The problem is not that I can’t use alternative apps - it’s that they don’t have access to various important system level features.
Some examples:
Only Messages and Mail can provide OTPs, again only when using the system keyboard.
When swiping the lock screen to the left, only the system Camera is allowed to appear.
When using navigation, only Apple Maps is allowed to provide the navigation overlay on the lock screen and Apple Watch.
After years, the default Mail app can be changed, but AFAICT that doesn’t do anything other than override mailto links. However, this functionality isn’t available for Calendar for example.
Similarly, you can’t override natural language Siri incantations to use your preferred apps. Like “message X” always uses Messages or “remind me of X” can only use Reminders. And alarms and timers can only use the Clock app.
I really want Apple to fix all of this, but I guess it’s easier to act like the “deletion” of system apps provides a level playing field. The real problem is that the default apps lack a lot of other features that only third parties provide - but Apple can’t be assed to improve them.
The thing is most normal users don't really want random apps to be able to provide OTPs. While it would be nice to have an API for every system functionality like reminders where every app is allowed to register as the reminder app, it would necessitate far more complexity and far slower pace of development on the reminder interfacing.
This is where there is a big difference in what the ultra few power users want and what normal users want. Ultra power users want to be able to install an app file for a random app with app store like experience and with as less hurdles as possible, while normal users are very scared of receiving an apk file in whatsapp and installing it by mistake (there is a spectrum here and it's not binary).
You don’t need to invent a “random apps” strawman. Apple already restricts which apps can be used as default mail/browser, just allow them access to the same APIs.
Why not at least Gmail, Chrome, and gBoard? Millions of “non power users” use these apps over Apple’s offering.
If that happens, prices may have to go up, that mathematical. Currently lots of people bought digital stuff they don’t need anymore. If they resell, people buying it don’t need to buy it from somewhere else.
I know it’s not really a zero sum game, but it’s obvious it would have a significant impact.
And I’m not even talking about media, which I’m sure some platform would start mass renting/selling in a fully automated fashion (upload all your licenses, watch whatever you want anytime because there will always be somewhere a license which is unused and a copy of the movie which is not actively watched at this moment). Basically they would only sell as many copies as the peak number of simultaneous watchers…
> If that happens, prices may have to go up, that mathematical.
I'd expect the opposite: competition between the "used" and the "new" markets would drive prices down, not up. Mathematically, you'd be increasing the supply, while keeping the demand nearly the same, which in the traditional supply and demand model means lower prices.
Or lower the prices for everyone. Why does Adobe Photoshop still cost a small fortune. Hasn’t improved much for the last two decades has it? Why can’t I rent it from my buddy for the few hours a month I might use it?
> All that will happen is that all software will move to a SaaS or IAP model.
Seems a little to late for that, everything is a bloody in-app purchase or subscription already. I really wish I could filter out apps with in-app purchases or subscriptions when searching the app store, but that would probably ruin the business of countless companies.
So how are the developers who make these products going to get paid?
When you resell a physical item it’s worn and costs time & effort to resell. Software is very different. That means no one would ever buy the software from the developer once a few copies are sold and can be passed around.
That would force SaaS even harder, since developers would need to justify it being a license.
To play devils advocate, couldn’t that allow a single purchase of a movie to be watched by millions of people? At which point no studio would sell it digitally.
In theory this could’ve happened with DVDs, but it was too much hassle for a single disc to be shared by that many people.
You could compromise with restrictions on how many times a file could be sold etc, but that concedes the point of a digital good not really being your property. And it might be used as a Trojan horse for even more DRM and surveillance.
> To play devils advocate, couldn’t that allow a single purchase of a movie to be watched by millions of people? At which point no studio would sell it digitally.
You're not thinking creatively enough. One day, somebody's going to use the law and make the "sales" API-driven. This will then turn it into a rental service where you can "buy" a game for two hours for $37.50 and then "sell" the game back to the mother ship for $36.50 of credit. The mother ship being, of course, whatever VC firm puts millions into having the world's largest Steam account.
I don't have to like the current ecosystem of no-transfers and DRM, to acknowledge breaking all that down would have major economic consequences against studios. Right now is especially not the time to be asking for this, because the whole video game industry is in deep financial trouble at the moment.
