frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

The Shadows Lurking in the Equations

https://gods.art/articles/equation_shadows.html
64•calebm•1h ago•11 comments

An eBPF Loophole: Using XDP for Egress Traffic

https://loopholelabs.io/blog/xdp-for-egress-traffic
82•loopholelabs•23h ago•25 comments

Radiant Computer

https://radiant.computer
48•beardicus•2h ago•22 comments

Carice TC2 – An fully analog electric car

https://www.caricecars.com/
17•RubenvanE•1h ago•12 comments

A P2P Vision for QUIC (2024)

https://seemann.io/posts/2024-10-26---p2p-quic/
15•mooreds•1h ago•8 comments

Mr TIFF

https://inventingthefuture.ghost.io/mr-tiff/
832•speckx•16h ago•113 comments

iOS 26.2 to allow third-party app stores in Japan ahead of regulatory deadline

https://www.macrumors.com/2025/11/05/ios-26-2-third-party-app-stores-japan/
146•tosh•2h ago•84 comments

SPy: An interpreter and compiler for a fast statically typed variant of Python

https://antocuni.eu/2025/10/29/inside-spy-part-1-motivations-and-goals/
147•og_kalu•5d ago•61 comments

Parsing Chemistry

https://re.factorcode.org/2025/10/parsing-chemistry.html
24•kencausey•1w ago•7 comments

Ask HN: My family business runs on a 1993-era text-based-UI (TUI). Anybody else?

26•urnicus•1h ago•6 comments

Learning from Failure to Tackle Hard Problems

https://blog.ml.cmu.edu/2025/10/27/learning-from-failure-to-tackle-extremely-hard-problems/
5•djoldman•5d ago•0 comments

Founder in Residence at Woz (San Francisco)

1•bcollins34•3h ago

RISC-V takes first step toward international ISO/IEC standardization

https://riscv.org/blog/risc-v-jtc1-pas-submitter/
205•jrepinc•6d ago•76 comments

UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

https://avherald.com/h?article=52f5748f&opt=0
237•jnsaff2•16h ago•206 comments

Hypothesis: Property-Based Testing for Python

https://hypothesis.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
173•lwhsiao•12h ago•99 comments

Removing XSLT for a more secure browser

https://developer.chrome.com/docs/web-platform/deprecating-xslt
50•justin-reeves•1h ago•44 comments

NY Smartphone Ban Has Made Lunch Loud Again

https://gothamist.com/news/ny-smartphone-ban-has-made-lunch-loud-again
52•hrldcpr•2h ago•22 comments

Bluetui – A TUI for managing Bluetooth on Linux

https://github.com/pythops/bluetui
217•birdculture•16h ago•76 comments

Kosmos: An AI Scientist for Autonomous Discovery

https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.02824
17•belter•1h ago•0 comments

Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

https://press.asus.com/news/press-releases/asus-proart-display-8k-pa32kcx-availability/
125•Roachma•1w ago•187 comments

Intervaltree with Rust Back End

https://github.com/Athe-kunal/intervaltree_rs
36•athekunal•3d ago•11 comments

Blue Prince (1989)

https://novalis.org/blog/2025-10-27-blue-prince-1989.html
19•luu•1w ago•14 comments

Gnome Mutter Now "Completely Drops the Whole X11 Back End"

https://www.phoronix.com/news/GNOME-Mutter-Drops-X11
15•throwaway7489•1h ago•1 comments

Apple’s Persona technology uses Gaussian splatting to create 3D facial scans

https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/apple-talks-to-me-about-vision-pro-personas-where-is-our-virt...
179•dmarcos•5d ago•82 comments

Optimism Associated with Exceptional Longevity

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1900712116
35•RickJWagner•2h ago•24 comments

I’m worried that they put co-pilot in Excel

https://simonwillison.net/2025/Nov/5/brenda/
239•isaacfrond•6h ago•166 comments

Michael Burry is back with two bets against Nvidia and Palantir

https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/05/business/nvidia-palantir-michael-burry-stock
48•jb1991•1h ago•43 comments

