Even after looking at that, it doesn't seem that bad. It's about the same as installing a management or configuration profile, but arguably, has the potential for more risk to your data privacy, so I wouldn't expect it to be easy.
OK, it could definitely use some more polish, but this is literally the first time Apple has done this.
And I don't think the dialogs are malicious or anything, I would do the same thing because I don't want people complaining to me and you have to hammer it into people because no one reads.
Edit: To be clear I'm also in the set of people who don't read.
That’s only true if you’re installing many third-party app stores. Showing a warning once, or even a couple times, doesn’t necessarily cause the same desensitization.
Sure, it could be worse. But it could be better. Compare it to installing fdroid on a stock a droid device.
If Apple hasn't made the experience of installing alternative stores on their phones as simple as installing fdroid on a stock android phone it's not because they can't, but because they don't want to.
And that's fine. That's just another thing the EU can force them to do.
I'm sorry but the way they interrupt the flow so many times is ridiculous. It would take minimal changes to make this flow non-disruptive but Apple wants users to drop off as much as possible during installation.
Part of Apple's product pitch is "you can give this phone to No-Tech Uncle Steve, and it'll be fine"
Some of this interruption is to scare off users who will absolutely fuck up their phones with bitcoin mining apps, given the opportunity
You can argue whether this paternalistic approach to technology is appropriate for the entire userbase, but there are definitely a number of cases that Apple is doing a genuinely good thing for their users here.
>I'm sorry but the way they interrupt the flow so many times is ridiculous.
There's similar number of steps to trust a third party root certificate, or a set a third party DoH provider. Do you also think those tasks should be 1click as well?
They're both gatekeepers. One is for iOS apps, the other is for websites. I'm not sure how "voluntarily" is a relevant factor here. People can and do install alternate roots, especially back in the days when letsencrypt didn't exist and the WebTrust/CAB monopoly was charging tens to hundreds of dollars for certificates.
From toys to energy products to electronics you can find infinite documents like this https://standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/cen/c1efd5d1-79c... regulating and defining a bunch of design choices and characteristics that products need to comply with before they can be imported or sold in Europe. Europe makes a lot of design decisions.
The US has traditionally attracted more venture capital than the EU, which is often cited as a key driver of innovation, particularly in the tech sector. In 2022, the US received over 60% of global venture capital, while Europe received around 15%. This disparity is partly attributed to regulatory differences, with US markets perceived as more flexible and conducive to high-risk investment.
The US startup ecosystem, particularly in Silicon Valley, is seen as more dynamic, with fewer regulatory barriers to entry compared to the EU. This has led to a higher concentration of tech giants in the US, such as Google, Apple, and Amazon.
The GDPR is often cited as a regulation that, while protecting consumer privacy, has imposed significant compliance costs on businesses, potentially deterring smaller startups and innovation in the data-driven sectors. Critics argue that such regulations can slow down the development and adoption of new technologies.
The EU has stringent product safety, environmental, and labor regulations. While these are intended to protect consumers and workers, they can also increase the time and cost of bringing new products to market. For instance, the EU’s cautious approach to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) contrasts with the US's more permissive regulatory stance, affecting innovation in biotechnology.
While the EU invests a significant amount in research and development (R&D), the US typically outspends the EU on both a per capita and absolute basis. This is seen in sectors like pharmaceuticals and technology, where US companies are often more dominant.
The US often leads in patent filings, particularly in cutting-edge technologies like AI, biotechnology, and nanotechnology. This is used as an indicator of a more innovation-friendly environment in the US, driven by both higher investment in R&D and a more favorable regulatory framework.
The US consistently ranks higher than the EU in the GII, which assesses the innovation capabilities and performance of economies. Factors include institutional environment, human capital and research, infrastructure, market sophistication, and business sophistication, where the US often outperforms most EU countries.
The US is home to many of the world’s leading research universities, such as MIT, Stanford, and Harvard, which play a crucial role in driving innovation. The EU has fewer institutions in the top tier, which can be linked to differences in funding models and regulatory frameworks that affect academic freedom and industry collaboration.
The dominance of US companies in the global tech industry is often attributed to a more permissive regulatory environment that fosters innovation. For example, the rapid growth of companies like Uber and Airbnb is partly due to a regulatory framework that allowed these platforms to scale quickly in the US before facing stricter regulations in the EU.
