Alternative app stores will arive on iOS - but there are substantial caveats

[HenrySalayne]

Summary

 

The EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA) will bring huge changes to iOS 17.4 - but only for European customers. These include alternative app stores, third party payments and a browser selection prompt to name a few.

Apple's news release focuses heavily on how this will negatively impact user experience.

 

Quotes

Quote

 

Changes to iOS

In the EU, Apple is making a number of changes to iOS to comply with the DMA. For developers, those changes include new options for distributing apps. The coming changes to iOS in the EU include:

• New options for distributing iOS apps from alternative app marketplaces — including new APIs and tools that enable developers to offer their iOS apps for download from alternative app marketplaces.

• New framework and APIs for creating alternative app marketplaces — enabling marketplace developers to install apps and manage updates on behalf of other developers from their dedicated marketplace app.

• New frameworks and APIs for alternative browser engines — enabling developers to use browser engines, other than WebKit, for browser apps and apps with in-app browsing experiences.

• Interoperability request form — where developers can submit additional requests for interoperability with iPhone and iOS hardware and software features.

Quote

Inevitably, the new options for developers’ EU apps create new risks to Apple users and their devices. Apple can’t eliminate those risks, but within the DMA’s constraints, the company will take steps to reduce them. These safeguards will be in place when users download iOS 17.4 or later, beginning in March, and include:

• 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. 

• 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.

• 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.

Quote

The new business terms for iOS apps in the EU have three elements:

• Reduced commission — 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.

• Payment processing fee — iOS apps on the App Store can use the App Store’s payment processing for an additional 3 percent fee. Developers can use a payment service provider within their app or link users to their website to process payments for no additional fee to Apple.

• Core Technology Fee — iOS apps distributed from the App Store and/or an alternative app marketplace will pay €0.50 for each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold.

 

My thoughts

Overall I like the direction this is moving in and this could turn iPhones into a more capable and flexible platform.

I'm very concerned about parts which seem to fall in the "malicious compliance" category. The notarization of all apps could be abused. The reported experiences with the Floatplane app do not fill me with confidence this will be a transparent and fast process. Even more concerning is the core technology fee. Any app developer with more than 1 million annual installs would have to pay at least $500,000 - apparently without accounting for the developers revenue of the app.

 

Sources

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-announces-changes-to-ios-safari-and-the-app-store-in-the-european-union/

https://www.xda-developers.com/apple-eu-dma-changes/

 

[Brooksie359]

I am a bit surprised that they lowered their rates as even if they do have competition I expect it would have a significant effect on their business as most people will still decide to use the apple store. I mean doesn't Google still take something similar to what Apple use to take even though there are plenty of alternative android app stores?

[Mark Kaine]

28 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Any app developer with more than 1 million annual installs would have to pay at least $500,000 - apparently without accounting for the developers revenue of the app.

im not sure i understand, but if i make an app for Apple products,  Apple gets exactly 0 cents, because im not using their storefront,  that IS the point of these laws lol...

[RejZoR]

8 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

im not sure i understand, but if i make an app for Apple products,  Apple gets exactly 0 cents, because im not using their storefront,  that IS the point of these laws lol...

If I understand wording right, it's if you offer it on Apple's App Store as well as on 3rd party stores and not if you entirely provide it on 3rd party stores only.

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

If I understand wording right, it's if you offer it on Apple's App Store as well as on 3rd party stores and not if you entirely provide it on 3rd party stores only.

It says and/or... https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-allow-downloads-outside-app-store-eu-with-new-fees-2024-01-25/

Quote

Starting in March, developers will be able to offer alternative app stores on iPhones and opt out of using Apple's in-app payment system, which charges commissions of up to 30%. However, developers will still have to submit apps to Apple for review for cybersecurity risks and obvious fraud, and Apple will charge a "core technology fee" to major app developers even if they do not use any of Apple's payment services.

 

I don't think this complies with the spirit of the law. You can't allow sideload but only if they pay you for it. This is already stupidly expensive but if this logic holds what's to stop them from charging you a billion for each sideload, effectively making it impossible? It doesn't work for open source apps that can't afford to pay these fees. Also a huge reason for sideloading is specifically to avoid Apple gatekeeping what you can or can't install on your device... it doesn't work if your app still has to be approved by them before you can install it. With this they can still decide which apps or app stores are even allowed on the device, regardless of the fee.