Grayskull: A tiny computer vision library in C for embedded systems, etc.

https://github.com/zserge/grayskull
145•gurjeet•17h ago•12 comments

Moving tables across PostgreSQL instances

https://ananthakumaran.in/2025/11/02/moving-tables-across-postgres-instances.html
45•ananthakumaran•3d ago•1 comments

Pg_lake: Postgres with Iceberg and data lake access

https://github.com/Snowflake-Labs/pg_lake
352•plaur782•23h ago•107 comments
Open in hackernews

iOS 26.2 to allow third-party app stores in Japan ahead of regulatory deadline

https://www.macrumors.com/2025/11/05/ios-26-2-third-party-app-stores-japan/
145•tosh•2h ago

Comments

hypeatei•2h ago
Is Apple really going to keep playing this game of gatekeeping until legislation forces them not to? I really don't understand how you could remain so stubborn as a company that a system of complex rules across regions is preferable to just making it open and getting with the times.

I've considered an iPhone due to the recent Google announcement w.r.t. code signing but it's still too walled off for me. They need to open up access to third party stores and third party browser engines.

EDIT: yes I understand that we live in a capitalist system that is maximizing profit. My argument is that long term they're going to lose this battle seeing as the EU and Japan have already forced them to play ball. There are two options: remain stagnant and collect app store rent as long as possible or learn to be competitive in this new environment.

misnome•2h ago
Presumably they did a cost/benefit analysis and think it is more profitable this way?
hypeatei•2h ago
I mean, sure, but it's most likely a myopic analysis trying to keep earnings looking good for next quarter. My personal feeling is that, after seeing the winds shifting, you would figure out how to operate in an open garden and start pivoting now rather than resisting it at every corner.
mdhb•1h ago
Only in a quarter to quarter sense. I’ll never give them another cent. I’ve watched large numbers of people go from fans to haters in the last five years especially. I also think at just a fundamental technical level their moat is quickly disappearing.
rckt•2h ago
They all will try to gatekeep as much as they can. Google's move made this pretty obvious. They don't need free market and open platform. This is something for some nerdy enthusiasts. Funny that all the new device that are being released lately, like Sidephone or Light Phone; they all do the same thing. And not only they lock you into their OSes, but they even restrict the software that you are allowed to use.
latexr•2h ago
> Is Apple really going to keep playing this game of gatekeeping until legislation forces them not to?

By this point it seems pretty clear that they will, at least while Tim Cook is in charge. Other higher ups, specifically Phil Schiller, knew this was a bad idea but were overruled.

https://www.macrumors.com/2025/02/25/apples-phil-schiller-co...

ndiddy•2h ago
The current system gives Apple a 30% cut of every transaction that happens on iOS. Did you really think they'd voluntarily give that up just to be nice?
cbg0•2h ago
Apple makes over $10B from App Store commissions in the US alone, why would they reduce their profits unless forced to do so?
latexr•2h ago
Because doing so would have generated goodwill, which would have lead to a stronger brand and more money in the long term. Instead, they shot themselves in the foot and put themselves in a situation where the launch of a new product (Vision Pro) was an embarrassing and utter failure with lacklustre support from third-parties.
lopis•1h ago
You don't need goodwill when you have captured the market.
latexr•1h ago
They haven’t captured every market (again, Vision Pro), and the ones they have they are losing power in.
arkitct•1h ago
It is a shame that people want to believe that companies are or will be good. Or that they should even be given "human" expectations. Companies are not people and should not be afforded being treated as such. A companies function, especially if it is a publically-traded company is to continuously provide greater return for investors, so say the majority of prospectus. What we the people, regardless of country, need to start doing is holding the company heads to account, perhaps if the threat of execution (is China right here?) could "make" the company/people good? Something needs to be done before everything we have and "are" as a human will be, is a subscription to life.
latexr•57m ago
> It is a shame that people want to believe that companies are or will be good. Or that they should even be given "human" expectations.

That’s not the argument at all. I don’t understand the point of your response, it has nothing to do with the points made in my comment. I’m not defending Apple, I’m doing the opposite.