The US often brings new drugs to market faster than the EU, partly due to differences in regulatory approval processes. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is sometimes seen as more flexible and faster in approving new treatments compared to the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
None of what you wrote support what you initially claimed which is, I quote, the least innovative area of the world. I’m eagerly waiting for you to showcase how let’s say Somalia with its complete lack of any regulation is more innovative than Europe.
On a more serious note, none of what you wrote support that the lack of capital risk in the EU is indeed caused by regulations and not one of the many other factors at play here.
I should have written less when compared to US. Obviously I did not mean Somalia and I think you know that. But since you didn’t provide a counter point, I’ll just consider you to be trolling until you provide a serious response.
> The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is sometimes seen as more flexible and faster in approving new treatments compared to the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
> For example, the rapid growth of companies like Uber and Airbnb is partly due to a regulatory framework that allowed these platforms to scale quickly in the US before facing stricter regulations in the EU.
> The US consistently ranks higher than the EU in the GII, which assesses the innovation capabilities and performance of economies. Factors include institutional environment, human capital and research, infrastructure, market sophistication, and business sophistication, where the US often outperforms most EU countries.
There is something about having paid parental leave, worker protections, 25+ paid vacations days day per year, and government agencies that don't allow corporations to poison you (and your water) with their products that makes people happier and healthier.
It might also have something with the fact that not fearing your children dying in a school shooting (sponsored by the innovative US gun companies) makes for happier people. I don't know.
> The US often leads in patent filings, particularly in cutting-edge technologies like AI, biotechnology, and nanotechnology.
I thought the US leads other countries in the price of insulin.
I totally agree that paid parental leave, worker protections, and strong environmental regulations contribute to a healthier and happier society. These are incredibly valuable, and they reflect the priorities of a society that values well-being and social equity.
However, it's also important to recognize that innovation and economic growth play a crucial role in funding these social benefits. If the regulatory environment stifles too much innovation, it could limit economic growth, which in turn could reduce the resources available for social programs. The challenge is finding the right balance—one that protects people and the environment while still allowing businesses to innovate and grow.
It's not about choosing one over the other but finding ways to support both. The US and EU might have different approaches, but each can learn from the other. Perhaps the US could adopt more robust worker protections and environmental regulations, while the EU could explore ways to make its regulatory processes more innovation-friendly. In the end, both sides can benefit from a dialogue that looks at the bigger picture.
It's true that the FDA has sometimes been criticized for allowing certain substances that are banned in the EU, and that's definitely a concern that needs to be addressed. The US could certainly benefit from adopting stricter standards on some of these issues, especially when it comes to consumer safety and environmental protection.
However, the flexibility of the FDA also means that life-saving drugs and treatments can reach patients faster, which can be a significant benefit, particularly for those with severe or life-threatening conditions. The challenge is ensuring that this speed doesn't come at the expense of safety.
It's worth noting that both the US and EU regulatory systems have their strengths and weaknesses. The key is to learn from each other—perhaps the US could tighten its regulations on food safety, while the EU could explore ways to streamline its drug approval processes without compromising safety. In the end, both systems are striving to protect their populations, but they do so in different ways.
You're absolutely right that the high cost of insulin in the US is a serious issue and a glaring example of how the healthcare system can fail people who need essential medications. The prices of insulin and other life-saving drugs in the US are unacceptable, and it's something that needs urgent reform.
However, when talking about innovation and patent filings, it's a different aspect of the system. The US does lead in patent filings, which reflects the country's strength in research and development. But, as you've pointed out, this innovation doesn't always translate to accessible or affordable healthcare for everyone. The challenge is to ensure that the benefits of innovation, like advancements in biotechnology, actually reach the people who need them without exorbitant costs.
It's clear that the US can learn from other countries, including those in the EU, about how to make healthcare more affordable and equitable, especially when it comes to essential medications like insulin. Balancing innovation with affordability is crucial, and it’s an area where the US healthcare system needs significant improvement.
In regards to gun violence
You've touched on an incredibly important and painful issue. The prevalence of gun violence, including school shootings, is a tragic and deeply concerning problem in the US. It's something that weighs heavily on the minds of many Americans and understandably impacts people's sense of safety and well-being.