I don't feel like this would be a major issue in practice. People can already pirate, sneak into the theater, etc., if they want to game the system.
Most people aren't interested in routinely selling and buying their media, so I would wager that most digital copies will end up on the digital "shelf" just like physical copies do, rather than being routinely sold off.
In theory, same is very much applicable for nearly all non-hygienic physical goods, but that did not make any business to stop.
A popular book can change hand a million times and save a lot of money, carbon emission, tree cutting, paper production cost, transport and logistics. The problem is careful usage and patience, i.e. not spilling coffee or food and waiting may be a year before a copy is available.
Phones has become everyday items (and as a sibling comment pointed out, gone past the DSA regulation threshhold), homeless people in the Stockholm subway will go around with crappy Androids asking for "Swish" (immediate money transfer app, used for P2P and other fast small amount transactions around here like restaurants and at open air markets).
Low-tech people often don't bother buying new computers since their phones are required for banking (BankID identification) whilst the computer is optional.
> They arguably have an even more restrictive environment than iOS.
Yet they inarguably have less marketshare and a reduced role in citizens’ lives. Modern living in society necessitates some digital access to the internet. Even homeless people have smartphones. Yet all those crucial interactions are mediated by devices controlled by too few players, meaning that a couple of foreign rich companies dictate too much of what you can do and have provably and repeatedly abused that power to entrench themselves further.
Consoles are entirely different, people don’t depend on them for interacting with society.
It’s about economic opportunity for EU citizens and businesses.
The EU has a responsibility to promote the prosperity of its citizens. If that means dictating how a US company does business, then that’s what they are going to do. Which is the EUs prerogative.
As an aside, and something that is seldom mentioned, but if Apple and the other trillion dollar tech giants just paid their fair share of taxes then they may not be in this mess!
The PS5's browser is hidden (it'll pop up when clicking links in Youtube video descriptions, etc), but it seems that the XBox one is just there to be used.
There's more than one person in these threads. It's entirely possible (in fact, it's actuality), that the people asking it before are not those asking it now.
From the rules: do not assume astroturfing or that others are non-genuine.
Phones are, honestly, more of an obvious first target, and harder for the manufacturers to argue about. Everyone has a smartphone. Game console sales in Europe are in the 5-10 million/year range, by contrast. And only one of the console manufacturers (Microsoft) is covered by the DMA at all, AFAIK; the other two just aren't significant enough.
That said, I wouldn't be amazed if attention is paid to consoles sooner or later, possibly bundled in with smarttvs.
Why gate such a basic functionality for users in the European Union? People elsewhere do not have access to alternative app stores anyway. Is allowing them to uninstall such apps too much?
Apple aren’t doing this out of the goodness of their own hearts, they’re being forced to by the EU. So unless their hand is being forced elsewhere they’re not going to do it.
Yup. You can bet most developed countries will start to follow suit now. Remember Apple's argument before they exhausted their appeals with the EU was that they could never do any of this, and the sky would fall, and their whole business would be destroyed. Now, that will have been proven to be absolute poppycock as they begin to abide by all these regulations in this one (large) region. I expect regulators in Japan, UK, Australia, etc. will start to say "Yeah, we want that too." And Apple has zero plausible argument left for why consumers everywhere else don't deserve or can't have the same level of choice.
Obviously not in America though, since we don't have a functioning government, just an executive branch that doesn't have the support of Congress, and a judicial branch that believes strongly that only an act of Congress could create the authority needed to actually rein them in. And a Congress which would ideally like to avoid doing any legislating besides passing a continuing resolution or debt ceiling bill every now and then, since there's too much fundraising work to do.
I mean, on their own, many of the core apps probably don’t bring much revenue to Apple. I can understand their reluctance to allow uninstalling the App Store, but what do they gain by preventing someone from uninstalling the Camera, for instance? Those who want to do so will use an alternative app anyway.
Folks in USA/CA would remove Safari and then return phone to the carrier/Apple as defective. No, I'm not kidding. I saw that multiple times - Windows messed on laptop? Laptop within return window? Return it is!