TechRemarker•1h ago
Doubt they would have been considered “goodwill”. Investors would complain they are doing their fiscal responsibilities. Customers and companies would complain they didn’t do it soon enough and still didn’t do enough. And if people started having issues with their phones because of side loading they would not blame themselves they would blame Apple for allowing them to do so and potentially hurting the brand. Vision Pro as a test of hardware capabilities seems to be going as one would expect at the current price points. Once they release their first consumer focused glasses as an accessible price point, that will be the real test of the product category.
latexr•27m ago
> Doubt they would have been considered “goodwill”.

Perhaps you haven’t been following Apple for long? There was definitely a period, not that long ago, where they had a lot of goodwill from third-party developers, especially indies, and that has steadily been eroded under Tim Cook.

They also took stances that were (or appeared to be) principled, which again placed them at a high degree of trust and goodwill (deserved or not isn’t the point, they had it) when compared to competitors.

> And if people started having issues with their phones because of side loading

I’m not talking about or suggesting side loading at all. You’re making arguments which are responding to something, but that something isn’t anything I said.

> Vision Pro as a test of hardware capabilities seems to be going as one would expect at the current price points.

Vision Pro is not a “a test of hardware capabilities”. It’s not an SDK, it’s a product marketed and sold at regular people, it’s described by Apple as a product you can use for enterntainment and work, not an experiment. And it had essentially no adherence from companies and developers, there’s not even an official YouTube app, for a device where one of the major use cases is watching video.

Batman8675309•51m ago
Why would they want goodwill when they can run propaganda campaigns against this instead?
rs186•8m ago
Goodwill and for-profit companies are inherently incompatible things.
microtonal•1h ago
For app stores specifically, I don't think people would get apps from other App Stores. Alternative App Stores have been possible on Android, some manufacturers even include their own store (Samsung), but only a tiny subset of users installs apps from another app store or from outside the app store.

For me personally, it is mostly an escape hatch for developers and users. It will keep Apple honest, because if they really mess up the platform, people have the possibility to go elsewhere.

I think the bigger risk for Apple is allowing other payment options within apps that are distributed through the App Store (which I believe is now allowed in the EU among other places)? I think the app store is very sticky, but a lot of people would pick another payment option if is ~30% cheaper.

asimovfan•2h ago
Do you 'really not understand' that they only want to maximize profit?
SXX•2h ago
Not only want, but this is what they must do in interest of shareholders.
fundatus•2h ago
Yeah, the fragmentation that is caused by Apple's behaviour is insane.

You can set a different email client globally, but a different default Messages or Maps app? That only works in some regions. In-App payments? You can now basically do whatever you want in the US, in the EU you can opt-in into a different regime, in other regions it's staying the same but who knows for how long.

By fighting this everywhere they're basically losing control over the outcomes and will end up with lot's of different regulations everywhere. Instead of doing the sensible thing and opening up their platform before they're being forced to do so.

junaru•1h ago
> They need to open up access to third party stores and third party browser engines.

Here in EU they did allow third party stores and all we got were shovelware sites with subscriptions. It added even more friction an shadiness to acquiring apps.

We need to sop pretending iOS third party stores are anything like what we envisioned them to be. They are not f-droid or anything even half as good. Apple complies with this impotent law because the law changes absolutely nothing for end user.

fukka42•1h ago
> Here in EU they did allow third party stores

Hardly. They did everything they could to make it completely pointless. Your apps still need to be blessed by apple and you still need to pay them. It's embarrassing the EU is allowing this sham.

junaru•1h ago
Exactly. The law achieved nothing yet its being championed overseas as 'move to the right direction' and 'progress'.
fukka42•1h ago
All it did was embolden Google to start locking down as well.
heavyset_go•1h ago
> Is Apple really going to keep playing this game of gatekeeping until legislation forces them not to?

Is Apple going to kill the golden goose unless it is literally forced to? Of course not.

