Apple announces changes to iOS, Safari, and the App Store in the European Union

My take is that Apple are doing the maximum possible to protest their disagreement with consumer protection laws interfering with their ability to do whatever they want. Their announcement has the tone of a spoilt child, with an air of punishment to be applied to EU users and particularly developers. It’s bad faith compliance.

Rather than protecting the interests of users, they are more interested in obstructing the DMA and its attempt to promote competition and protect consumers from monopolistic practices.

My favorite part: "EU users will be confronted with a list of default browsers before they have the opportunity to understand the options available to them. The screen also interrupts EU users’ experience the first time they open Safari intending to navigate to a webpage."

I mean it's like saying that having a choice before being educated by one of the parties among the choices is a bad thing and it looks bad.

But this is the argument with the cookie banners again, isn't it? "Surely choice isn't a bad thing", except that everyone hates them and just clicks allow anyway. At least this regulation is only going to annoy people in the EU and not globally this time.

Do you really expect to see a browser choice dialog every time you open safari?

No, but a bad decision at this point is going to be tricky to resolve due to the type of user that might end up using it.

The only people who might be influenced by this popup are people who don't know that other browsers are an option. Are these the people that is makes sense to drop them into a random browser, are they going to be able to make a good choice from this popup do you think?

Is there a benefit to dropping some unsuspecting user into Opera, for example, and letting them deal with the myriad of incompatibility issues for the sake of an illusion of choice?

Is there a benefit to you, the expert user, to getting this popup when the first place you're going in Safari is the Chrome download page anyway?

Apple chose to comply that way. We're arguing over poor design right now because this is a user story for no one - that's Apple's fault. There are thousands of ways to comply with the DMA, and the proposed one here is nonsense; Android and Mac exist as proof that you can give people choice without sabotaging them.

Ostensibly, you're right; why give the uninformed masses an imperative browser decision? If Apple was willing to make it optional or put it behind a Developer Mode, they wouldn't be faced with such stark regulation. Blame whoever you want, but the writing has been on the walls for years - Apple sabotaged themselves if they weren't prepared for sideloading.

everyone hates them and just clicks allow anyway.

This is an overbroad generalization and false for me at least. I will always take the two seconds to disable non-necessary cookies, or just bail on the site if it doesn't have the option or isn't absolutely necessary.

Fine, almost everybody. If there was any way to verify though, I'd put money on the numbers of people irritated by cookie banners and geo-blocks for websites was enough to tip the Brexit vote. I think the EU needs to be very careful about how these regulations are viewed by normal people.

I think the EU needs to be very careful about how these regulations are viewed by normal people.

The EU doesn't decide how Apple complies with their regulation. If Apple wants to throw a temper tantrum and degrade the user experience, it is nobody's fault but theirs.

The wording of the whole press release is hilarious. The tone is so petulant and odd for such a large company haha.

Just shows how triggered their SET is by all this.

"Confronted" not presented. Lol the screen should also state in bold lettering "This freedom is forced on you by EU which we hate. You will pay for this, and it's THEIR fault, not ours. No hard feelings."

Fortunately, there are quite a few clauses in the original regulation[0], like 31-33, and some clauses in the 50s IIRC, that explicitly mention some of the coercive tactics Apple is employing.

Like leveraging other mandatory services provided by Apple to incur fees.

[0]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ%3AL%3...

While it will be nice to ship hobbyist apps through a third party channel, it will only be a matter of time until app users are bullied into installing third party stores. For the normal user it's less of a "choice" than it is for the technical user. The average user wants to play games on their phone and will submit to any breaches of privacy in order to do so. These average users are the parents, siblings, and children of most technical users. The average app is spyware even on the App Store and I only see it getting worse with these loosened restrictions.

That said the content on the App Store is already pretty bad privacy-wise, this is more of a money issue and whether Apple deserves to get paid for their role as an app channel.

> it will only be a matter of time until app users are bullied into installing third party stores

This is a silly meme. On Android, which allows third-party stores, nobody is being bullied into installing any of them.

And yet enough people do it to the point that Android makes up more than 50% of all infected devices by virtue of Trojanized banking apps and the like being distributed via third party stores.

Android has 72% marketshare so even your made up stat would suggest it is safer than iOS

The only way to play Fortnite on Android is by installing the Epic Games app directly from their website. That’s many millions of users who’ve already had to install a third party store to play a popular game.

fwiw Amazon tried doing that (and maybe they're still trying?)

