this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
188 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37719 readers
47 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
188
Apple will require notarization for apps from third party app stores, and will disable updates for apps installed via third party app stores if staying outside EU (support.apple.com)
submitted 8 months ago by brie@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As far as I can tell this basically means that all apps must be approved by Apple to follow their "platform policies for security and privacy" even if publishing on a third party app store. They will also disable updating apps from third party app stores if you stay outside the EU for too long (even if you are a citizen of an EU country, with an Apple account set to the EU region).

The idea that preventing app updates is in line with their claims of protecting security is utterly absurd. "Never attibute to malice what can be explained with stupidity," but Apple isn't stupid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jramskov@feddit.dk 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)

I’m generally ok with them requiring basic security and privacy protections through the notarization.

[–] ferralcat@monyet.cc 21 points 8 months ago

Signing doesn't provide security of privacy protections. It just means you paid apple a fee.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They can ask users if they want that, I'm sure many of their users do. What they shouldn't do is force people to accept their version of "security and privacy".

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They don't force anyone; plenty of non-Apple devices out there to choose from.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It gets a bit more complicated than that when it comes to antitrust law.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Apple has less than 30% mobile maket share in the EU, antitrust laws usually kick in above 66%, and very rarely above 50%.

There are other laws being worked on to combat shrinkflation, and others to curb all the tricks of removing features after the sale, but they're not here yet, and it remains to be seen whether they'd apply.

[–] Jramskov@feddit.dk 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think that’s how to look at it. There’s clearly something less than optimal about having these huge gatekeepers (as I believe is the term used) and the EU is trying to limit their power.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Gatekeepers and the DMA, are not exactly antitrust laws; they are a series of regulations applied to entities providing a digital service to above roughly 10% of the EU population, no matter the market share, without provisions to break them up.

I guess... you could call them "antitrust light", sort of.

[–] Knuschberkeks@feddit.de 10 points 8 months ago

yes but I want the option to judge software myself. If I want software that has been looked over by Apple I can go to the Apple Appstore. If I want something that doesn't fit their requirements I want the option to go somewhere else.