 

I don't give Tim Sweeney too much credit but at least he has some legal experience on the matter...:

Quote

Tim Sweeney, chief executive of "Fortnite" creator Epic Games, which pursued an antitrust case against Apple in the United States, criticized Apple's planned changes as "hot garbage" and said he does not believe the moves are legal under the DMA.

"Apple proposes that it can choose which stores are allowed to compete with their App Store," Sweeney said in a series of posts on social media platform X. "They could block Epic from launching the Epic Games Store and distributing 'Fortnite" through it, for example, or block Microsoft, Valve, Good Old Games, or new entrants."

[Senzelian]

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

The new business terms for iOS apps in the EU have three elements:

• Reduced commission — 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.

• Payment processing fee — iOS apps on the App Store can use the App Store’s payment processing for an additional 3 percent fee. Developers can use a payment service provider within their app or link users to their website to process payments for no additional fee to Apple.

• Core Technology Fee — iOS apps distributed from the App Store and/or an alternative app marketplace will pay €0.50 for each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold.

This seems to me like even more anti-competitive behavior that the EU will have to do something about.

[hishnash]

27 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

This seems to me like even more anti-competitive behavior that the EU will have to do something about.

No this move by apple seems to comply with the ruling rather well.  People projected all sorts of things they wanted onto this ruling but the ruling itself did not provide side loading etc that was just a proposed solution for it (and would itself not have been enough) the ruling was very clear that alternative app distortion platforms needed to be possible but it would be ok to limit that to light companies (not people wanted to distribute cracked/prirated apps etc). 

[bcredeur97]

EU only. Guess we 'muricans have to stick to the walled gardens

[TetraSky]

Yeah, saw this news as well... It's... Not good. Here's what a programmer (the guy who developed "Ruby on Rails") had to say about it :

Quote

(...) let’s take Meta as a good example. Their Instagram app alone is used by over 300 million people in Europe. Let’s just say for easy math there’s 250 million of those in the EU. In order to distribute Instagram on, say, a new Microsoft iOS App Store, Meta would have to pay Apple $11,277,174 PER MONTH(!!!) as a “Core Technology Fee”. That’s $135 MILLION DOLLARS per year. Just for the privilege of putting Instagram into a competing store. No fee if they stay in Apple’s App Store exclusively.

Holy shakedown, batman! That might be the most blatant extortion attempt ever committed to public policy by any technology company ever.

Source : 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/david-heinemeier-hansson-374b18221_apples-new-extortion-regime-to-keep-big-activity-7156432167722479616--iaT/

[Kisai]

9 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

My thoughts

Overall I like these changes and this might turn iPhones into a more capable and flexible platform.

I'm very concerned about parts which seem to fall in the "malicious compliance" category. The notarization of all apps could be abused.

 

Anyone not expecting malicious compliance from the get go, needs to wake up.

 

This was not like the USB-C kerfuffle, where Apple had nothing to gain by sticking to lightning. It was just an albatross around the iPhone experience's neck.

 

However the "Walled garden" on Apple devices was a net benefit to the customer, MOST customers. The people who whine-bitch-moan about it, are mostly people who don't use Apple devices, or have something to gain from sideloading.

 

Epic Games want's this, because they want to keep 100% of the revenue. So do companies like Netflix and Spotify. That's why they make you signup and pay with your card on their website and not let you do it on the app.

 

None of this benefits YOU.

 

[hishnash]

4 hours ago, TetraSky said:

Yeah, saw this news as well... It's... Not good. Here's what a programmer (the guy who developed "Ruby on Rails") had to say about it :

You only pay this fee for new installs the first time a user installs the app so the numbers he gave are incorrect as instagram is not growing that fast.

Also with the the apple App Store you can select what model you want, the higher rev-share (no per install fee) or the per install fee + lower rev share. 

 

[saltycaramel]

Microsoft veteran Steven Sinofsky: this is heartbreaking.

