Epic Games Inc v Apple Inc

First, Apple does not follow the same rules they set for developers.

Second, Apple does not treat all developers equally. We have functionality we’re unable to offer to iOS users.

The same feature, including technical implementation mechanism, is available in Claude and Gemini. It’s unfair.

As someone from that region, this is probably a good idea for all parties, right now. I'm not fond of our current trajectory, and the outside pressure to change isn't sounding unreasonable.

Right now we have a relatively high confidence that as long as the devices are not jailbroken and are kept up to date they are relatively secure.

What this change means for people like me is that either there is some capability to detect whether third-party app stores are in use on a device and we will set a policy that disallows anyone using such things from accessing company data/services, or we have to lock out the devices altogether.

That has already happened on several occasions (Apple refusing notarisation, since you still need to be a member of their Developer Program thus subject to their ToS and all the crazy in it).

Hopefully, the next revision of EU's DMA and equivalent in other countries will close the loop hole.

Or maybe... John Ternus would wake up one day and decide to be a better human being and just fix this globally for everyone.

The nuance is the Online Safety Act 2021 does not have an "app distribution blocking notice" or "app blacklisting notice" or similar, therefore, I think the effect is Apple can't stop a Russian website distributing apps to Australian users who seek them out, but Apple can use a received "app removal notice" to then blacklist the relevant app on existing devices?

[1] https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2021A00076/latest/text

You should try submitting an app on the app store just to prove to yourself how not true this is. Even in the AI era. They do vet, but it's not as substantial as you think

m'okay bye.

Seriously, what are you trying to accomplish by saying this? Do you think you or app developers have any leverage with Apple? A corp that's the size of several countries?

We need choices and alternative options.

An Open Source / Free Software Only app store on iOS which only allowed reproducible builds would be so much better than the iOS app store for security.

I would trust that so much more, and I feel like anyone even marginally technically competent would too.

If Mozilla made its own app distribution platform for Firefox and Thunderbird, I'd also naturally trust that.

At this point, I do not trust apple at all. The iOS app store sells ads. If I search for my bank's name, a different bank comes up as the first result.

If you search 'Ledger Bitcoin Wallet' on the app store, someone who pays more for the ad slot can present you with a crypto stealer (which has happened in the past! the app store review didn't catch that obvious bullshit).

The app store's "due diligence" and "vetting" all went out the window as soon as they started selling the top search spot to the highest bidder.

However, the looming threat of that being possible, and Apple not being able to block it from happening, will hopefully prevent Apple from making the App Store experience worse than it needs to be, both from the user's perspective, and the publisher's perspective.

Chances of my aging parents installing an alt store and getting duped are slim to none.

AppStore is filled to the brim with scam apps. See https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/2026/9/9.html

You have a CHOICE now

The way this should work is that Apple can charge whatever they want for whatever they want but then nobody can be required to use them instead of a third party. So if they want to charge 30% to distribute your app then that's fine, but then you have the option of having someone else distribute your app to customers with iOS (or hosting it yourself), in which case Apple gets 0%.

At which point they might want to get e.g. 5% of something rather than 30% of nothing.

If the rules are good enough for Apple, they are good enough for everyone.

This might sound like a defence of Apple, and to a small extent it is. But actually, I’m being deadly serious. I think the world would be a better place if these rules applied to everyone.

“But poor Nintendo” rings as hollow to me as “but poor Apple” probably does to you.

Who do you suppose is the primary entity responsible for making it so that you haven't been able to do this on iOS using the variety of open source and proprietary third party development tools that people use on platforms like Linux and Windows?

Of course, this will never happen, it's Apple... they can't even spell competition let alone "libre".

If they want to charge for an SDK, they have to invest some money to make it feel that we're paying for something.

> 4. Subject to orders 12 and 13, the first respondent must not (including by procuring any act of any related corporation) prohibit, prevent or take any action (including by imposing a fee or condition) which is likely to hinder users of iOS devices from discovering, obtaining and updating iOS apps, including alternative app stores, via Alternative Distribution Channels, or from using iOS apps obtained in that way on iOS devices, or prohibit, prevent or take any action (including by imposing a fee or condition) which is likely to hinder app developers from distributing and updating such iOS apps to such users via Alternative Distribution Channels, including but not limited to: ..

Then it goes on to list all the ways Apple isn't allowed to quietly break 3rd party app stores - like, they can't make developers or users pay money to use them. They can't restrict which APIs are allowed to be used via 3rd party stores. They can't require that people who publish apps in the official store remove their apps from 3rd party stores. And so on.