• fodor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    10 hours ago

    No no no. Brazil forced Apple to open it’s devices to third party options. Apple folded because it had no choice.

    (Of course it could leave Brazil, but then shareholders would sue the execs for basic incompetence or whatever, and win, of course.)

  • Xylight‮@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    Man i feel like if Apple opened up their systems, it would barely affect revenue, and would make android much less appealing. proper sideloading and full control over the OS would genuinely remove a lot of barriers for hardcore android users to move to ios.

  • DoctorPress@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    16 hours ago

    this shows apple is actually capable of supporting third party apps but decides to simply not. I still don’t get the hype around “You’ll own nothing and be happy”.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    18 hours ago

    will let

    This implies there was a choice. I’d’ve been glad for a “must let” headline.

    • balsoft@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      I think the actual headline should be “Apple forced to remove some illegal barriers to app installation for users in Brazil”.

      I am annoyed by the headline giving Apple the agency to let users use their device. Screw that, if someone buys a device they should be able to use it however they please, including installing their own OS and their own apps on top, and replacing any part of the hardware. Anything preventing that should be illegal.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Eh, or just buy an android. How dumb is this shit?

      I support it, don’t get me wrong… But like, guys, we solved this over a decade ago.

      • themurphy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        20 hours ago

        That’s where these rules are coming from. EU made the first move, and countries around the world follows.

        It’s like this with most laws. But the world depends on the first mover. Right now for everything on consumer protection, it’s the EU they look at.

      • hornedfiend@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        Yes and no. Apple managed to fuck that up using something called “notarized apps”. Guess how many apps you can sideload? I think you have more than enough fingers to do that easily.

      • e8CArkcAuLE@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        what possibility are you referring to? i only knew about the dev app workaround but you would have to reload the app every 7 days

  • richmondez@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Still got the onerous signing procedure that still makes devs pay a tithe to Apple like in other markets I assume?

  • NullPointerException@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I don’t really want side loading, I just want, as a foreign that frequently goes to Brazil, to be able to install apps from the Brazilian AppStore. I can’t use many apps because they’re not in my AppStore. It seems side loading is a possibility.

      • elgordino@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Yeah. It’s super annoying when visiting a foreign country and you want to install an app for a local transport provider. If they haven’t made their app available globally you just can’t install it.

        • buffing_lecturer@leminal.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Or for expats who buy a phone in their new country and cant access their apps anymore. Even worse as more businesses require the use of their app for certain things and don’t offer a web app.

      • NullPointerException@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I imagine they use this as a way of removing an app from a country that forbids it. But also, I think you, as a dev, pay more if you want your app in all AppStores. As other said, transport app, food delivery and other services are a pain to have if they’re not available in your country’s AppStore.

    • badgermurphy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Do you mean that you, personally do not have any use for side loading, or that you want side loading to not be an option?

    • w3dd1e@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Nope. It’s physical location, and in Europe, you have to verify your physical location every so-many days.

      I was going on vacation to Europe so I was going to try it, but my trip got cancelled.

  • tinsukE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    With a fine of ~$27 million, I think they’ll just pretend to be working on it, get the “good guys, complying with legislation and opening up the platform”, not do it (or at least, not in any satisfactory way), and pay the fine, if it gets applied.