> "These changes resolve Apple’s disagreements with the Commission over business terms and alternative distribution."

[...]

> "The Core Technology Fee, a per-install fee for developers that achieve extraordinary scale, will be replaced by the Core Technology Commission, a simple 5 percent commission on digital transactions in apps distributed outside the App Store. The new terms also eliminate the initial acquisition fee and store services fee."

[...]

> "In order to keep EU users as safe as possible, Apple will continue to require every alternatively distributed app to go through Notarization — a baseline review focused on basic functionality and protection from serious threats."

This is bonkers, I can't believe the EU Commission agreed to it. The main issue that the DMA was about still remains: Apple retains ultimate control over app developers' dealings with users.

The status quo that the EU should have pushed for, and which Article 6(7) of the DMA requires, is one where a developer can distribute iOS apps to users without ever entering into any contractual relationship with Apple. The OS APIs that most apps use are already paid-for by the user when they buy the device. Apple wants to double-dip and charge developers for the value that the users already have by virtue of owning their iDevices with all the necessary iOS paraphernalia in them.

Of course, Xcode and the SDK overall aren't paid for by users, so Apple can charge devs for it, but so far there's no way to signal to Apple that you have opted out of using their SDK and have the fee waived. Not that it would be enough anyway, since even having to interact with Apple in any capacity to be an iOS dev is the main problem.

> The OS APIs that most apps use are already paid-for by the user when they buy the device.

That argument would assume no cost for upgrades.

I remember having to buy new operating systems.

That said, looking at the state of recent OS upgrades, I think I'd have been happy if the only changes over the last, oh, decade or so, had been purely security updates. But these too are not free.

> Apple wants to double-dip and charge developers for the value that the users already have by virtue of owning their iDevices with all the necessary iOS paraphernalia in them.

Yes, obviously they want to make as much money as possible, and this is at odds with consumer interests.

That said, I have the impression that for many users, the benefit is the app ecosystem, while for many developers the benefit is the users. Endless marketing cycles of new-shiny-API for one, and new-shiny-UI for the other.

That said, power-law distribution, so "the app ecosystem" is probably mostly Meta, Google, Amazon, as specific names, then becoming somewhat vague with "whatever work mandated of Slack or MS teams", "their bank", "three or four supermarkets", and "a taxi firm who may or may not be Uber".

The EU likes the power to delist apps by compelling two companies (Apple and Google) to do so.

Android is moving to the same, KYC (credit or debit card; no prepaid cards) with play store required for APK distribution

> In a statement, a Commission spokesperson welcomed Apple’s changes to its business terms, which it said “follow a close dialogue between the Commission and Apple”.

> “Following today’s announcement, the Commission will monitor Apple’s effective implementation of the new terms,” it added.

There's nothing on the commission webpage, all I could find is the above comments from a spokesperson which aren't hugely definitive.

I think we can take the mention of dialogue to mean the commission thinks the new rules are a step forward enough that wider civil society can have a look and maybe kick up a stink, and the absence of press release coordinated with Apple as evidence the procedure is still open

> I can't believe the EU Commission agreed to it.

This press release conspicuously lacks any suggestion that it did agree.

That feels like a crazy definition of Notarization there Apple.

Well I think this it at least improvement to the status quo

> there's no way to signal to Apple that you have opted out of using their SDK

How do you not use their SDK?

Maybe one of the commissioners tried Android?

> Apple retains ultimate control over app developers' dealings with users.

The app developers can offer their own line of devices on the market. Users are free to choose a different manufacturer. Apple doesn't hold anybody in chains, it is people and developers who are coming to them.

Or should people to restaurants and demand to be allowed to order food delivery from other places to their tables, and bring their own drinks? Honestly, I think that most hackers and EU bureaucrats think that it would be a splendid idea.