The issue of gun violence is complex and deeply rooted in cultural, legal, and political factors unique to the US. While innovation in industries like technology or medicine can drive progress, it's clear that not all innovation is beneficial, especially when it comes to the proliferation of firearms. The US could learn a lot from other countries, including those in the EU, that have successfully implemented stronger gun control measures to reduce violence and create safer communities.
Addressing gun violence in the US requires a multifaceted approach, including better regulation, mental health support, and community-based interventions. It’s an area where the US must do better to protect its citizens, especially its children. No amount of innovation in other sectors can make up for the need to ensure that people feel safe in their everyday lives.
Apple made the change outside of the regulation. It already had USB C on the iPad.
It’s going to end up port less like the Apple Watch one day despite EU regulations. Are we going to force Apple to provide a power port? No that’s stupid
Unless we change physics and make wireless charging anywhere nears as efficient as wired charging, I imagine we are going to have a way to charge with a wire for quite some time.
There are scenarios where those wireless inefficiencies add up, for example when charging off a battery bank whose “tank” you need to conserve… burning 40% of your capacity as heat is kind of crappy.
No, the EU accelerated the timeline but Apple was already en route to USB-C.
It is also worth noting that Apple had already started transitioning some of its products, like the iPad and MacBook, to USB-C before the regulation was finalized. This suggests that Apple was likely already moving in that direction, perhaps due to the technical advantages of USB-C, such as faster data transfer and charging speeds, and the growing adoption of USB-C across the tech industry.
So, while the EU regulation might have accelerated the timeline or made the decision more definitive, it’s possible that Apple was already planning to make the switch eventually. In the end, it seems like a situation where consumer interests and regulatory goals aligned, leading to a positive outcome.
Even on MacOS, Apple will prompt you to delete applications that were installed outside the app store when you try to run them for the first time. They don't provide any instructions on how to disable this 'feature' , I had to look it up online. Enabling the app requires going several menus deep into System Preferences and setting a security toggle.
Netflix's push into mobile gaming goes another way— distribution is still through the Apple app store, and all the individual titles are $0, but at startup they do a handshake with your Netflix app to make sure you're logged into an active account.
Obviously that doesn't break the stranglehold on the distribution side, so you're still subject to Apple's delays, errors, and moralizing through the review process. And I expect Apple would have something to say about it if the "main app" was in fact taking your money in an a la carte way vs just being a gateway to a subscription. Either way, it's not hard to see how Xbox Game Pass could pursue a similar model and point to what Netflix is doing as being basically the same deal.
> Europe can keep doing its regulatory thing while the US works to improve. At least someone is doing something.
is perfectly fine.
On the other hand, somebody questioning what's actually improving in the US is a low quality comment because "it's politics".
The US has regressed down in every possible human development index in the last 2 decades, from happiness and freedoms, to longevity, inequality and societal division.
Since when are statistics and facts considered low quality posts and "politics"?
My point is that the low amount of regulation in the US is part of the reasons why US consumers are taking a hit, whether it's monopolistic app stores that can crank prices, exorbitant medical costs, plummeting living standards and rampant inequality, and crashing longevity and happiness.
This a complex issue with a lot of nuance. Hope is important, measurement of what needs to be changed is important, as well as scoping to topics instead of trying to boil the ocean (enumerating a tire fire, for example). One problem at a time.
In this thread, Europe has shown regulation is possible. The US has as well, with the FTC and DOJ actions of late. So while there are lots of problems left to solve, it’s okay to appreciate what has been solved so for, and to work to understand the burden of work that remains. Lets not rant, lets solve problems. And stay hopeful!
Tangentially, I think sentiment has declined and “low effort posts” are more frequent because the world has become an objectively worse place over the last 10-15 years. Posts are simply reflecting reality.
There absolutely are more flamebait comments. Use that flag button - from what I understand, downvotes are for low-quality comments, whereas flags are for comments that straight-up break the site guidelines.
My point is that I as no expert in fraud can in about 5-10 minutes find many examples of clear fraud online that nothing is being done about.
If anything, ONLY buying through the Apple App store would probably result in a safer buying experience for most folks with MORE protections not less.