Android users from sanctioned countries are very much bullied into installing third-party appstores to install bank apps and the like.

Why is it "user choice" when someone rants against using a certain store or streaming service, but "bullying" when a developer chooses to host their apps somewhere other than [majority mindshare holder]?

It goes both ways. Someone can choose to host an app I value outside of the App store, and I can choose to ignore it. The app may get along fine enough without me, or it will relent and come back. That's just business. And if it's hosted on an alternative store because Apple kicked it off the App Store, that's on Apple.

It doesn't exactly go both ways, if Meta puts WhatsApp into their own app store, as a european user you might be very well bullied into allowing even more Meta spyware onto your device.

If a developer has such a significant user base you don't have a choice. Same with banking apps: If there are no alternatives that allow you to not use a platform (in this case iOS/Android) you are bullied as you have no choice to not do business with them.

Most of my EU friends would absolutely never install a separate Meta store to install WhatsApp, they'd just switch to Signal or Telegram, which lots and lots of people have been doing of late.

I mean, there's nothing stopping Zucc from doing this right now on android, yet they don't.

Request

Backport to iOS 15.

Apply generally the same rules for computer manufacturers. Pre-Installing Windows and forcing them to use it? No.

Lenovo allows me to order a system without any operating-system or Linux. And I can spend the saved money to GNOME or other people in need. That should be standard, default shall be operating-system.

And for Google. Visiting Google or YouTube and they try lure me to install Chrome. Android must ask if I want a better browser. Like Safari or Firefox. I appreciate a port of WebKitGtk (needs more developers).

Actually I would appreciate if the EU generally stops thinking in “free markets” and thinks instead of “free citizens”. If I own something it is mine.

But you bought it and knew what you would get upfront? You're free to not buy it. I never understood this entitlement. "I want device XYZ to behave like I want." Why buy apple in the first place? There are enough devices that cater to this very preference.

The only argument the EU can make is monopolies. And mac is not even near being a monopoly. Not even the i devices are.

You understand this is true for Apple too, right? They are free to leave the EU market if they don't like the EU rules.

Absolutely.

Your argument is that the people know that they are only two harmful smartphone systems from Google and Apple. And therefore it is the people’s fault to choose one?

    > Choose between death or ban! 
    < Ban?
    > Okay. Death through ban.

People have the right to modify, repair or maintain their property - within boundaries of law (e.g. you can use tires of your choice on your bicycle - but you cannot remove the belts in a car and drive on public roads).

In the past we enforced regularly features for devices. Interoperability should be a general requirement! Exceptions apply only if the manufacturer is able to explain why it isn’t possible or a new standard is required.

Back to normal.

PS: Your argument is neglecting lacking knowledge by 90% of customers and the mass-effect by this group. People do not understand software.

People have the right to modify, repair or maintain their property

In all honesty, I think this just isn't true with networked software anymore and I don't think we can solve this properly. It's not a simple lawnmower but exists in a bigger context. As Apple/Google etc. need to spend more work and money afterwards, it's not as simple as "it's muh property" but get's a lot more complex.

Your argument is neglecting lacking knowledge by 90% of customers and the mass-effect by this group.

That was an argument in 2006, I don't think it is 18 years later. And in all honesty, I don't believe people care. Otherwise they wouldn't buy Alexa or stupid adware in the form of TVs. They know, they just don't care.

As a Thinkpad fan (from Germany, maybe this makes a difference) I have to say that Lenovo usually only let's you buy Laptops without Windows for very crappy machines or if you're a student via Lenovo campus program.

The X13 Gen3 or Gen 4 (both AMD or Intel) are high-end devices. Both allow to ship without operating-system.

// edit

Double checked that. You can also select the OS for the T14s or T14-Intel. The decision of Lenovo for options are sometimes weird. It looks like that ThinkPads preferred for professional usage likely ship without operating-system. Maybe you look for already built-devices only? Look for the options upon CTOs devices - which makes sense - their built upon request.

Sometimes you can also select Fedora or Ubuntu but I think the majority of Linux user prefer to setup the system itself.

This malicious compliance shows the problem with the regulator superpower fantasy when it comes to software and platforms.

With hardware, the EU can demand adherence to standards like USB-C.

With software and terms of service, the EU can ban specific things, and Apple can come up with other terms to keep control of the platform.

With hardware, the EU can demand adherence to standards like USB-C.

