Mike Peterson
A witness in the Apple v. Epic Games case says that the Cupertino tech giant would need to redesign its software and hardware to allow alternative app stores, though some are doubtful about the claim.
On Wednesday, Apple filed summaries of its expert witness reports, including a rebuttal from Dr. Daniel L. Rubinfeld that claims that Apple would need to "redesign its hardware and software ... to make the iPhone interoperable with alternative app stores and with apps that would not qualify under Apple's app-review guidelines."
That statement, shared on Twitter by FOSS Patents founder Florian Mueller, elicited a strong reaction from Epic Games founder Tim Sweeney.
That's baloney! iOS already has a mechanism for users to install apps from the web - the Apple Enterprise Program. Only contractual limitations prevent it from being used for consumer software distribution.https://t.co/TfUN3rqHTm
— Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) April 14, 2021
Mueller, for his part, added that he has previously used methods to install apps on iOS devices outside of the App Store. While the method works without requiring new hardware, he says that it is "made unnecessarily cumbersome by Apple," noting the company requires developers working with alternative app stores to store a list of unique device IDs (UDIDs) in an app itself.
"In order to find out one's UDID, one has to connect an iPhone or iPad to a MacBook with a USB cable and open the iTunes app; copy the UDID; paste it into a message to the developer; and the developer then has to actually integrate it into the app package. That's obviously not an option for large-scale distribution," Mueller wrote in a blog post.
The requirement to store UDIDs within an app is a policy guideline, which Apple could conceivably lift at any time. Apple also requires developers to build a store app and distribute it via TestFlight, which comes with other limitations.
Mueller also cast doubt on another statement in an Apple witness report provided by James Malackowski that claims the App Store itself is referenced in more than 250 U.S. patents and patent applications.
According to Mueller, that's "meaningless," since references to the App Store don't necessarily indicate that the marketplace is protected by patents.
The Epic Games v. Apple case is set to go to trial on May 3.
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
AppleInsider Staff
Chip Loder
Malcolm Owen
17 Comments
"In order to find out one's UDID, one has to connect an iPhone or iPad to a MacBook with a USB cable and open the iTunes app; copy the UDID; paste it into a message to the developer; and the developer then has to actually integrate it into the app package. That's obviously not an option for large-scale distribution," Mueller wrote in a blog post.
And yes, it prevents developers from directly distributing software, or opening up ‘alternate’ stores. And here again is the disingenuousness —not recognizing that established entities will reproduce their existing store dynamics. That means more malware, more copy-cat apps, more crap-ware, more marketing of questionable content to kids, and a race-to-the-bottom mentality that’s meant to undercut any (especially smaller) competitors until a stranglehold can be established. Game stores in particular are yet another cash grab by these companies — you’ve seen them do it over and over again, so it boggles the mind how these corporate parasites are now re-born as freedom fighters for the common person.
Oh, and one more thing, since Sweeney mentioned MDM distribution without naming it by name … ask him if it’s company policy to allow rank and file members to side-load apps or if it’s closed in order to protect against a corporate data breach. That will tell you all you need to know about how much of a liar he really is.
Well started. Sweeney is so full of himself and BS. I guess he thinks we aren’t smart enough to see through his giant stream of BS. Allowing him to get his way will actually make our phones less secure. No thanks. If I wanted that, I’d get an Android. I hope the judge sees through his crap screen too.
The sooner Epic gets this swindle thrown in their face the better. They simply want everyone workforce them To do what's best for them. I mean, if they just admit that it would be a good start. But pretending they are looking out for any greater value is what makes me most angry.
Imagine spending years of hard work inventing a hardware and software platform that changes and builds the world only to have a person who benefits from your blood, sweat and tears demand you engineer and change your products to fit his selfish narrative and profit off your hard work without giving a penny...