[smoldesu]

> Can I make an iOS app in pure Python, and should Apple make it possible?

Given that neither the browser or iOS runtime can interpret it, no? I think it's reasonable to expect people to write an iOS Python interpreter and expect to get that distributed though. And if the users deliberately install it, what's the problem?

> Just like nobody is forcing Tesla

Tesla has to certify vehicles as road-safe. Besides FCC compliance (which Android handles just fine), Apple doesn't really have many legal safety obligations to use as a defense. Unlike a Tesla, Apple can let users sideload iOS apps without threatening other users around them.

[palata]

Maybe I did not express myself well. My point was that Apple not embracing PWAs is their choice, I don't see the problem there.

I see a problem with the idea that "we did not convince Apple with our PWAs, that's probably because they are evil, so now we'll try to force them with the law".

[smoldesu]

Why do you see that as a problem? Apple is welcome to leave if they disagree with Europe's market terms. They didn't leave Russia when they made their demands though, and Lord knows they're deep enough in bed with China. Whipping up a fuss over sideloading and PWA guidelines is a red herring; Apple is just butthurt that regulators found their infinite service revenue loophole.

Apple has every right to self-determination, but sometimes that means deciding whether they agree with the law.

[palata]

> Why do you see that as a problem? Apple is welcome to leave if they disagree with Europe's market terms.

The problem I see is that IMHO, the law should not force Apple to accept a new technology just because web devs don't want to learn Apple's technology (that provide at least the same features as PWAs).

> Whipping up a fuss over sideloading and PWA guidelines is a red herring; Apple is just butthurt that regulators found their infinite service revenue loophole.

That's the thing: you conflate the App Store with the PWAs, and that's where I disagree. Enabling side-loading of native iOS apps is completely orthogonal to enabling PWAs. For some reasons pro-PWAs hijacked the side-loading lobbying effort and are trying to leverage it for their own agenda.

[smoldesu]

Well, you're welcome to take issue with that I suppose. The way I see it, Apple has invited this for years; the only way in their ecosystem is through the App Store or the browser. If they make unreasonable demands out of their App Store, the exploitation of the browser will be next. It's been this way since Cydia, really.

Much as we'd rather deny it, the App Store and Safari are inextricably linked on iOS. There aren't alternatives allowed to either, and the purpose leads back to the same reason; control. It's really not hard to see how Apple's desire for stable service revenue is at-odds with the capabilities of their platform. The DMA and the DSA both give Apple the ultimatum; loosen up or ship out.

[danaris]

> And if the users deliberately install it, what's the problem?

And is this a universal principle of yours?

For instance, would you say the same about malware—that anyone should have the right to develop it, and use whatever shady tactics they want to trick people into installing it—and if they do, that becomes their problem?

[smoldesu]

Users don't deliberately install malware, though. They do install Python runtimes; you can secure this the exact same way desktops have done for decades, by signing executable.

It's literally elementary stuff.

[danaris]

Users don't deliberately install malware that's called "Install This To Give All Your Money To Scammers."

They deliberately install an app that's called "Funny Videos Daily Ha Ha!", that also has a rootkit or whatever that gives all their money to scammers.