189

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 4 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

[-] shrugal@lemm.ee 7 points 4 months ago

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

[-] jarfil@beehaw.org 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

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 3 months ago

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 3 months ago* (last edited 3 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.