Not picking sides here, just curious; if a better standard comes along, do we all have to wait for the EU to turn it into a law before companies can change to that new standard?

You can install whatever plug you want on your device - as long as it also has a USB-C plug on it too.

So if you come up with a truly revolutionary new plug and the market at large adopts it, then there's no reason the EU won't approve of it being the new standard.

The point of the standards is to ensure consumers aren't being fucked over by proprietary plugs that are incompatible with all the other devices out there, like what Apple was doing, not to enforce some arbitrary limit that says USB-C is the final form factor plug we'll ever be using

Governments have enforced standards for a long time. There's always that tradeoff. Standardization has benefits, and at some point the government says that a standard is "good enough".

On the other hand, antitrust lawsuits have been extremely effective historically at changing company behaviour. See MSFT.

Microsoft is an american company, which is why a lawsuit by the american government with the threat of breaking it up worked.

The EU can't break up Apple. Apple is calling the bluff here.

Regardless of these changes or the pricing, I expect there will be very very few third party app stores created.

For a simple reason: Most iOS users don't want it and won't use them. If your app isn't available in the main store, the vast majority of users simply won't install it.

The exceptions would be perhaps extremely popular games like FortNite / Epic.

The most interesting what-if question to me: will Facebook go for it and move their apps into a Meta store and then try to push people over? They lost enough money from the App Store privacy policy changes that I’m sure they have thought about it very carefully.

I haven’t checked, but I’m certain that even if you host on a third party store you still have to follow the privacy policy of apps on the device. Having a third-party store just means you can sell apps with different terms than the AppStore.

Yes, I don’t think it’d change the OS rules for things like having to ask to use the microphone or badging when location services are in use, but I was thinking about things like the disclosures about data resale and tracking which cost Meta a fair amount of money.

This again is an interesting angle for the EU context where things like the GDPR are protecting user privacy. Would Meta be aggressive there, or simply bide their time trying to get other governments to mandate the same platform openness for devices but without the GDPR?

Are there any decent alternatives to iOS that won't force me into the cold embrace of Google or some huge Chinese corporation?

"Are there any decent alternatives to the alternatives?"

Basically that, yes. Thanks for refactoring my question.

Check out Sailfish OS [1]. With the paid version you can also run Android apps. A good review of the os [2].

[1] https://sailfishos.org/

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbYPoiZh8wg

So to summarize: You can create your own app store, but Apple controls it, and it will cost you. You can create your own app store, but only you can publish to it. You can use your own payment method, but Apple must be allowed to collect data and a large fee from every payment. You can distribute apps that Apple approved in your app store, but you have to give Apple the data and pay per install.

Not even Google is close to that amount of data collection and greed...

You can always just not get an iPhone. But in the EU, they'll regulate the direction you can wipe your ass.

TBH they should really mandate bidets.

Not even Google is close to that amount of data collection and greed...

Yet Apple is the one claiming to be protecting your privacy... At least Google is somewhat honest

Ok apple fanboys. Down-vote all you want if you want to ignore the truth.

Do these changes apply only within the geographical borders of the EU, or do they apply to EU citizens everywhere? EU data protection laws, if I'm not mistaken, apply to all EU citizens, so I'd imagine that these do too. If that's the case, I wonder how Apple plans to selectively enable access based on citizenship.

These regulations usually apply for users located in the EU, regardless of citizenship.

That's interesting. They will definitely find the minimum amount of users to enable this for.

I wish I was European, or I could move there, but the most likely route would probably be committing some crime in the states and then seeking asylum unfortunately

Does that work without death penalty being on the table?

You could just immigrate and be an expat. Lots of folks do it.

Am I crazy, or does this mean the possibility of actually having WebXR on Apple devices in the not-so-distant future (without relying on Mozzila's outdated WebXR Viewer app)?

AVP will have a version of Safari with WebXR support behind a flag. It will be interesting to see what happens to anyone who runs a service like that and if/how Apple will come out for their pound of flesh. At this point I am surprised they don't charge telcos for the privilege of offering phone services to what Apple seems to consider a wholly owned and exclusive customer base.

Possibly stupid question, but if I install an "alternative app store", approved by Apple, can i not just use that store to install yet another app store (assuming there would be one) that isn't approved by apple and doesn't care about their restrictions (and doesn't pay apple anything?)

They require apps to be notarised, so my guess is that this app store from another store would not be, and as such, would not execute on the iPhone.