Eh, people return their devices because don't know how to correctly use them all the time, I don't see how it is different here. And people definitely don't need to intentionally do this -- in the US, most major retailers allow you to return opened products within the return window (although it could get complicated with so-called "activatable devices")
I’m sure a non-trivial number of users would delete apps that are required for basic functionality. Stopping them prevents support issues that could require resetting to factory settings, if they didn’t add some other way to get the App Store back.
Definitely. I’ve had family members delete a bunch of the stock apps and then complained to me that various fitness and health functions stopped working. Turns out the fitness and health apps were important.
Is that really sufficient justification for stopping users from having more control over their device?
Like should we really let the 'Grandma Finds the Internet'[0] meme be the reason that you and I can't make decisions for ourselves?
Whatever cost savings that Apple has from avoiding support for these people is dwarfed by the money they make from stopping competitors to these apps from growing due to these control mechanisms.
That's the real reason apple doesn't want to do this and has to be kicked dragging and screaming by the EU.
Releasing it as a feature everywhere would require at least a bit of public explanation and might give the appearance that EU forced Apple into doing something good for everyone. Being petty and releasing the bare minimum georestricted only to EU requires no public explanation and gives more the appearance that this is some dumb law Apple was forced to comply with. At least that's probably their thinking.
That is probably a more likely explanation that "because it would lose them money".
I suspect that the number of people who are actively going to switch to a different App Store is minimal. Users can already install other browsers, even if they are still using WebView, same of messaging apps and I doubt that many would care to replace the camera app. Photos maybe, but is that really a huge lose for Apple? That saves them from storing your photos.
People on HN is often assuming that people would leave the App Store in droves, if given to option. I really don't see that happening.
If I buy a phone in the EU can I keep this ability everywhere even with a UK Apple ID? Seems pretty nice having everything separate like this. I hope it forces them to allow different browser engines than Safari too.
No. Apple spent a lot of time and money building a service called "countryd" with the sole purpose of making sure that people outside the EU can't use any of the features that they already did the work to develop anyway.
> countryd determines the user's physical country based on multiple characteristics. It is used by the eligibility system to ensure it is difficult to spoof the user's true physical location. It was introduced in iOS 16.2 and macOS 13.0.
I'm assuming at some point they'll move away from bespoke ROM-level settings like "Japan-bought iPhones always have a shutter sound" or "Chinese iPhones use the term "WLAN" instead of "WiFi", and instead path all of that through `countryd`. Maybe for WiFi and cellular regulations also.
How wonderful of Apple to make sure non-EU citizens are protected from the terrible dangers of freedom to choose, forced upon EU iOS users by the tyrannical EU government /s
I wonder, if another country were to leave the EU in the future, would Apple actually go in and modify the code (or enable a server flag) to remove the feature from all of those country's users' devices?
It just seems so wrong to own a device, but still have the manufacturer dictate what that device is allowed to do, AND they have the ability to change those capabilities at will. It feels like buying a physical calculator, where the manufacturer can one day wave a magic wand and I lose the "divide" button. I'm generally an Apple fan and I get that people like Apple's "walled garden" but even to me this seems like an abuse.
After staying in one region consistently, all the big tech companies will automatically switch your region for you. Some might take longer to force you than others, but it’s not certain that you can forever stay on another region.
But what makes most people have to switch eventually is a bank/government app that is region locked and you need it to live your life without pulling your hair out jumping through stupid hoops.
A VPN and two devices is the only way to stay truly separate from the region you live in full time over the long term.
No, it's not close at all. macOS allows you to sideload, EU iOS still does not. macOS allows you to write programs for your own device without paying Apple $100 every year, EU iOS still does not. macOS provides an environment for general purpose computing, EU iOS still does not.
Are the apps actually uninstalled for real, or does the system just hide them to create the same appearance as uninstalling to satisfy legal requirements?
They are part of the iOS System partition, so almost certainly just hidden. Considering that the entire point is to improve competitiveness, hidden is almost certainly good enough, as it's not the EU's job to be disk space czars.
Beyond just that, if you uninstall the app store, how would you get it back without it already being available on-device? You'd probably need Safari but then if that's removed too?
> Apps that are removed, such as the App Store , can be re-downloaded using an "App Installation" section in the Settings app.
Whether that's really a redownload or restore from disk cache probably doesn't matter unless the EU starts to argue that it being available with 0 latency from disk is a competitive advantage.