One of the value propositions to consumers is that Apple has enough power to push back against big corps.
Ask to Track was a push (originally apple was going to ban totally but in "fairness" let businesses track) to let users decide if they wanted to be tracked. If they said no full features of the app had to remain available.
Compare even that to the pointless privacy notices they send in the mail saying you can send a letter to some address to ask them not to track you and sell you data?
I worked in an elder care adjacent setting - financial fraud is wild against the elderly. It's getting sophisticated. A nice robot voice calls, your account at XXX has been compromised or accessed from Russia, if this was not you you please enter the 6 digit code we've sent to confirm. That six digit code is the 2FA for your real account, which is then drained.
They specifically called out "We get to see how businesses operate under the US government policies when they act on the web" — it's not a specific dig on Android.
Not only that, forcing Apple to open its app platform to all comers invites some of the worst abuses seen in the android ecosystem ((privacy, difficulty canceling, selling customer info…).
As you point out, the fact we see little outrage of the abuses by small app business speaks to astroturfed outrage and a misguided, anti-capitalist sentiment directed towards Apple. I’m more worried about getting harmed by a desperate fly-by-night app developer who sells my personal information than I am by Apple, since Apple has a long term reputation to protect. I’d like to see more restrictions on the App Store, not less.
Edit: why was the parent comment flagged? It was an entirely reasonable post. Was it flagged because indie app developers found it bothersome?
EU can focus on making more regulations, while US focuses on building new businesses. Then the new businesses will adapt to the regulations, while Europe has no businesses that need to be regulated.
Massive corporations with the power to control societies are not a sign of success. I'd rather have 10000 medium sized businesses in my country than one whale that uses it's size and market dominance to eat everything else.
What is Google’s business these days? What about Facebook’s? The core products that put them on the map have been degenerating for the past decade, and the only exciting things coming out of these companies have been the result of acquisitions.
I am happy that the lack of regulation + the ability to exploit your workers creates massive companies. Not sure if it's good for your society, but you do you, America.
America skews down in a lot of metrics as we accept a huge amount of immigrants who come with nothing from poverty. Europe barely accepts anyone and is a white monoculture, which makes it look better on paper.
Norway is frequently mentioned by US leftists as a country we should emulate. Not even 5.5 million people, fewer than the single US state of Massachusetts, with the overwhelming majority white natives. The EU also has very strict requirements for residency, including language and skill requirements, while the US takes in foreigners without any education, skills, or money to support themselves. It's not even remotely close, and by pretending it is, shows you know literally zero about immigration.
> The EU also has very strict requirements for residency, including language and skill requirements, while the US takes in foreigners without any education, skills, or money to support themselves
I thought the US required a visa, same like the EU. Your subjective opinion that the US allows everybody but the EU is too strict might be wrong, have you thought about that. Here is, for example, info how to get a worker visa for Sweden:
"If you wish to work in Sweden as an employed worker for more than three months, you must have:
- a work and residence permit; and
- a valid passport.
Workers in certain sectors need not apply for a work permit."
Are those the "very strict" EU requirements you were referring to?
You also didn't answer my question, we have 24 official languages, how many do you have?
The fact is that the EU has a combined 30 million immigrants, and the US has 46 million. Hardly a difference to warrant your false statement that the EU: "barely allows immigration", would you not agree?
> Norway is frequently mentioned by US leftists as a country we should emulate. Not even 5.5 million people, fewer than the single US state of Massachusetts, with the overwhelming majority white natives.
Have you heard of Vermont? A state with 94% Caucasian population. You called Europe a "white monoculture" (although we speak 24+ languages) based on Norway, one of the many countries in Europe (keep in mind Norway is not in EU) comprises of, what does that make Vermont?
It reveals you have no idea of immigration, what countries the EU comprises of (Norway is not in EU), and haven't checked the stats showing we have more cultures, official languages and ethnicities than the US.
I will remind our CEO to shut down our 100% European company, because apparently he didn't received the message yet.
Total impact up to this point was maybe man-month to make sure we're GDPR compliant, while Apple opening up NFC may bring at least a few nice contracts (from local players no less).
I'm not a heavy app user, but I do think there things I want from Apple's app store process, such as privacy, security, and safety reviews.