This comment is a needle in a haystack!

took me 9 minutes to get here

I recently visited China, and ended up buying my first iPhone (SE) to go there. The Google/Android situation their is awful. All the Chinese phones have shitty third party app stores, and you can't even install / update your apps without using an international sim or VPN on your international android phone. App store works just fine (filtered but fine).

Isn't this change going to allow China to roll out a shitty knock-off app store and make the iPhone experience just as horrible as Android over there? :(

And if this lets us run real Chrome on iOS, there goes any need for cross-browser testing for smaller websites (and Google themselves). This would make Firefox even less tested and give Google all the power.

Not an iPhone/iOS user myself, but I think this is bad news.

Every android phone maker in China has to curate its own app store, not because it is fun, but google decided to play hard ball. Not saying it's google's fault.

Can EU users opt-out from all that stuff?

Yes, but they have to opt out of the EU first

Are they going to explain why this is only coming to the very latest version of iOS? They still operate the same appstore on devices that can't run that iOS version. Devices which still even get security updates occasionally.

I suspect that the USB-C law, the DMA only requires new releases to comply. The iPhone SE, for instance, didn’t need to comply with the USB-C mandate as its an existing product.

Alright, let's break it down. Apple's new rules are like when you finally get the freedom to eat ice cream for breakfast, but then realize you have to buy the ice cream yourself. Everyone was excited about alternative marketplaces, but now it's like, 'Surprise! There's a cost attached.' It's a classic 'be careful what you wish for' scenario. You wanted more options? Great, but now you've got to deal with the real world where things aren't always as free and easy as they seem. It's like discovering Santa isn't real all over again. Welcome to the grown-up table, alternative marketplaces.

It's more like you get to eat ice cream for breakfast, but in addition to having to buy the ice cream yourself, you still have to pay the waffle house down the street a fee whenever you get a new flavor of ice cream.

Wording of press release seems more like anti-regulation propaganda, and fear mongering.

Look past it all and will see it’s just a desperate attempt to hold on to their profits in wake of the App Store exodus.

As someone with a Vision Pro preorder and a developer account, this stuff is really souring me on taking the device seriously as a development platform.

I abandoned iOS development for the web in the 2010s because app review roulette made it too unreliable and stressful to build software on iOS. I had a few semi-successful apps, but it was simply not worth dealing with Apple's opaque review process and restrictive rules to access a limited userbase with bad unit economics. I could make more money building the same software elsewhere with fewer headaches.

I'm very excited to play with new interaction modalities on the Vision Pro, and the device itself looks amazing, but all of this recent news from Apple is not making the Vision Pro seem like an attractive place to think about developing a serious business. It's a shame - I've been a diehard Mac fan for 20+ years, but feel increasingly concerned about their approach here. I hope they change tack.

It would be cool, if Apple extended this (or a similar new scheme) worldwide. Then it would be possible to rigorously throw out all garbage and badly implemented Apps from its own store, i.e. make it real shiny quality. Any rejected developer may then still publish their Apps in alternate ways.

Monopolist scum being monopolist scum, I really hope the ecj grow a backbone and remove apple from our lovely union

Why is this article timing out for me on Firefox and in South East Asia?

EDIT: It was the CloudFlare DNS issue. NVM.

Hey I’m confused, why does everyone hate Apple now? Did I miss a memo? I like their computers and phones. I’m not an iOS developer. Do I still need to get on this band wagon?

Just imagine Microsoft charging $1 for every .exe installer clicked on in Windows 95.

Apple's total failure to build popular new products has forced it to defend/grow it's services revenue in unethical and anti-user ways. The only winners here are $aapl stock holders and at great cost to global progress and fairness.

Tim Cook of all people should sympathize with developers everywhere getting it in the ass without consent.

All I want for Christmas is…

A different browser engine on my iPad Pro (UK).

(Don’t pitch it as a go between from iPhone and Mac, while giving it a essentially a mobile browser engine)

Providing hardware and gatekeeping installs with fees is double dipping. Users want your hardware because of the cool software that runs on it. If you depend on 3rd parties to make attractive software don't harm the developers!

I think that providing hardware as well as gatekeeping installs with fees is double dipping. Users want to use your hardware because of the great software that runs on it. Don't bleed your developers.

Everybody in this comment section that has bought an Apple device is complicit in this bullshit. Every single person.