 

 

[saltycaramel]

Spotify CEO: well uhm actually we're gonna remain in the good old Apple AppStore

 

https://twitter.com/eldsjal/status/1750988499518362089?s=61&t=-_GGcNPipSftQRjxNk0fgg

 

(edit for clarity: read the full thread at the link above, he’s very not happy about the new terms and that’s why he’s staying on the old terms in the regular AppStore; whenever you see me display a tweet as link I mean to say “read the whole thread, just previewing the first post isn’t meaningful”)

 

According to pundits, podcast hosts and X/Mastodon hearsay every developer hates the AppStore and Apple's terms, and this has been true for years, and yet they're all there doing business..

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

Spotify CEO: well uhm actually we're gonna remain in the good old Apple AppStore

 

https://twitter.com/eldsjal/status/1750988499518362089?s=61&t=-_GGcNPipSftQRjxNk0fgg

 

According to pundits, podcast hosts and X/Mastodon hearsay every developer hates the AppStore and Apple's terms, and this has been true for years, and yet they're all there doing business..

Look at the right to repair parts when Apple shipped absurd equipment to repair apple devices.

 

Malicious compliance. They could have just engineered the equipment to be less of a pain in the ass.

 

There is no benefit to anyone not selling on the Apple store. Either put your app on the store and accept the fees, or take your app off the store and get next-to-no money because none of the customers are there.

 

Like here's the thing that pisses me off about the Epic store is the same thing that pisses me off about the Ubisoft and EA launchers. Here is this extra annoying piece of crap that has to be sitting on the device in order access my content. 

 

This is the same problem with having Netflix, Disney+, Amazon, Spotify, Apple Music, Crunchyroll etc and yet not having all those available as native apps on iOS devices.

 

Like this was one of the reasons why I canceled my Disney Movie Club subscription, because up to a point, you could redeem the codes on iTunes and Whatever-flavor-of-the-week-service-that-turns-into-Google. So I redeemed everything on iTunes, then one day, the Disney Movie Club codes stopped working, and their support said "use google"

 

No. **** that. You chose to stop allowing the codes to be redeemed on iTunes because it cost you more money. I don't want to split my movies between two stores any more than I want to split my games.

 

The problem isn't that multiple stores exist. The store is not the problem. The problem is that you make me purchase the damn media on every store if I want to keep things in the same store. Why would I pay for the disney movie club still if you won't let me redeem the codes on iTunes, yet the movies ARE on iTunes. I may as well just buy the one or two movies I want on iTunes and forgo the disney movie club entirely.

 

The EU DMA stuff isn't going to improve competition, it's just going to make purchasing digital things immensely more miserable. Buying on iTunes or Epic Games is not the same as going to Walmart and Costco. If you go to Walmart or Costco, you are buying exactly the same item. But when you buy software or media you can't play that media or software without the store existing. If that store dies, which has happened like a dozen times with redeeming codes not-on-iTunes, they migrate the videos, without your consent, to some other platform that is even worse than the last one.

 

iTunes has been around a very long time for music. It's basically in the position Steam is for games. Trying to claim it's a monopoly is just a flat out lie, because you can buy "the content" elsewhere, but you aren't getting the exact same thing if you buy it elsewhere. For all we know, buying the iTunes movie is 20mbit, and buying the Google Play one is 6mbit. We have no means of figuring this out because of DRM crap.

 

So Apple requiring that the application to be exactly the same on whatever store, is actually a GOOD move, because otherwise you're going to see neglect, like what happens when something is simultaneously put on Steam, and also Itch, GOG, or various other Japanese download stores. The canon ball being thrown here is at third party stores that the app or game would not pass Apple's content standards.  

[leadeater]

15 hours ago, TetraSky said:

Yeah, saw this news as well... It's... Not good. Here's what a programmer (the guy who developed "Ruby on Rails") had to say about it :

Source : 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/david-heinemeier-hansson-374b18221_apples-new-extortion-regime-to-keep-big-activity-7156432167722479616--iaT/

I'd be more sympathetic if it weren't Meta lol

 

10 hours ago, hishnash said:

You only pay this fee for new installs the first time a user installs the app so the numbers he gave are incorrect as instagram is not growing that fast.

 

Be very careful you actually understand the exact wording Apple is using, this can be exactly as bad as portrayed there depending on what Apple actually means.

 

Quote

 first annual install per year

Per year? Not per user.