Apple, together with Google, get a cut of 15% to 30% of all mobile app revenue. They have the entire market captured. They will only give that up when they're forced to.

the_gipsy•1h ago
Is Apple really going to leave all that money on the table until obligated? No.
gregoriol•1h ago
Tim Cook must go: he failed at preserving their gatekeeping, and failed at opening it in an honorable manner.
mjparrott•1h ago
There are end user benefits to apples approach too, due to better governance and control over what apps are available. Governments also have incentive to maximize their power and are not benevolent actors in this scheme.
TechRemarker•1h ago
On the other hand if long ago they backed down and lowered fees and allowed more control, aside from the potential security and privacy concerns that could negatively affect the brand, companies would have just then wanted more. As Epic has said they think they should have to pay nothing for all that Apple provides. So not saying all Apple’s choices and timing were right or best, but giving up previously wouldn’t have prevented all of this but rather just lowered the bar and making it easier for companies and countries to make it easier to lower it even further.
myko•1h ago
> As Epic has said they think they should have to pay nothing for all that Apple provides.

I agree with this assuming what Epic Games wants is to be able to distribute their software themselves without Apple being in the loop

isodev•1h ago
> aside from the potential security and privacy concerns

I make apps both as an indie and during my day job. The App Store review doesn’t do anything to protect the privacy or security of iPhone users. Most of the review is focused on ensuring Apple doesn’t get sued and that you as a developer don’t try to advertise something Apple doesn’t like. The whole idea that the App Store is safer is a marketing thing.

bzzzt•54m ago
Ok, what do you make of this then? https://support.apple.com/en-us/122712

While not perfect, they claim to do security checks and verify some privacy choices. So they do something at least.

As a consumer I can see value in Apple forcing itself in an arbiter role for app payments so they can step in when I have a conflict with an app developer.

isodev•1m ago
All this is rehashed common sense - what you as a seller of software probably will do anyway to appear legitimate. No part of the review process stops someone from circumventing any of those rules - all you need is for the app to behave during review.

Every technical safeguard is part of the operating system anyway, so that’s what’s really protecting you and it will still protect you when you install an app from another source. Just like computers have worked since forever.

eptcyka•1h ago
Even if alternative app stores are opened up, there are enough limitations that severely impede the device for me as is. You can't use a VPN and at the same time do service discovery on your local network, for instance. For some services, anyway.
yieldcrv•59m ago
Cigarette companies do this everywhere

And they’re just the most visible

Everything banned in the US is still offered as soon as you step across a border, every gross visual warning mandated in those countries is not implemented in the US

BenFranklin100•1h ago
I hate this. If I wanted a race-to-the-bottom malware ecosystem, I’d buy Android.

This helps the tens-of-thousands fart app developers and ultimately hurts quality developers making privacy sensitive apps for well-heeled customers who gladly sign up for fat subscriptions if the value is there.

gdulli•1h ago
The people who want to prostrate themselves for tech giant "security" paternalism can still use the first-party app store. The people who don't want to give up freedom for security should have the choice not to do so.
xandrius•1h ago
I see someone really gulped down that Apple kool-aid.

Your life is absolutely untouched by having other store options. And privacy is maintained by the granularity of the permissions, the manual review process is generally a joke and it changes like the weather.

bzzzt•49m ago
If your social network is only available on a store not respecting your privacy and it's normalized people install stuff from there it's a loss for you since you don't have the option for the app that's compliant with Apple's privacy rules. Either you give in to more privacy violations or you give up being able to speak to part of your social network easily.
postalrat•1h ago
Helping tens of thousands and developers sounds like a good trade.
mdhb•1h ago
Actual security / privacy person here. The iOS ecosystem is much much much worse than people currently think of it as. This is primarily due to adware SDKs and in-app browsers that Apple has done absolutely nothing to address.
bzzzt•53m ago
And it's still better than Android in that regard...
Batman8675309•47m ago
The average person is literally never encountering malware on either platform.
kmeisthax•5m ago
Don't worry, Google is making the opposite move to lock down Android, whereby now app developers have to get notarized and anyone who distributes apps Google doesn't like gets fucked.

Personally, every time I hear Apple fans talk about Android users "trying to turn their iPhone into Android because they bought the wrong device", I groan. Because over the last ten years, while Apple has more or less hasn't budged on their shitty security policy[0], Google has been stumbling head over heels trying to turn every Android into a shittier iPhone.

