In Switzerland, Delta Emulator is not available in the App Store since Riley made it an AltStore exclusive in Europe. However, you cannot get AltStore either because Switzerland isn't part of the countries where Apple allows alternative stores: https://support.apple.com/fr-fr/118110#countries-and-regions.
Unpopular opinion: I'm really not keen on Riley using Delta as a key driver to make EU folk pay for the AltStore. I'd much, much rather get it from the Apple App Store, just like everyone else on the planet--and I'd pay Eur 4.99 for it there, easy, just because I really don't want the hassle of dealing with another App Store.
Riley posted the following on Mastodon about this:
Getting some Qs about Delta availability, hope this clarifies things!
• Delta is exclusive to AltStore in EU
• Because of Apple’s new dev terms, all downloads in EU cost us €0.50/yr in AltStore PAL and App Store…so couldn’t offer Delta in EU App Stores without making it paid
• App Store only supports one-time paid-upfront apps, so we’d have to pick a price that could support ~years of CTFs
• PAL’s €1.50 covers Delta’s CTF
• We’d make everything free everywhere if it wasn’t for the CTF
Well, now you can add it to the ever-expanding list of iOS apps you just can't use. No need to feel lonely about it though, there's a lot of great free apps that Android users are also locked-out of unless they flip the sideloading switch. Here are just a few: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/
Sideloading switch on Android? You install F-Droid and then install whatever you want from F-Droid. I'm assuming you mean the "install application from unknown source" pop-up when you open the F-Droid apk from your downloads folder. This is NOTHING compared to the hoops Apple users have to jump through to install third party software.
Your comparison is pointless (I've been using F-Droid for almost a decade, and that's where I get most "serious" Android utilities today - like Termux and various UI tweaks I can't do without). I am fine with hacking Android (and running emulators on it) because I don't rely on it for work, IM, family or work stuff. It's just a sandbox for me.
But I would have liked to have Delta (and paid for it) on iOS, because that's where I spend most of my time. I'll just wait until RetroArch (or someone else) ships on iOS.
That's a shame. It's just free software, there should be no reason why you can't just put it on your phone if you have the code and want to approve it. Maybe Apple should re-draft the App Store conditions to better accommodate Free Software if this is the sort of business they'd like to attract. If not, oh well, it's only the users that have to suffer.
> I'll just wait until RetroArch (or someone else) ships on iOS.
You must be new to mobile, and Apple, and notarisation. I can build and install it myself, but even with a developer account it's a hassle. The key problem with iOS app distribution isn't alternate app stores--it's enabling end users to run their own apps on their own devices without timeouts or jumping through hoops, and nobody seems interested in fixing that.
The problems you talk about are deliberately created by Apple and only fixable by Apple. If you buy an iOS device you're opting in to whatever bullshit Apple comes up with that isn't explicitly regulated away, and when regulation is introduced Apple has made clear that they will do whatever they can to avoid complying with the spirit of said regulation.
The creator of Delta is pushing the first regulation-protected route they have for distributing their app. You started this thread saying you wish they didn't.
Dealing with notarization, timeouts, yearly developer account subscriptions, it's all terrible. The only hope to ever get away from it is to put up with as little of it as possible, which currently means an alternative app store. Or you can stop buying Apple devices.
Sounds like you're going to be in the business of fielding unpopular opinions for quite some time. I'm shocked that someone would shake their fist at the person developing code that you can go download right now[0] and not the business that prevents your phone from using it. If this is your sincere opinion, you either misunderstand the situation or expect to have your cake and eat it too.
What you're saying is that you are not interested in solving what you describe as "The key problem with iOS app distribution".
I am not claiming Android is perfect in any way; I don't think a truly good usable mobile option exists. I will claim that the differences in quality are minor in comparison to the problematic level of control Apple exercises over iOS.
What does “Apple approved” mean? I know Apple has heavy handed curation, for example requiring various forms of moderation / censorship of social media apps. Can these stores offer whatever they want?
Also what’s with that fee? Why aren’t phones forced to operate like traditional operating systems? Apple shouldn’t be allowed to charge fees for people to install software on devices they own.
I'm no expert on the matter, but this is what Apple says:
> All apps listed on alternative app marketplaces are submitted to a Notarization process with Apple. Notarization is a baseline review that applies to all apps, regardless of their distribution channel, focused on platform policies for security and privacy and to maintain device integrity. Through a combination of automated checks and human review, Notarization helps ensure apps are free of known malware, viruses, or other security threats, function as promised, and don’t expose users to egregious fraud. Apple does not enforce the App Store's high standards for business practices and content on apps distributed through alternative app marketplaces.
So what I understand is that it's a baseline check for security, technical issues etc. Content moderation doesn't seem to be a part of it.
oh it's definitely much more than a "baseline check", it seems to be mostly the same silly rules as the real app store
for example, the developer of Clip (Riley Testut) had to add a pointless "map" function which uses the user's location in order to be allowed to run in the background
The first version I tried used the user’s location to remain active, but was rejected by Apple. Testut then updated Clip with a Map feature — so there’s a reason for the app to remain active in the background — to receive approval.
Windows is still around, I think. And you used to be able to install anything on it, from any source, with zero control by MS. (On newer versions that's possibly less true.)
But if you want to steal grandmas' money, it's much easier to setup a romance scam operation than to try to get them to install some app.
You can search for innumerable articles and anecdotes of people moving their family and elders to iOS on mobile and Linux on desktop for exactly these reasons
> Why aren’t phones forced to operate like traditional operating systems?