This is just such a sad state of affairs. In the end nobody wins and everyone loses - apple and developers.

Now Apple needs to provide the APIs for alternative markets which is a waste of time as well as making more vulnerability vectors and potentially confusing users. And app developers who decided for whatever reason to use their own distribution channel would still have to pay apple on every purchase.

What is the point of this change?

i.e. they will keep two product versions around in order to keep screwing the people outside the EU.

€0.50 for each first annual install per year is extremely expensive for many applications to handle. Especially if people just do installs to check and remove.

We had this discussion with Unity already.

Could be ok for fortnite though, epic should be pretty happy.

Also, who needs apple pay, Poland uses blik payments everywhere and it is just fine (and you have to autorise each payment with an alert from your bank app).

Next morning Facebook removes its app from Apple Store and directs users to sideload the app, because it needs those sweet permissions that were denied before.

Apps outside official app store may force you to enable permissions it does not really need, refusing to work without it. Apps in official store should work with the permissions approved by the store. The “should” is enforced by the store.

So not really open. Still need Apple’s permission and pay their tax to run something on a device you purchased for ~$1000.

...it seems DHH is Chuck Norris class badass?

He rants one day, few months later EU creates policy and Apple conforms. Nice reality bending powers.

For users, the changes include new controls and disclosures, and expanded protections to reduce privacy and security risks the DMA creates

Wait a minute, did the EU tried enforcing key escrow or something?

The new options for processing payments and downloading apps on iOS open new avenues for malware, fraud and scams, illicit and harmful content, and other privacy and security threats.

Ah, I see. Apple gate keeps everything for our own good. Nothing to do with money. Nothing at all…

Now I have a relative that for some reason always gets their computer full of malware. Had to reset their Android phone last week, presumably for this very reason. Nobody has any idea how that stuff gets in, but with him, it always does. We started to jokingly accuse him of getting to shady web sites, but he won’t admit to anything. Anyone knows someone like him, and how they might be helped?

Besides locking his computer like we would a child, that is.

I like the aggression. This is how Apple has how always worked. Difference is these days you don't have the iconoclast high vis leader who's announcing these policies and a rationale. Just have Apple -- the machine -- doing it, same as it's ever done.

If Steve Jobs was still around there might be a PR blitz with some YouTube videos of him doing a very persuasive ad about why the EU is wrong. And why Apple is right. Hahaha! :)

There is no topic more popular on HN than European regulations. Thats a pretty sad state of affairs if you think about it. Personally I'd be interested in blocking every thread like this. Though I don't think these regulations will survive because the EU won't survive. Its like discussing Soviet law. Its totally pointless on a tech blog.

Okay, so Apple's doing a bit of the ol' switcheroo with the rules, and the EU is like that strict teacher who sees everything. It's like when you were in school and thought you could sneak a text under the desk, but the teacher had eyes like a hawk. Now, Apple's trying to be sneaky and the EU's like, 'I don't think so, buddy.' It's all legal jargon and big words, but basically, it's a game of cat and mouse, except the mouse is a tech giant and the cat's got a whole continent backing it up. Gonna need more than cheese to get out of this one, Apple.

My take? This whole situation is like a game of 4D chess where everyone's trying to be the smartest in the room. Apple's playing the long game, the EU's laying down the law, and the rest of us are just here munching popcorn, watching the drama unfold. It's like, "Oh, you're gonna charge for that? Cool, cool, cool, but remember, there's always a bigger fish." And let's not forget, in the end, it's usually us, the consumers, who end up footing the bill, one way or another. So grab your popcorn, folks, and let's see how this corporate soap opera plays out!

It seems good intended EU regulations on the tech sector tend to follow the cookie modal path when implemented.

I’m curious how iOS 17.4 may affect side loading currently.

“ These safeguards will be in place when users download iOS 17.4 or later, beginning in March, and include:

Notarization for iOS apps — a baseline review that applies to all apps, regardless of their distribution channel, focused on platform integrity and protecting users. Notarization involves a combination of automated checks and human review.

App installation sheets — that use information from the Notarization process to provide at-a-glance descriptions of apps and their functionality before download, including the developer, screenshots, and other essential information.

Authorization for marketplace developers — to ensure marketplace developers commit to ongoing requirements that help protect users and developers. Additional malware protections — that prevent iOS apps from launching if they’re found to contain malware after being installed to a user’s device.”

