS users already have the ability to set a third-party web browser — other than Safari — as their default.<p>make me wonder if anyone proof-read this thing at all. That said, this is a good day for EU users, and I applaud everyone who worked so hard to make this happen.<p>The notarization requirement seems quite reasonable, and honestly better than I expected.

It’s so surreal to me how every time apple comes up on HN there’s so so many people coming to defend them and applauding them for what they’re doing when, like in this example, they’re clearly trying to manipulate and do whatever they can to seem as if they’re complying while essentially making the situation worse

Their entire response is so petty. Borderline unprofessional in its tone, really.

Whoever wrote this did a great job of causing me to visualize the sneer on their face as they did so.<p>Toddler level pouting + just Ivy League levels of &quot;we know what&#x27;s good for you more than you do&quot;.

&gt; Core Technology Fee — iOS apps distributed from the App Store and&#x2F;or an alternative app marketplace will pay €0.50 for each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold.<p>If I&#x27;m reading this right (and I did double check this with ChatGPT [0]) if you have an app with two million unique installs annually, you owe Apple 500 000 euros. That seems to include free apps as well.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chat.openai.com&#x2F;share&#x2F;905c5c45-657b-477c-a746-0468dd7747a7" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;chat.openai.com&#x2F;share&#x2F;905c5c45-657b-477c-a746-0468dd...</a>

&gt; Across every change, Apple is introducing new safeguards that reduce — but don’t eliminate — new risks the DMA poses to EU users.<p>What a line...

Key facts to note:<p>* Apple has 22 percent market share in EU [1]. * EU Economy is 15 percent of World Economy [2]. * EU population is 5.5 percent of World Population [3].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;appleworld.today&#x2F;apple-now-has-22-of-the-smartphone-market-in-europe-excluding-russia&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;appleworld.today&#x2F;apple-now-has-22-of-the-smartphone-...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Economy_of_the_European_Union" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Economy_of_the_European_Union</a><p>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;european-union.europa.eu&#x2F;principles-countries-history&#x2F;key-facts-and-figures&#x2F;life-eu_en" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;european-union.europa.eu&#x2F;principles-countries-histor...</a>

As someone with a Vision Pro preorder and a developer account, this stuff is really souring me on taking the device seriously as a development platform.<p>I abandoned iOS development for the web in the 2010s because app review roulette made it too unreliable and stressful to build software on iOS. I had a few semi-successful apps, but it was simply not worth dealing with Apple&#x27;s opaque review process and restrictive rules to access a limited userbase with bad unit economics. I could make more money building the same software elsewhere with fewer headaches.<p>I&#x27;m very excited to play with new interaction modalities on the Vision Pro, and the device itself looks <i>amazing</i>, but all of this recent news from Apple is not making the Vision Pro seem like an attractive place to think about developing a serious business. It&#x27;s a shame - I&#x27;ve been a diehard Mac fan for 20+ years, but feel increasingly concerned about their approach here. I hope they change tack.

Europeans: We need you to allow some open competition on iOS.<p>Apple: How about we re-write all the rules while maintaining absolute control.

I wanna know when I&#x27;m gonna be able to use native Firefox with addons enabled instead of Safari-coated unusable crap

It&#x27;s actually getting really hard to like Apple

The tone of the release is really something. So much shade.

I wonder what happens if you travel from the US to EU and then back. Will you be able to install alterative browser while in EU and then it gets blocked?

Android phones like Samsung and Oneplus etc are good now. Why put yourself through this? For iMessage?

These changes are the definition of Malicious Compliance, I hope the EU goes down hard on this bullshit

&gt; Across every change, Apple is introducing new safeguards that reduce — but don’t eliminate — new risks the DMA poses to EU users.<p>&gt; new risks the DMA poses to EU users<p>Oh wow. Just wow.<p>Thank you based Apple for &#x27;&#x27;&#x27;protecting&#x27;&#x27;&#x27; the EU users from the bad, evil Digital Marketing Act. You are so awesome and great!<p>Truly evil stuff this DMA, you can read more about it here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu&#x2F;about-dma_en" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu&#x2F;about-dma_en</a>

Ah yes apple the shining bastion of what&#x27;s best for the consumer. &#x2F;s<p>Easy fix. Don&#x27;t make apple apps.