They are operating like traditional operating systems, namely like game consoles where paying royalties to OS makers for distributing software has been a thing since the Atari/Activision settlement in 1980.
Knowing Apple I'd personally be concerned about retribution from them. I feel like something else completely unrelated on my device will stop functioning because I'm a user of the app store.
I don’t feel like my iPhone 12 mini is slow with 17.4? I guess it doesn’t make sense t argue about subjective experiences but I just wanted add a some anecdata.
Battery feels just fine (over a day, that is with Tailscale turned off [did get better some updates ago.])
I think by design of the ecosystem it makes the most sense for apps that can't be on the main store.
That would be emulators, uncensored social media, probably apps that do not meet the NSFW policy of the App Store... that kind of thing.
I'm not sure we'll see user-enabling apps for proprietary services like newpipe, because it's still a store, so corporate censorship is to be expected. In that sense, it is far inferior to a true, no store, side-loading ability like on Android, where you can freely install any application you want.
I've managed to get almost all my apps (sans Google apps and banking) to autoupdate through Obtainium on Android. It really feels like the future.
Yattee is a good example for what Apple puts those developers through. Here is a direct quote from their website:
> Apple keeps rejecting macOS version of Yattee for several unrelated and random reasons. As I believe the App Store approval process is random and getting approval depends mostly on whether the reviewer has had a nice day, I keep resubmitting macOS versions with every update so maybe we will get lucky one day.
The app also has obscure and incomplete features & UI purely to comply with Apple guidelines (or trick human reviewers paid beans into not actually realizing what the app is).
It seems like one of the major categories should be free software apps that Apple won't put in the store because of the license, e.g. GPL. Can alternate stores distribute those on iOS?
What specific apps might this app store distribute that Apple's won't? Apple's insistent that third party app stores enforce Apple's content restrictions IMHO defeats the purpose of the third party app store mechanism.
Apple changed the rule to allow Gameboy emulators on the App Store days before the Alt Store went live. So even if you don't install the Alt Store, that's already a benefit for everyone.
Someone ends up paying Apple either way. On the App Store, that person usually ends up being the developer. With the new framework (stupid as it may be), developers can choose to externalize that cost to users and make an example of how ridiculous it is. With high-demand apps like emulators, it's easy to attract users and directly expose them to the limits Apple imposes on them. That's a great vehicle for change, and I fully expect Apple to backpedal on the Core Technology Fee once it attracts broader scrutiny.
It makes perfect sense to me that paying $99/year for the App Store is cheaper than $0.50/install. But you shouldn't have to pay anything to install Free Software in the first place, so I can also see why some people would consider protesting Apple's policy to be invaluable.
That's a common misconception about free software. Free software is about the user's right to see and modify the software. Doesn't mean people can't do business with it. You're right that they usually don't require fee for installation, but that's merely because that the source code is available on the internet, in most cases, and so the user can install it without paying anyway.
Apple waves fees for non-profits (both developer annual fee and core technology fee), so at least qualifying free software organizations don't have to pay anything for either the app store or alt stores.
Free software organizations don't package software. The people developing iOS ports of FOSS applications are not going to register as a nonprofit to play Apple's silly game. It's an insult of a fig-leaf to the industry at-large.
Plenty of free software organizations package software. Heck Mozilla, Signal, VideoLAN, Mastodon, Wikimedia and Tor even package iOS software.
And frankly, most of the iOS ports of FOSS aren't themselves are closed source, so they don't really count as FOSS, but if the people who, say, ported OpenOffice to iPhone gave it to the Apache foundation? I can't see why they wouldn't release it.
I really can't imagine any circumstance where the European Commission is ok with Apple charging competitors for the privilege of competing with them, in a market explicitly mandated by the DMA.
AltStore or Epic complying with Apple's current dubious terms makes no real difference.
I assume there will be a few more soon, though Apple still pushes for notarization and such, making things difficult for the lone hacker developing for fun. So I don't expect as many apps as once cydia had.
It's pretty cool that I can play Chrono Trigger and Pokemon FireRed Rocket Edition on the go though :) I'd love to see Epic bringing Fortnite to AltStore out of spite. :D
If an alternate store can have a game emulator, could it also have e.g. an Android app emulator, which in turn could run Android app "ROMs" that aren't individually notarized?
I had an issue with the Download button not working the first time as well. The solution was to go back to AltStore homepage, click and go through the checkout process again, at some point it says you already are subscribed and instead of charging you again takes you to the download page, where this time the button works.
At least that's what happened for me, worth a try.
yes, quite a few hoops to jump through to get something working.
Back in the day, I went through massive effort to jailbreak my iPhone, void the warranty, and use the Cydia app store (amazing that this whole community operated for free).
But slowly the vanilla iPhone experience got good enough that I didn't need to jailbreak anymore, or at least it wasn't worth the effort. And the community died down as well.
Interesting to see the resurgence of a similar concept.
I guess community of it died also because of how difficult/rare jailbreaks got, with some significant time of droughts between jailbreaks. Also jailbreaks had too many downsides; some apps would be too invasive, crash the Springboard, some secure apps (bank etc) wouldn't run, iirc updates weren't possible or hard to do, "tethered" jailbreaks required restoring them each time you reboot etc. etc. Too much day-to-day fighting against the system at the end.
Alternative stores OTOH have a lot more promise, if Apple can't manage to kill them through malicious compliance. They have a lower barrier of entry, and most downsides of JB don't apply either.