 

With $135 million dollars involved I would not be making assumptions, I would be asking Apple for exact clarification and consulting contract law legal advice. Not a time to play around with "I think" with that kind of money.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

Spotify CEO: well uhm actually we're gonna remain in the good old Apple AppStore

 

https://twitter.com/eldsjal/status/1750988499518362089?s=61&t=-_GGcNPipSftQRjxNk0fgg

 

According to pundits, podcast hosts and X/Mastodon hearsay every developer hates the AppStore and Apple's terms, and this has been true for years, and yet they're all there doing business..

Did we read the same thing? Daniel Ek is the CEO of Spotify and his personal words in that Tweet are

 

Quote

While Apple has behaved badly for years, what they did yesterday represents a new low, even for them

 

Yes they are staying on the App Store, them staying isn't what you think it is or giving the messaging you want it to be. He is quite literally saying Apple is bad and this, what Apple has done is worse, but they have to stay because the offered new deal is worse than just using the App Store still.

 

If you want to celebrate a stab wound is better than two stab wounds that is what I would call "a choice".

 

Yes I am being facetious but please do not misrepresent the words and actions of others for your own benefit or ideology.

[saltycaramel]

51 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yes they are staying on the App Store

 

So that was accurate.

 

51 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yes I am being facetious

 

I was being semi-facetious as well.

 

Him complaining, kicking and screaming, but staying on the AppStore nonetheless is the joke. 

 

Another semi-facetious way to look at the situation

 

[Kisai]

4 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

 

Him complaining, kicking and screaming, but staying on the AppStore nonetheless is the joke. 

 

Another semi-facetious way to look at the situation

 

Well, they should have realized from the start that what they were asking for "alternate store to keep all the money for themselves, and burden Apple with plugging the security holes in the third party store" was not going to be the end result. 

 

The emperor has no clothes.

 

https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/

Quote

Alternative distribution on iOS in the EU

To reflect the DMA’s changes, users in the EU can install apps from alternative app marketplaces in iOS 17.4 and later. Users will be able to download an alternative marketplace app from the marketplace developer’s website. Developers can access these distribution options in App Store Connect after agreeing to relevant business terms for apps in the EU via developer.apple.com.

 

If not properly managed, alternative distribution poses increased privacy, safety, and security risks for users and developers. This includes risks from installing software from unknown developers that are not subject to the Apple Developer Program requirements, installing software that compromises system integrity with malware or other malicious code, the distribution of pirated software, exposure to illicit, objectionable, and harmful content due to lower content and moderation standards, and increased risks of scams, fraud, and abuse. Apple has less ability to address these risks, and to support and refund customers regarding these issues. Even with safeguards, many of these risks remain.

 

While we’ve built new capabilities to continue supporting iOS features that users depend on in their apps, it’s important to understand that some features may not work as expected for apps using alternative distribution. Features like Screen Time, parental controls, and Spotlight will continue to function and maintain Apple’s security, privacy, and safety standards. Features like restrictions on In-App Purchase in Screen Time and Family Purchase Sharing, universal purchase, as well as Ask to Buy are not supported because the App Store and its private and secure commerce system won’t be facilitating these purchases. Apple won’t be able to assist users with refunds, purchase history, subscription cancellations and management, violations of user data privacy, abuse, or fraud and manipulation, in addition to issues that make the user experience less intuitive. Developers, or the alternative app marketplace from which their app was installed, will be responsible for addressing such issues with customers.

 

[leadeater]

5 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

I was being semi-facetious as well.

 

7 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

Spotify CEO: well uhm actually we're gonna remain in the good old Apple AppStore

Unless someone bothers to go to the given link you are and as it reads heavily implying that Spotify is choosing to stay on App Store, willingly so. When in fact the actual situation is that they want out but the newly present option by Apple is worse than the current.

 

At no point ever would the CEO of Spotify use a term like "good old" in relation to the App Store. They clearly have grievances and this change does not address them.

 

5 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

So that was accurate.

Accuracy was never in question. It's your promoting how good the App Store is and saying such companies are happy with it when they are factually not happy with it. Choosing to conduct business on it for economic and financial gain doesn't mean "happy" is involved. Can a business even be "happy"?