Whoever was in charge of the language for this did a great job. I know some may disagree, but if I were Apple that’s exactly how I would word this announcement.

Interesting that they’ve attributed a quote to Phil Schiller!

Rolling out the big guns!

I’m guessing this has significantly rattled Apple’s cage.

“The changes we’re announcing today comply with the Digital Markets Act’s requirements in the European Union, while helping to protect EU users from the unavoidable increased privacy and security threats this regulation brings. Our priority remains creating the best, most secure possible experience for our users in the EU and around the world,” said Phil Schiller, Apple Fellow.

Man that read was insane with all the "risk" "safeguard".

"Sssh, Apple will take care of you. We know what's best for you, don't leave the house it's safer inside. Don't see your friends when I'm not there, I need to keep you safe, you know how you get"

Christ, Apple's literally turning into an abusive partner.

The EU has a haphazard record on technical regulation, but their requirement for alternative app stores is decent IMO.

Apple and Google have a chequered history of cherry-picking which social networking apps are allowed on their platform, based on content in those apps.

Some apps may, for cultural reasons, have the lion's share of toxic content, such is the nature of a free society where cultures are allowed to differ. But users should be free to decide what apps they consider "toxic," because peoples' definitions of "toxic" differ.

Free speech is a first amendment right because it's a fundamental pre-requisite of a free society.

Why should two corporates in California (subject to all the political biases that exist in that state) be gatekeepers of freedom of expression and association for the rest of the world?

If a corporate chooses what opinions and discussions are "appropriate" for us, then our thoughts and worldviews are subtly shaped by the whims of that corporate.

It wouldn't be so bad if there were multiple corporates who differentiated their approach, but unfortunately we've seen Big Tech acting in concert on certain issues (certain apps that were banned), and that should concern us all.

They may suppress rightwing views today, but we can't predict what Big Tech will deny us access to tomorrow. Tomorrow's target might be something we value (but is inconvenient for the Big Tech establishment)

If you're on the left-hand side of politics, try to imagine a world where two companies in Wyoming controlled your access to information and discussion. And an app was banned if it was seen to be too leftwing... too "risky" and "disruptive" to "public order?"

I understand Apple's arguments about the integrity of its ecosystem, and for what it's worth, I value Apple's vertically-integrated and curated approach. But I lost a lot of faith in Apple when they started cherry-picking social networks. Now I recognise that users need a side-channel so they can choose to sacrifice a degree of safety in order to retain access to free speech.

Reading Apple's announcement doesn't fill me with confidence though. "Authorization for marketplace developers — to ensure marketplace developers commit to ongoing requirements that help protect users and developers."

Inevitably, this means that if a developer dares to build a marketplace that hosts a free speech app, Apple can simply refuse to allow the marketplace to run on their phones.

Big Tech will not relinquish control without a fight.

If I wanted hellstew, I would switch to Android

Sure, there are some risks with this DMA : https://imgur.com/a/paJP1T7 ;-)

How do they collect the money from the external payment option and external app stores? How do they know how much those transactions are?

Apple should also offer the converse: App Store for non-Apple devices.

If I buy a product from company A, then want to use it to do business with company B, then what does company A have to do with it? Am I not the owner of my device?

So I want to release an open source software app that does a better job at tracking browser history. The frontend and backend are both open source. However, I want to charge money to use my backend if they don't wanna run own. Could I be impacted by this?

So I won't be able to install a non-WebKit browser on my device outside of the EU?

https://app.livestorm.co/revenuecat/apple-dma-2024?type=deta... < Live panel discussion about the whole mess between the RevenueCat folks and some other industry insiders

What makes me almost certain that the DMA Commission will not approve of most of the requirements is the following reporting requirement on the DMA compliance report[1] that Apple will be required to file with the regulator:

"n) where applicable, all actions taken to protect integrity, security or privacy (e.g., data access, data retention policies) pursuant to the relevant provisions in Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 and why these measures are strictly necessary and justified and there are no less restrictive means to achieve these goals"

As a bonus, just to really hammer it in:

"o) any type of market analysis or testing (in particular A/B testing), business user surveys or consumer surveys or end user consent rates that have been carried out to estimate the expected impact of the measure on the objectives of Regulation (EU) 2022/1925"

[1] https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/document/download/9...

There's a lot of talk about Apple trying to circumvent this, but there actually are some good things from this. For instance, Firefox on Mobile can now use the Gecko engine instead of WebKit! (I think it's still Gecko?)