“It’s very dangerous but we will allow our users to download and install apps from the internet”.

This press release could not be more passive aggressive. Barely a sentence goes by without a petulant remark about <i>gasp</i> being regulated by a system of governance that doesn&#x27;t pander to big business.

I want to be able to install pirated IPA files so I can, for example, use Spotify Premium for free. I have always been able to do this with APK files on Android. Will I be able to do that on iOS after these changes are in place? AltStore is a bit annoying to use.<p>From other comments I am suspecting this won&#x27;t be possible so this new regulation is the worst of both worlds: we will be forced to install 3rd-party stores for some apps but we won&#x27;t be able to install any app we want outside of stores. And on top of that, one of those browser selection popups whenever we set up our device.

a lot of hot takes inbound... oh wait already 782 comments

It has become absolutely impossible for alternative with Apple on this. They are loving these regulations.

So if enough EU people install a free app, the developer will be liable for €0.50 per install?<p>T-thanks EU!

Thats just great, more popups to dismiss, mandated by the EU

How the EU is getting away with all these restrictions targeting US businesses is beyond me

Next morning Facebook removes its app from Apple Store and directs users to sideload the app, because it needs those sweet permissions that were denied before.<p>Apps outside official app store may force you to enable permissions it does not really need, refusing to work without it. Apps in official store should work with the permissions approved by the store. The “should” is enforced by the store.

No company should be allowed to both sell the hardware and run the store for 3rd party content.<p>Edit: Actually I realize my thoughts on this are too emotional and my words aren’t coming out in a way that clearly communicates the issues I see.

There is no topic more popular on HN than European regulations. Thats a pretty sad state of affairs if you think about it. Personally I&#x27;d be interested in blocking every thread like this. Though I don&#x27;t think these regulations will survive because the EU won&#x27;t survive. Its like discussing Soviet law. Its totally pointless on a tech blog.

I recently visited China, and ended up buying my first iPhone (SE) to go there. The Google&#x2F;Android situation their is awful. All the Chinese phones have shitty third party app stores, and you can&#x27;t even install &#x2F; update your apps without using an international sim or VPN on your international android phone. App store works just fine (filtered but fine).<p>Isn&#x27;t this change going to allow China to roll out a shitty knock-off app store and make the iPhone experience just as horrible as Android over there? :(<p>And if this lets us run real Chrome on iOS, there goes any need for cross-browser testing for smaller websites (and Google themselves). This would make Firefox even less tested and give Google all the power.<p>Not an iPhone&#x2F;iOS user myself, but I think this is bad news.

Firefox hardcore user here -- and someone not at all versed in anti-monopoly laws.<p>Could someone explain why the EU forced Apple to allow alternative browser engines in their own eco-system (&quot;walled garden&quot;)? It&#x27;s theirs, shouldn&#x27;t they do whatever they want with it? It&#x27;s not like there aren&#x27;t any alternatives to iOS - Android is excellent and you can use many different browsers on Android. So... where&#x27;s the problem?

I’m just as much a Firefox fan as anyone, and I use Firefox exclusively on desktop, even going around explaining the benefits, etc. to others.<p>That said, as much as I have complaints about Safari, if this spreads beyond the EU, that’s practically handing Chrome a monopoly on a silver platter. What’s to stop them?<p>I would just like to retroactively reply to the objection that the government can just antitrust regulate Google. Ignoring my general distrust of large-scale government regulation on a free market, I would like to point out how long it took the EU to implement these changes since Apple started these behaviors. If Chrome does obtain a monopoly, we’re looking at years before the government even does anything.

This can destroy the product experience.<p>Worrying about browser engines was always misguided. Letting 5 people use Gecko will be fantastic until Gecko is so irrelevant that even those people give up.<p>Vendors like Microsoft having a large userbase attracted to good, reliable software to counter another browser’s overt influence was always the solution. It’s all about users.<p>25 million people on Firefox is not enough. Neither is 5,000 that switch their rendering engine in iOS. Firefox needs users for relevancy, not its own engine.<p>To be clear, I’m not outraged by this EU edict. I’m saying it’s irrelevant and misguided as most regulations are.