What if I'm an EU resident whose bank or workplace security software are sideloaded or distributed by an alt store? What if I'm traveling for longer than a month? What if, to keep banking or working, I need an updated version of said apps?
F me for being away for longer than an arbitrary amount of time that Apple thinks characterises ... what?
Readit News
Some examples:
Only Messages and Mail can provide OTPs, again only when using the system keyboard.
When swiping the lock screen to the left, only the system Camera is allowed to appear.
When using navigation, only Apple Maps is allowed to provide the navigation overlay on the lock screen and Apple Watch.
After years, the default Mail app can be changed, but AFAICT that doesn’t do anything other than override mailto links. However, this functionality isn’t available for Calendar for example.
Similarly, you can’t override natural language Siri incantations to use your preferred apps. Like “message X” always uses Messages or “remind me of X” can only use Reminders. And alarms and timers can only use the Clock app.
I really want Apple to fix all of this, but I guess it’s easier to act like the “deletion” of system apps provides a level playing field. The real problem is that the default apps lack a lot of other features that only third parties provide - but Apple can’t be assed to improve them.
I mean, you as a human only ever pay the minimal price for a product that they will sell it to you for. Why would any other human do otherwise?
This is where there is a big difference in what the ultra few power users want and what normal users want. Ultra power users want to be able to install an app file for a random app with app store like experience and with as less hurdles as possible, while normal users are very scared of receiving an apk file in whatsapp and installing it by mistake (there is a spectrum here and it's not binary).
You're right! But most normal users DO really want the app they CHOOSE to be able to provide OTPs!
Why not at least Gmail, Chrome, and gBoard? Millions of “non power users” use these apps over Apple’s offering.
If I can sell something physical that I don't need anymore, I should be able to do so with the things I "bought" on, let's say, Steam.
I know it’s not really a zero sum game, but it’s obvious it would have a significant impact.
And I’m not even talking about media, which I’m sure some platform would start mass renting/selling in a fully automated fashion (upload all your licenses, watch whatever you want anytime because there will always be somewhere a license which is unused and a copy of the movie which is not actively watched at this moment). Basically they would only sell as many copies as the peak number of simultaneous watchers…
That would be amazing actually.
I'd expect the opposite: competition between the "used" and the "new" markets would drive prices down, not up. Mathematically, you'd be increasing the supply, while keeping the demand nearly the same, which in the traditional supply and demand model means lower prices.
As well as making the most expensive price the same globally e.g. buying apps in Bangladesh to resell in the US.
Making the entire industry worse off for everyone else except you.
Seems a little to late for that, everything is a bloody in-app purchase or subscription already. I really wish I could filter out apps with in-app purchases or subscriptions when searching the app store, but that would probably ruin the business of countless companies.
When you resell a physical item it’s worn and costs time & effort to resell. Software is very different. That means no one would ever buy the software from the developer once a few copies are sold and can be passed around.
That would force SaaS even harder, since developers would need to justify it being a license.
Users can't gift/resell what they don't own ;-)
In theory this could’ve happened with DVDs, but it was too much hassle for a single disc to be shared by that many people.
You could compromise with restrictions on how many times a file could be sold etc, but that concedes the point of a digital good not really being your property. And it might be used as a Trojan horse for even more DRM and surveillance.
You're not thinking creatively enough. One day, somebody's going to use the law and make the "sales" API-driven. This will then turn it into a rental service where you can "buy" a game for two hours for $37.50 and then "sell" the game back to the mother ship for $36.50 of credit. The mother ship being, of course, whatever VC firm puts millions into having the world's largest Steam account.
I don't have to like the current ecosystem of no-transfers and DRM, to acknowledge breaking all that down would have major economic consequences against studios. Right now is especially not the time to be asking for this, because the whole video game industry is in deep financial trouble at the moment.
Most people aren't interested in routinely selling and buying their media, so I would wager that most digital copies will end up on the digital "shelf" just like physical copies do, rather than being routinely sold off.
A popular book can change hand a million times and save a lot of money, carbon emission, tree cutting, paper production cost, transport and logistics. The problem is careful usage and patience, i.e. not spilling coffee or food and waiting may be a year before a copy is available.
Why doesn't the EU apply these same rules to video game consoles (Xbox/PlayStation)?