As for the "race to the bottom malware ecosystem", you don't need to sideload at all to get pwned on Android. That's enabled by Google themselves, because Google Play - what is supposed to be the vetted and secure place to obtain software - is absolutely chock full of scamware. If the app store is the "default", or only option, its business model doesn't actually punish the store for failing its users' trust.

In fact, while Google is demonstrably worse at every aspect running an app store, Apple's own store isn't much better. Sure, Apple can stringently review and deny app submissions from a new developer, but large established megacorporations get all sorts of special treatment on Apple devices. Think about how they made an example out of Tumblr, compared to how they manage Reddit, Twitter, or any Facebook-owned[1] app. Or how Apple blatantly violates their own ATT guidelines by not letting us turn off their own first-party tracking[2]. Or worse, how Roblox's core business model violates basically all the App Store rules and nobody at Apple seems to care, even though that app is basically a child predator's best friend. The iOS App Store is also a race-to-the-bottom malware ecosystem.

[0] To paraphrase, "Users can't be trusted not to fall for scams, and also they will rape developers, so we should have total control over their phones".

For the record, "rape developers" means "modify software in a way those developers don't like", which is "rape" in the same sense that your VCR is a home-invading rapist.

[1] It is always ethical to deadname corporations.

[2] In fact, this is so blatantly anti-competitive, the EU is mulling over - I shit ye not - forcing Apple to get rid of opt-in consent to level the playing field. Which itself sounds like a GDPR violation.

IgorPartola•1h ago
Apple is a hardware company with proprietary CPUs and such. They have such a moat that if they open sourced their entire OS stack today nobody would be able to do anything with it except by buying their hardware.

But the issue with the app stores is the app fees. Those must be lucrative enough to want to keep that gate for themselves.

microtonal•1h ago
They have such a moat that if they open sourced their entire OS stack today nobody would be able to do anything with it except by buying their hardware.

That doesn't make much sense, XNU and the layers above it are very portable, they went PowerPC -> x86 -> x86_64 -> ARM64 after all. They also supported multiple different GPUs in the Intel era.

If the entire OS stack was open sourced today, we would have forks running on standard Intel/AMD CPUs in a week. They wouldn't have the same optimized power management, etc. But I think it would have a good chance of wiping out desktop Linux within a brief period.

macOS/iOS are part of the moat.

bzzzt•1h ago
If the entire stack would be open sourced there would be ports, but would there be a market for macOS devices without the optimized power management and device integration Apple offers now?

I'm still hoping some other integrated software/hardware company will stand up and offer the same attention to detail as Apple did. Instead of that everybody's actively enshittifying their own products and complaining Apple is earning so much...

evilduck•43m ago
Companies have tried to sell Hackintoshes before. There was a market before Apple silicon. There is still some demand it's just nigh impossible to build a modern fully compatible system.

I doubt a knockoff MBP would happen initially but it would absolutely encroach on the Mac Mini.

ezst•13m ago
> wiping out desktop Linux

Doubt. I couldn't figure out how to do windows management under macOS to save my life. This is so needlessly obscure and inconsistent.

bzzzt•1h ago
According to the first Google result they had a revenue of 10 billion dollars in app store fees in 2024.
macNchz•1h ago
Services are super high margin (twice that of hardware), growing quickly year over year, and now make up a big fraction of Apple's overall revenue. Sadly, I think, the days of Apple having the incentives and motivations associated with being primarily a hardware company are well past us—we're at the stage where hardware and OS product decisions reflect a need to drive services revenue, rather than simply making something great that people want to buy.
madeofpalk•1h ago
App Store revenue is essentially infinite margin. Selling gambling games to children is essentially free money for them.
_aavaa_•57m ago
*skimming off the top from gambling games for children.

They don’t even have to put in the effort of making it.

betaby•10m ago
> gambling games to children

Essentially the same as giving alcohol to kids at home. That's the parents fault first and foremost.

