[DownrightNifty]

> Since DMA came into effect almost two years ago, can anyone comment on its effectiveness?

I'm so glad you asked, because I wrote an entire website about it: https://doesioshavesideloadingyet.com/

Executive summary: Epic Games benefits greatly from the DMA, but powerusers and smaller developers don't get much benefit. This is due to Apple's lackluster compliance measures that are currently being investigated and may be deemed illegal.

We might hear another update from the EU rather soon though: https://9to5mac.com/2025/03/10/report-apple-will-be-fined-by...

I really hope that the DMA does not go down in history as a failed experiment, because that will be a huge loss for open platforms as a whole.

[coastalpuma]

This is a great site, and thank you for the effort.

One suggestion for an addition to the section on FOSS: Related to the issue of not being able to modify the source of apps we use, we also can't verify that an "open source" app on iOS is built from its claimed source code. We just have to trust the developer. This blocks true auditing of iOS apps for data privacy practices, something we know is needed given that the "privacy labels" are often deceptive https://archive.ph/Ak6qU. As such, this is a data security issue as much as a user freedom issue.

[DownrightNifty]

Thanks for the suggestion. Feel free to contribute this change yourself if you want: https://github.com/DownrightNifty/dihsy/blob/main/dihsy.md

I'll probably end up adding it myself if you don't want to, because it's actually something I wanted to include originally but forgot to.

This is definitely a huge issue with the current implementation of DMA compliance. Apple's mandatory DRM encryption scheme as part of the notarization process doesn't just block reproducible builds and the improved security that those offer, but also means that third party app stores aren't capable of auditing the apps they offer in any way. If Apple lets something slip through their notarization review (which is not an impossibility, since it's happened on the App Store before), then the third party store carrying that app will be unfairly blamed for the incident.

[ks2048]

iOS has sideloading, if you pay $100/year for a developer account.

[DownrightNifty]

That is listed under "unofficial sideloading methods". A more accurate title would've been "Does iOS support sideloading yet?" but I wanted to keep the domain name as short as possible :)

The Apple Developer program is not intended as an option for end users to enable sideloading on their device, even if that is a side effect of joining it. It is only intended to allow developers to briefly test new builds of their own apps in a limited capacity before uploading them to the App Store (or third party stores in the EU). Apps "installed" this way expire after a certain length of time and you must ask Apple's cloud service for a new certificate each time that happens in order to keep using them. You're still tied to Apple indefinitely this way. If your developer account is terminated for whatever reason, or Apple decides to increase the price such that you can no longer afford your account, then suddenly you no longer have sideloading, and you no longer have access to any of the apps you previously sideloaded.

Therefore, I lump it into the same category as jailbreaking -- yes, you can argue that the existence of that means iOS already has sideloading, but it's not officially supported.

Sidenote: You don't need to spend $100/yr if you want to go the "unofficial sideloading" route; AltStore (Classic) is available for free: https://altstore.io/