I can't comment on the quality of these reviews themselves, but I'm assuming some people and some automation are providing some benefit and I know that work costs money.
Does it become the wild west when you install apps outside of the app store? Am I taking extra risk here?
You are making it sound as if Epic can't provide privacy, security and safety reviews, considering they already have an established PC store competing with Steam. I think we are gonna be okay.
It's not going to be the wild west, as your words make it out to be, but a healthier system than the oppressive and monopolistic mono culture that Apple clings on to for dear life.
As an asshole, but at least an honest one, I would do the same. So I expect that they are being an asshole rather than following the spirit of the law.
I’m skeptical that this will be a win for users. Most Gamers are upset when they have to use any launcher besides Steam and I don’t see how this will be any different. Android always had third party app stores, yet nobody uses them.
Well, this can have a price tag difference, and some consumers might care for that.
Apple insists on taking 30% of every purchase. If Epic can sell their products on their own store, that middle man money is out of the picture, and they can offer their apps for cheaper than you'd find them on the app store.
> Most Gamers are upset when they have to use any launcher besides Steam and I don’t see how this will be any different
I am one of those gamers, but if I see an Epic store sale, I might buy the game via the Epic store (I got like 7-8 titles for free already).
95% of the peasantry are illiterate and have no concept of newfangled ideas like elections or organized labour. Best let the feudal lord continue to call the shots, they're in power, so clearly this is the natural order of things. /s
Serious question. Does this open up EU iPhone customers to CrowdStrike-like security issues related to their phones if they use these new App Stores? Or at least reduce security and privacy of their devices by downloading less vetted apps? I am not pro either way yet I am just curious what the community thinks.
Apps still don't have system level access to anything, so no. iPhone apps can't automatically run in the background, run on boot or just access random data from random apps. If they can it'd be an exploit, and while the App Store gives you some extra safety in that they can scan for it / pull the app without updating iOS, now you actually need an up-to-date OS.
It's a small additional risk but really not that big at all compared to what you can do with Android sideloading or app installing on macOS/Windows, and not comparable at all to macOS kernel extensions or Windows drivers.
No, not at all. Security is an ongoing process of system design, nothing that the App Store can offer. iOS is designed with an aggressive sandboxing model with very strict permissions for accessing privacy-impacting APIs. The App Store, additionally, does include all sorts of scamware that was let through the screening process.
Apps on iOS are strictly user space. They cannot run at a kernel level, which was the issue with CloudStrike. An oversight in CloudStrike's software, which assumed a downloaded file would never be in a broken state, prevented the system from booting.
Technically, Microsoft requires approval for software that runs at the level of CloudStrike. So, clearly, a review process is not sufficient to prevent that issue either.
First part: Not at all. Apps can‘t deeply integrate into the system and it’s always through very tightly defined APIs.
Second part: Technically yes, practically no. Apps are still tightly bound by the system.
Theoretically there can be exploits out of the app sandbox that could be caught before an app is released on the app store. But once the vulnerability it will quickly be closed - and while it‘s not known it also won’t be caught by the app store‘s automatic checks anyway, so it could also be inside of app store released apps.
Yes, absolutely. Part of the reason I’m very happy that people around me tend to use iPhones is that I have some base level confidence in what they’re installing. I don’t trust nearly anyone to make good decisions about what applications they are installing, given how much information cellphones have it’s untenable to have them installing random garbage because some website said so.
The headline is so funny. It’s their store. It’s like folks think I can go into a supermarket and sell my wares without paying rent and having some sort of agreement …
That’s where Apple screwed up imo. I don’t think they’ll ever get to gatekeeper / macOS level of openness. But they could have relaxed on the restrictions and listened to their devs (offered free trials, etc) and lowered the take from 30 for one time payments to something less but in return could keep the store front idea.
As long as they cling to the iPhone and the iPad as being appliances then the same sort of locked down approach of the consoles and their single vendor stores makes sense.
Regardless of your stance on whether or not Google specifically is a monopoly, this should be considered extremely concerning that Harris seems so friendly with someone representing a defendant her own justice department is prosecuting.
Not that I want to divert from the topic at hand—just agree there's good reason to be apprehensive about similar expectations being met here.