 

The core issue is you knowingly chose to mispresent his words and actions, just don't do that it's actually not "ok"

[HenrySalayne]

11 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

Microsoft veteran Steven Sinofsky: this is heartbreaking.

What's heartbreaking is the complete lack of facts and context.

 

Steven Sinofsky left Microsoft more than a decade ago and has no affiliation with Microsoft but is now a board member of a venture capital firm.

 

"We’re all less safe, secure, reliable, private, etc online." is an unfounded claim and nothing but populism aiming at a emotional response.

 

Apple uses the very same process to "notarize" apps for their very own app store right not. It is blunt hypocrisy to declare the very same review process "unsafe" when it is applied to a different app store.

[saltycaramel]

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

 

Unless someone bothers to go to the given link you are and as it reads heavily implying that Spotify is choosing to stay on App Store, willingly so. When in fact the actual situation is that they want out but the newly present option by Apple is worse than the current.

 

At no point ever would the CEO of Spotify use a term like "good old" in relation to the App Store. They clearly have grievances and this change does not address them.

 

Accuracy was never in question. It's your promoting how good the App Store is and saying such companies are happy with it when they are factually not happy with it. Choosing to conduct business on it for economic and financial gain doesn't mean "happy" is involved. Can a business even be "happy"?

 

The core issue is you knowingly chose to mispresent his words and actions, just don't do that it's actually not "ok"

 

This whole movie happened in your head.

 

I didn't misrepresent anything. I didn't use quotation marks.

I've now added a "Read the whole thread" warning to that post because apparently we now have to write under the assumption people won't click on external links and we have to bear the blame of people failing to read the whole linked source (makes so much sense!).

 

Show me where I implied they were "happy", unless the idiom "good old" INEVITABLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY implies the idea of "being happy about it" (English isn't my first language but I don't recall this to be case). And anyway that was ME speaking (= mockingly translating his corporate-speech tirade), without quotation marks.

[saltycaramel]

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

Steven Sinofsky left Microsoft more than a decade ago and has no affiliation with Microsoft but is now a board member of a venture capital firm.

Learn English, "veteran" definitely applies to his case and his career, even if he left MS a decade ago.

[HenrySalayne]

13 minutes ago, saltycaramel said:

Show me where I implied they were "happy", unless the idiom "good old" INEVITABLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY implies the idea of "being happy about it" (English isn't my first language but I don't recall this to be case). And anyway that was ME speaking (= mockingly translating his corporate-speech tirade), without quotation marks.

You wouldn't say "good old" referring to something which is not good, trustworthy and reliable.

"Our luxurious Mercedes broke down, so we have to use our good old Lada to drive to grandma." is something you would not say.

 

 

"Learn English, "veteran" definitely applies to his case and his career, even if he left MS a decade ago.", said kindergarden veteran @saltycaramel in a childish but unsurprising response to valid criticism.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

Show me where I implied they were "happy"

I literally already did.

 

But since you need it more clearly spelled out since you don't actually know what "good old" means or how to use it:

Quote

used before a noun to describe a familiar person or thing with affection or approval

 

2 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

INEVITABLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY implies the idea of "being happy about it"

It does.

 

Hence you misrepresenting the words, opinions and feelings of another person. That's simply not something we should be doing. There is no situation, context or any such other way the CEO of Spotify would associate or use the wordage "good old" and Apple App Store, because that can only mean the above definition thereby directly imply the CEO of Spotify is happy with and views Apple and their App Store positively which is the literal opposite of his opinion.

 

With this now new information read your own words again and tell yourself what this is saying

14 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

Spotify CEO: well uhm actually we're gonna remain in the good old Apple AppStore

 

 What is this actually saying? Because either what you intended to say and actually said are not matching or you did actually have a clue about this.

 

Neither is saying you intend for people to click on the link/read the full Tweet a good excuse because the situation here is the equivalent of reading a synopsis of a book or movie and it not actually describing it accurately at all. Don't you think it's a little bit problematic to set an expectation of what you're about to see and it actually not being that at all, or worse just taking your summary of it at face value and as written only to be now misinformed. 

 

P.S. The existence of "good" in the phrase should have been more than enough to know it is not in keeping with the actual opinion and statement.

[Fnige]

I love how it took until the second paragraph before apple's newsroom piece talked about malware