Apple Pulls iPhone Torrent App From AltStore PAL in Europe (theverge.com)
- Reference: 0178913682
- News link: https://apple.slashdot.org/story/25/08/28/1125221/apple-pulls-iphone-torrent-app-from-altstore-pal-in-europe
- Source link: https://www.theverge.com/news/767344/apple-removes-itorrent-altstore-pal-ios-marketplace
> Apple has removed the iPhone torrenting client, iTorrent, [1]from AltStore PAL's alternative iOS marketplace in the EU, showing that it can still exert control over apps that aren't listed on the official App Store. iTorrent developer Daniil Vinogradov [2]told TorrentFreak that Apple has revoked his distribution rights to publish apps in any alternative iOS stores, so the issue isn't tied to AltStore PAL itself.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/news/767344/apple-removes-itorrent-altstore-pal-ios-marketplace
[2] https://torrentfreak.com/apple-revokes-eu-distribution-rights-for-torrent-client-developer-left-in-the-dark/
How? (Score:2)
For someone who doesn't develop apps for Apple devices, can someone explain how Apple can revoke an app from a third party store? Is this a revoking of developer license keys or something?
Re: (Score:3)
> Is this a revoking of developer license keys or something?
Yes, basically this is it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you develop for Android then you're going to learn how this very thing works real soon.
Re: (Score:2)
can't you develop for Android and sideload your apps freely without having to pay anything or get any "key" from Google?
Re: (Score:2)
Google just announced developers will need to get a verified account (and pay $25) for any app to install and run, even sideloaded. Comments already said this will enable Google to revoke permissions to anyone they don't like. [1]https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
[1] https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/08/25/1716213/google-to-require-identity-verification-for-all-android-app-developers-by-2027
Re: (Score:3)
> For someone who doesn't develop apps for Apple devices, can someone explain how Apple can revoke an app from a third party store? Is this a revoking of developer license keys or something?
Basically, you still need a developer certificate (and account) from Apple, because even though the developer might not release to Apple's AppStore, they still need to have their app notarized through Apple's notarization service in order for it to be installable on any device, regardless of the source "store" it's installed from. That gives Apple the usual powers it's always exerted on any iOS/macOS developer.
There's other ways to develop for Apple's devices, ("ad-hoc"), but those severely limit how you ca
Re: (Score:2)
Note: macOS is less restricted for distribution (for now ), but still requires dev account/notarization to avoid the B.S. scary warnings they put up during install when you don't go that route.
apple is just asking for being forced to allow sid (Score:2)
apple is just asking for being forced to allow side loading with.
NO FEES
NO notarization or the macos software that is an automated system that scans your software for malicious content, checks for code-signing issues, and returns the results to you quickly. (NO content checks)
Re: (Score:2)
A torrent app will put government will to the test. I have no doubt citizens will want this, but governments are bought and paid for by many corporate interests, and those interests dislike torrent apps, whether they're used for things that aren't yet owned, but especially for things that are.
This is exactly the sort of corporate tyranny (Score:2)
Is why I won't buy an iPhone or iPad
Re: (Score:2)
Windows wants into this club, soonest, just install that TPM and windows 11, i bet macos and windows lock down the same day.
More to the story (Score:2)
Revoking the developers keys suggests there is more to the story than just an app store removal. I doubt Apple is going to share details about the why they performed the revocation.
what a joke (Score:2)
You pay an arm and a leg for a computing device, and have to put up with this crap
Malicious Compliance (Score:2)
This is just Apple doing its usual malicious compliance thing, where it "allows" devs to do something, but only because it's required to by law, and then takes it away, without any real explanation given.
Malicious Defiance. (Score:2)
> This is just Apple doing its usual malicious compliance thing, where it "allows" devs to do something, but only because it's required to by law, and then takes it away, without any real explanation given.
If Apple is required by law to do something and then turns around and does not do or allow that something, that’s not what I or anyone else would call “compliance”.
Requiring no explanation is akin to telling a bank manager “girl math” is the reason they should ignore a negative bank balance.
Fine them $1M per day until they provide a legal explanation. Otherwise, call malicious defiance what it is; blatant corruption.
Re: (Score:2)
> Fine them $1M per day until they provide a legal explanation. Otherwise, call malicious defiance what it is; blatant corruption.
Agreed - any service provider that accepts money for a service but then locks customers out of said paid service without valid explanation deserves these types of fines (I'm looking at you, Google!)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's actions can never be malicious and when apparently contravening the law, it's because people don't realise that the law must and will bend around Apple's actions as the definers of the greatest good.
This is what Apple managers actually believe.