[gbl08ma]

For those wondering, this is 100% an Apple-directed decision. The strings for a canary version of the client, at one point, blamed App Store rules directly: https://github.com/Discord-Datamining/Discord-Datamining/com...

I can only assume that it is also against Apple's rules to blame Apple for their draconian policies, and therefore they had to amend the text.

[barake]

You are correct, in my experience. Stating that Apple is mandating a change is grounds for rejection and maybe even a phone call.

[realusername]

That's not surprising, there's some clear anti-trust issues on the mobile app market

[flurdy]

They need a canary. A clear statement that says Apple did not mandate these changes. If it is missing we all know why...

[ClumsyPilot]

It is against Apple policies to tell the truth.. How is this not market manipulation? They are purposefully misleading the market on a grand scale.

The whole "you are free not to buy from someone else " doesn't work if you are being lied to. I believe that my rights as a consumer are being violated by this practice.

[g_p]

It is manipulation - Facebook were not allowed to disclose transparently the 30% Apple tax.

There's now enough antitrust cases against Apple that I'm hopeful they're going to lose in a few serious jurisdictions and be forced to change their ways.

The risk of this is already in their SEC filings, so they know it might happen. Funny they disclose the whole truth when it's legally required, but don't let others tell the truth when it's inconvenient.

[015a]

At some point, some large app needs to stand up against Apple. Fortnite was a start, but that's a game; it doesn't "hit home" in Silicon Valley culture.

I still have hope that Facebook will pull something major in response to the ATT changes. To be clear: I support the goals of ATT, and I think Apple is in the right on it. But I think freedom of distribution on iOS is more important than this, and when choosing between Freedom and Privacy (or as our forefathers would say, Freedom and Safety); I will choose Freedom, every single time.

Apple should not be forcing users to choose. There do exist non-resolvable dichotomies when one has to choose, but this is not one of them.

[luckylion]

> it doesn't "hit home" in Silicon Valley culture.

Are people in SV not aware? I was under the impression that they are acutely aware but are being paid gigantic sums of money to put aside any concerns and opinions.

[luxuryballs]

Doesn’t Apple have the freedom to build their OS how they prefer? Just like we have the freedom not to use it.

[IgorPartola]

Fortnite/Epic did. Didn’t work out for them.

[TechBro8615]

Has that been resolved yet?

[g_p]

Still ongoing, and epic are getting some good documents out through discovery, which should help their case, as well as other overseas antitrust investigations.

[superkuh]

Cut the gordian knot. Discord should just release the iOS application themselves and bypass the Apple walled garden.

It is time to end corporate feudalism and the first step is installing applications the way they were meant to be installed instead of through one specific corporate gateway.

[Cu3PO42]

How do you suggest they do that? Any enterprise certificate they use to sign the .ipa would be revoked within hours, probably minutes. Telling users to sign it themselves (and re-sign it every 7 days) just isn't feasible.

The only alternative would be not to have an iOS app, but that would also be a significant blow to their business. I can't, in good conscience, blame them for complying here.

[superkuh]

They should maintain 2 branches for iOS. The full featured branch that users who have rooted their iPhone can download and install and a Apple-Safe gimped version for the iOS app store.

[aero-glide2]

Glad I have android

[m463]

> Discord should just release the iOS application themselves

Who knew when we got PC software on floppies, without IBM's permission, it was the good old days?

After decades it seems apple and google closed the barn door.

[gbl08ma]

On non-jailbroken iOS devices the only way to install apps is through the App Store or through some convoluted methods which involve having a developer account (which you must pay yearly for), and I believe the % of jailbroken iOS devices is much much lower than the % of people willing to install Android APKs outside of Google Play, anyway. Sure, they _could_ do that for few people who have jailbroken iPhones, but doing that is pretty much like giving up on their iOS app altogether.

[SSLy]

AltStore lets you sign apps with a non-developer iCloud account.

[easton]

That expire after seven days, just like if you signed them with XCode. And you can only install two or three apps at once, and the wireless linking rarely works.

Apple just needs to have a version of "fastboot oem unlock" (or, for that matter, "csrutil --disable") where I can sideload applications with a big warning on the lock screen/splash screen that says the device is not secure. Besides, as long as the code is running inside the sandbox, who cares?

[SSLy]

Alright, then I think we agree. And using AltStore is not a luser-sustainable method of delivery, so the point is moot.

[idle_zealot]

And how would people install this app? Jailbreaking? AltStore with a Mac and developer account? The bar is pretty high for most of Discord’s users.

[DocTomoe]

I was under the impression that distributing apps on iOS was not possible outside of the Apple App Store.

Have things changed?

[niij]

You can't side load apps on iOS like you can on Android.