Comment by franga2000
8 months ago
Why can't they add a "this app is not verified by apple, we can't guarantee it's safe" popup? Making people jump through ridiculous hoops (like jailbreaking) would violate the DMA, but surely not a simple matter-of-fact warning? Windows does the same with unsigned apps, as do many version of Android.
Because they want to cripple alt stores and ignore the DMA for as long as they can to protect the 30% extortionate rate their position as the sole provider allows them to force on developers.
The deliberate crippling of third-party stores is a clear example of malicious compliance, something Apple is well known for when facing regulatory pressure.
It's neither new nor surprising. Think about it: the Netherlands' dating app payment pricing trick, South Korea's alternative billing law, the US anti-steering injunction in Epic v. Apple, the Core Technology Fee for the EU's DMA, their ridiculous 'right to repair' process, etc.
What’s striking is how often parts of the discussion around Apple completely ignore this known pattern, instead leaning on apologetic corporate narratives about safety, integrity, privacy, or the environment.
I am against most of the (current!) regulatory pressure on Apple, but regardless of whether one supports these regulations, we can talk honestly about this practices of malicious compliance or even corporate disobedience. They exists in the world regardless of our personal stance on regulation (or Apple).
Generally speaking: If a tech giant does something and there are several possible motives, one of which is profit or power consolidation, and the others are different things, it is always profit/power. They did not start out a giant after all.
Because people don't read and scammers would just teach people how to click through that.
It's tragic, the amount of babysitting supposed adults need...
(I'm not totally against it, the mythical grandma would otherwise lose all her savings because of an animated dancing monkey exe)
Protecting grandma from scams by blocking a torrent app on her phone is rich. Getting a phone call is how grandma is going to get scammed.
1 reply →
Unfortunately, said grandma isn't all that mythical. Scams of all kinds cost US citizens alone 158 billion dollars a year [1].
[1] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ftc-states-scams-cost-us-cons...
2 replies →
If you had told me many years ago end users would be opening powershell prompts and willingly copy pasting commands into them to infect themselves with infostealer malware, i wouldn't have believed you yet here we are with ClickFix
That's not "Apple is not allowed to", that's "they don't because they think it's ineffective".
No, they are literally prohibited from doing that - they tried and were shut down by the eu
Did anybody in this comment chain ever suggested otherwise?
2 replies →
I think that’s because of the last phrase in this provision in the DMA (article 13.4 in https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%...):
“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.”
Because Apple is not allowed to discourage the use of other distribution methods, and such a popup implies that an app provided via other channels is "less safe" than an app provided by Apple.
> Windows does the same with unsigned apps, as do many version of Android.
This is not the same. Windows states that they cannot verify the origin of the app because its not signed. In the current state Apple thoroughly verified the origin of the app, and the app is also signed.
Imagine a guy standing in front of your grocery store telling you that "the food in this store did not pass quality control of Walmart, so we can't guarantee that it's safe"
I still don't see the problem. Apple can say this app wasn't verified for safety by Apple because...it wasn't. I see an argument for them having to have a setting to disable the nag screen, but it's just stating a fact, just like Windows says "this app is not signed, you can't verify it comes from the correct publisher".
The walmart comparison makes no sense. A better comparison is the operator of a mall putting up a sign saying the products the stores in there sell are not verified by them. Often a store chain also owns malls, so Walmart saying "the things in the Walmart in the WalmartMall are ours and we vouch for their quality, but the other stores in the mall are independent and not vetted by Walmart.
It's only weird because it's so obvious nobody would think otherwise for a mall. But apparently people expect different for phones, which does make sense given Apple hasn't allowed third parties until now.
> I still don't see the problem. Apple can say this app wasn't verified for safety by Apple because...it wasn't.
In the context of this popup, Apple is not just the manufacturer of the device, it is the operator of a competing marketplace. The fact that they suddenly present themselves and state that they did NOT verify this app implies that the quality of the products offered in that market are somewhat inferior to what Apple themselves are offering. <-- This is anti-competitive behavior
> It's only weird because it's so obvious nobody would think otherwise for a mall.
No, it's weird because Walmart has no business telling customers of OTHER markets that THEY don't vouch for its quality.
In this Metaphor Walmart was already caught and ordered to stop hindering other players from competing on equal grounds, so naturally Walmart cannot put someone in front of every competing store to cast doubt on their offering.