Etheryte•1h ago
Services are the second largest revenue steam for Apple, after the iPhone. All other hardware they make is way further down. There's a relevant discussion at [0].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45764986

solarkraft•1h ago
Are there any regions in which they’re not allowed to enforce notarization? Since that effectively preserves their gatekeeper status. Even a lot of the App Store guidelines still apply to notarization.
zoobab•1h ago
Notarization means they still have a say on which app is allowed to run or not.

This goes against the spirit of the DMA, which was supposed to 'open up' 3rd party stores.

The European Commission does not seem to care atm that Apple is still the gatekeeper.

microtonal•1h ago
The European Commission does not seem to care atm that Apple is still the gatekeeper.

I think the European Commission is threading the needle, trying to find a path to uphold the DMA/DSA while not provoking another tariff war.

bzzzt•1h ago
I think they prefer to have Apple accountable for everything that happens on Apple devices too. You can't pressure Apple into removing an app when they have to give up the only option to enforce that.
ChocolateGod•59m ago
> I think the European Commission is threading the needle, trying to find a path to uphold the DMA/DSA while not provoking another tariff war.

The EC is also under a lot of internal pressure from member states to calm down on the regulation, as it's considered one reason why Europe is such a bad place to do a tech startup right now.

user_7832•27m ago
> The EC is also under a lot of internal pressure from member states to calm down on the regulation, as it's considered one reason why Europe is such a bad place to do a tech startup right now.

Turns out then using private data for ads (Google) and acting like a middleman (Apple) are apparently lucrative and worth money?

(This isn't a critique to you OP or your comment, but rather a commentary on the 21st century.)

r_singh•1h ago
The next decade looks like tech vs. governments everywhere. From the article, it seems Apple won’t roll this out worldwide unless forced.

As a user I like Apple’s App Store for security personally, but I wonder how multiple app stores turn out in other regions. I see the EU already allows alternative app marketplaces — has anyone used one and can share their experience?

isodev•1h ago
Apple complied but maliciously in the EU making it very difficult and very expensive to offer apps on alt stores. They also made sure to add scary warnings so one can never offer a normal onboarding flow.

> Apple’s App Store for security

The App Store doesn’t do anything to protect you in that sense. It’s easy to circumvent and these days it’s cheaper to just buy an iOS exploit than go through the trouble of making a shady app.

alpinisme•54m ago
> It’s easy to circumvent and these days it’s cheaper to just buy an iOS exploit than go through the trouble of making a shady app.

But why is that easier? And is it inevitably so or a result of the fact that the boundaries of the one place to install apps from is aggressively policed?

r_singh•54m ago
> The App Store doesn't do anything to product you in that sense. It's easy to circumvent...

Interesting, their marketing has customers believe otherwise, so I wouldn't have thought that as a noob in cybersecurity.

I've submitted an app to the iOS App Store in the past, and the process is tedious and doesn't seem superficial (unlike the Play Store process, which was completely autonomous at the time), so that's another reason why I wouldn't have thought it.

q3k•35m ago
The review doesn't guard against malicious code. You can slip through anything you want, just don't trigger the functionality during review and you're golden. People have been doing that for private framework calls since forever.

The protection is in the permission system and sandboxing, which is active regardless of the source of the code.

prophesi•4m ago
You only need to pass the app review once, then you're free to deploy over-the-air updates for as long as you'd like. Though you'd need to use a framework like React Native, Ionic, Flutter, etc which supports it. Essentially anything where you can change app code without making any changes to the underlying native code (as that would require going through the app review process again to publish those changes).
Ezhik•3m ago
Specifically from a HOBBYIST perspective, what bothers me about the App Store is not even the 30% thing, but just... the pain of it all. The rejection horror stories, the "Apple told me to change my app's entire model" stories, the "I can't put this little gadget specifically for me and my family on the App Store" problem, and so on and so on. There's really no home but the web for silly little things.
gruez•38m ago
>The App Store doesn’t do anything to protect you in that sense. It’s easy to circumvent and these days it’s cheaper to just buy an iOS exploit than go through the trouble of making a shady app.