They arguably have an even more restrictive environment than iOS.
Low-tech people often don't bother buying new computers since their phones are required for banking (BankID identification) whilst the computer is optional.
Yet they inarguably have less marketshare and a reduced role in citizens’ lives. Modern living in society necessitates some digital access to the internet. Even homeless people have smartphones. Yet all those crucial interactions are mediated by devices controlled by too few players, meaning that a couple of foreign rich companies dictate too much of what you can do and have provably and repeatedly abused that power to entrench themselves further.
Consoles are entirely different, people don’t depend on them for interacting with society.
This isn’t about punishing Apple.
It’s about economic opportunity for EU citizens and businesses.
The EU has a responsibility to promote the prosperity of its citizens. If that means dictating how a US company does business, then that’s what they are going to do. Which is the EUs prerogative.
As an aside, and something that is seldom mentioned, but if Apple and the other trillion dollar tech giants just paid their fair share of taxes then they may not be in this mess!
Dead Comment
So, yes.
It's so genuine that it's asked in every single thread on this topic.
From the rules: do not assume astroturfing or that others are non-genuine.
That said, I wouldn't be amazed if attention is paid to consoles sooner or later, possibly bundled in with smarttvs.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/531063/xbox-live-mau-num...
[2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/272639/number-of-registe...
Deleted Comment
Obviously not in America though, since we don't have a functioning government, just an executive branch that doesn't have the support of Congress, and a judicial branch that believes strongly that only an act of Congress could create the authority needed to actually rein them in. And a Congress which would ideally like to avoid doing any legislating besides passing a continuing resolution or debt ceiling bill every now and then, since there's too much fundraising work to do.
¹ At the very least more code and cases and testing where it could go wrong.
² Maybe reduced support calls?
³ Spite could be a reason.
Like should we really let the 'Grandma Finds the Internet'[0] meme be the reason that you and I can't make decisions for ourselves?
Whatever cost savings that Apple has from avoiding support for these people is dwarfed by the money they make from stopping competitors to these apps from growing due to these control mechanisms.
That's the real reason apple doesn't want to do this and has to be kicked dragging and screaming by the EU.
[0] https://imgflip.com/memegenerator/Grandma-Finds-The-Internet
I suspect that the number of people who are actively going to switch to a different App Store is minimal. Users can already install other browsers, even if they are still using WebView, same of messaging apps and I doubt that many would care to replace the camera app. Photos maybe, but is that really a huge lose for Apple? That saves them from storing your photos.
People on HN is often assuming that people would leave the App Store in droves, if given to option. I really don't see that happening.
https://theapplewiki.com/wiki/Filesystem:/usr/libexec/countr...
> countryd determines the user's physical country based on multiple characteristics. It is used by the eligibility system to ensure it is difficult to spoof the user's true physical location. It was introduced in iOS 16.2 and macOS 13.0.
Edit: best I could find is "no", according to techcrunch from August 2024
https://techcrunch.com/2024/08/21/uks-competition-authority-...
It just seems so wrong to own a device, but still have the manufacturer dictate what that device is allowed to do, AND they have the ability to change those capabilities at will. It feels like buying a physical calculator, where the manufacturer can one day wave a magic wand and I lose the "divide" button. I'm generally an Apple fan and I get that people like Apple's "walled garden" but even to me this seems like an abuse.
Brexit meant leaving the EU.
But what makes most people have to switch eventually is a bank/government app that is region locked and you need it to live your life without pulling your hair out jumping through stupid hoops.
A VPN and two devices is the only way to stay truly separate from the region you live in full time over the long term.
Maybe not for long though: https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/commission-sends-pr...
Deleted Comment
> Apps that are removed, such as the App Store , can be re-downloaded using an "App Installation" section in the Settings app.
Whether that's really a redownload or restore from disk cache probably doesn't matter unless the EU starts to argue that it being available with 0 latency from disk is a competitive advantage.
What happens if I have accounts in other countries and switch between them?
What if I'm an EU resident whose bank or workplace security software are sideloaded or distributed by an alt store? What if I'm traveling for longer than a month? What if, to keep banking or working, I need an updated version of said apps?
F me for being away for longer than an arbitrary amount of time that Apple thinks characterises ... what?