Different threat models. If you're the mossad and want to go after someone in particular, yes the exploit is the way to go, but if you're running some run of the mill scam, you're certainly not going to spend 6+ figures on a ios 0day that'll get patched within days.

spike021•35m ago
> They also made sure to add scary warnings so one can never offer a normal onboarding flow.

is this any different from Macs also prompting the user when a downloaded binary is suspicious/not signed properly? or windows when installing it'd flash a screen about trusting what you're installing?

fundatus•12m ago
It was way worse. They basically made the first install attempt fail. Then they made you go to the Settings app (of course without telling you that you have to go there) to allow it. Then you had to try again to download, which then triggered the scary warnings that you had to accept. This has been changed now though due to EU pressure.
fundatus•15m ago
> Apple complied but maliciously in the EU making it very difficult and very expensive to offer apps on alt stores. They also made sure to add scary warnings so one can never offer a normal onboarding flow.

Even for web distribution in the EU (which they allowed some time ago) they require you to have had an Apple Developer account for at least 2 years and at least one App with more than 1m annunal downloads in the App Store.

So they're forcing you to have a very successful app in their own store before you can distribute yourself, basically making this impossible to actually use. It's such a blatant case of malicious compliance, it's insane.

pprg1996•1h ago
I hate the security argument when it comes to third party stores or apps. No one is putting a gun to your head to install these things. Imagine trying to apply the same logic to macbooks and not let them install from the web or homebrew.
tempodox•59m ago
There has to be a catch. Apple would never give in without malicious compliance to the hilt.
qqxufo•53m ago
Two separate levers determine how meaningful this is: distribution friction and runtime parity. Distribution friction = install prompts, default store, ability to deep-link to a store listing, auto-updates, and payment flows. Runtime parity = access to the same OS APIs/entitlements (push, background tasks, NFC, etc.) without extra fees.

If Apple keeps scary interstitials, disables auto-updates for non–App Store apps, or taxes critical entitlements, you get malicious compliance. If regulators require neutral prompts, update parity, and ban API tolls, alternative stores become viable—even if only for niches (thin-margin games, enterprise, open-source).

The metric to watch isn’t “are alt stores allowed,” but how many taps from web → install → update. If that gets close to App Store levels, behavior will follow. If not, it’s the EU story all over again.

nolok•27m ago
To go one step beyond, here a simple way to view it that doesn't trigger the usual "it's a one store per app bonanza issue" : would a steam store work and be properly usable ? I use steam because it's one major "app" store (though on desktop) that is very large, not based on specific ethics nor to a specific manufacturer nor OS developper
yupyupyups•46m ago
Here is a joke for you all. How do you keep a floor clean?

Tell MacRumors it's Tim Cook's boot.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ios-26-2-to-allow-third...

emchammer•34m ago
Tim Cook has shown everybody what he is good at. It’s not running a computer company. It’s time for him to be shown the door.

Can’t even scroll right in the text editor. Trillion-dollar company.

franczesko•17m ago
Jokes aside, I'm pretty sure they pay for buzz around the Web
ryandrake•22m ago
I don't really want multiple app stores all over my device. A world where if you want an application, you first need to install each developer's "store app" is a step backwards. Look at what happened on Windows. I can't just install Fortnite. No, I have to get the "Epic Games Store" and then use that to install and launch it. A lot of other games also have their own "launcher" now, too which is just a thinly veiled store that you have to launch before you run what you really want.

I just want to take the iOS equivalent of an EXE or APK, load it onto the phone, and be done with it. I don't want fucking stores all over the place.

fundatus•9m ago
This is technically possible in the EU (through web distribution[1] of Apps), but intentionally made impossible to actually use by Apple. They require the developer to have had an Apple Developer account for at least 2 years and at least one App with more than 1m annunal downloads in the App Store.

[1] https://developer.apple.com/support/web-distribution-eu/

rs186•22m ago
I remember the time when Macrumor comment section was full of opinions like "The EU is being unreasonable and that's why EU is so behind in tech" "Why not create your own operating system" blah blah.

How the table has turned.

betaby•12m ago
Still, 'Why not create your own operating system'?