Forcing people and app developers to choose all or nothing is spiteful and vindictive.
Such behavior from Apple just because I downloaded an app that they didn’t get paid for would drive me straight to the arms of their competitors. I’m sure they can do a better job addressing your concerns and mine than what you’ve proposed.
Yes, and kudos to ESPN+, Peacock, and Hulu (among others) who take the 15% hit to take subscriptions as in-app payments.
I completely disagree. Apple has legitimate business and security interests in maintaining their own store…and realistically I think any attempt in 5he US anyway to force them otherwise is doomed to fail. They also have legitimate interests both security and business wise in not being blamed for something that happens on a store they don’t control…and legitimate interest in getting paid for the ecosystem they developed.
That said…while I think the forced opening laws currently under consideration are incorrect and would eventually get tossed…and I’m treading carefully to not cross Adams politics line…it wouldn’t surprise me if they passed and were signed with the inevitable lawsuits being decided 5 years later…and in that case…what we used to call good engineering practice would point Apple towards a pending the lawsuit alternative that caused the least amount of damage to Apple’s legitimate business, economic, and ecosystem concerns. Is it exactly what I suggest? Maybe…maybe not…but they have a lot of smart engineers, lawyers, and business people to figure out ahead of time what they will do if xx or yy happens. Just like having macOS running on Intel years before that switch and on A series chips years before we saw the M1…it’s just being smart and proactive on their part.
Allowing both stores simultaneously available on iOS is a losing proposition for their legitimate economic and security interests…because when Joe User loses $15,000 because of an app that was distributed on say the Epic store and that Apple had zero control over…Joe. user, his lawyer, and the Apple haters in some of the media aren’t going to blame Epic…they’re going to blame Apple.
And it isn’t all or nothing…it’s either or. The user has a choice.
I can just see it now:
You’re email address has signed up for access to apps delivered by our competitors, therefore we are cancelling your subscription to iCloud, removing your access to all of the apps we’ve deemed incompatible with your security choices, including iPhoto, Photos.app, Pages, Numbers, Calendar, etc.
TouchID and FaceID have been disabled lest somebody else learn what you or your finger look like. Your security is our top priority.
Your iCloud drive has been emptied for the sake of protecting your privacy and ability to make free choices. Your photos have been deleted. Your wallet balance has been emptied. Your phone will no longer work with Messages, and all of your message history has been removed. We understand your desire for security and privacy, so we are sure you are happy to know we have been proactive to protect you.
Because we value your safety, your phone can no longer access your contacts list, nor dial, lest a rogue app take advantage of your lapse in proper priorities. Of course, if you’d like to call emergency services, as always, you can count on Apple.
We hope you enjoy your iPhone with alternative software and services!
Napster started out to be just MP3s, but it very quickly evolved to be almost anything uploadable or downloadable. But it was basically a peer to peer format that enabled fonts, applications, artwork, etc. to be downloaded. Music was always dominant and therefore the most affected financially, but just about any content that could be condensed, uploaded and downloaded was able to participate in the service.
30% does add up, and Apple is doing very well with the continuing growth of their services. However, they traditionally don’t break out what each service earns individually when they are reporting. I stumbled upon a very interesting article about how Steve Jobs’ profit margins from the 30% take for iTunes sales were so low that it flabbergasted the record labels he pitched the service to. Microsoft and others had pitched had much higher rates to them, only to be turned down. They thought Steve was bat s—- crazy, but the cut was so ridiculously low they might as well give it a whirl. The rest is history:
At the time, sales of Macs had just started to rebound, and when iPod and iTunes debuted, they upended the music industry. For Apple, the revenue from iTunes was profitable; but the money raked in by iPod was amazing. It’s highly likely that the margins from the 30% the App Store, Music, etc. are good, but most likely, they are not through the roof profitable like Apple hardware sales.
Facebook just announced a 47.5% take from sales for its Meta NFT store, plus an additional 15% fee for Meta Worlds. It makes the App Store fee sound like a big bargain:
My problem is I want my iPad to be different from my iPhone. I think more absolute security is a good feature for the phone and the identical implementation of security on the iPad is too restrictive. I understand there are many with legitimate reasons not to share this view. I would like the iPad to be more like the Mac in how it controls apps. Since my needs aren’t going to be filled by Apple, I hope there is some sort of accepted compromise for App Store control which comes out of the European litigation. Apple has itself to blame for not listening enough to developer and legitimate business complaints and concerns. Apple and its phones are not a monopoly, but the next best and worst thing.
When Tim Cook starts giving me the hardware for free then it will be his business what I install on it or do with it.
If they care about security, then they can continue to offer their App store and users can choose to buy from there based on the guarantees Apple offers. However Apple’s restrictions on what software goes into their App store and thus what we can install on a particular device goes well beyond protecting the user from malicious software.
I completely support Apple being forced by governments to open up their devices to allow users to decide where they want to get their software and how they want to use the hardware for which they paid.
Furthermore Apple is a de facto monopoly in the marketplace for iOS, iPadOS and tvOS apps. If they don’t like the government enforcing a free app market, then they are of course free to discontinue the iPhone, iPad and Apple TV. No-one’s forcing them to make this hardware.
My elderly mother knows almost nothing about technology, but even she knows enough not to just click on things like that.
That’s exactly the problem. Apple could probably have kept getting away with a monopoly on outlets for iOS et al apps, but for the fact that it is very obvious they’re blocking applications for reasons other than security.
The claim that reviews of Fokusek Enterprise’s apps have been removed is clearly not true, or at least no longer true, they are present now, including reviews left before the tweet was sent.
Complaining about the developer’s bad practices seems to have had some effect, all of Fokusek Enterprise’s apps now seem to have a 3 day trial.
I’m not persuaded by “Mac App Store review is not perfect, therefore developers and users should have the right to avoid all app stores,” which is the only point I can think of for sharing this story.
Apple defeats antitrust class action challenging App Store control:
App Store monopoly claim rejected by federal court; reasoning is a strong win for Apple
That currently is not accurate.
No-one’s forcing you to buy it.
Interesting – what do you want to do on the iPad that requires more openness?
The reason I shared the article is because people are talking about how great a job Apple does compared to what the competition would do. It’s blatantly obvious that Apple is not doing a good job watching out for its users. Its users are having to force Apple to take action, which is what you’ve now seen.
Lol. How about choose what apps I want to run? Instead of crawling to Apple begging permission to install an app on the most powerful personal computer in the room—that I own, not Apple!
I assume the reason you’re sharing this very old news is because you disagree with Rich’s article that we’re all commenting on? From the article:
But this foundation is now at risk, largely due to how Apple has treated app developers and payments. On 25 March 2022, the European Union published its draft Digital Markets Act. If enacted, the legislation would, among other things, require Apple and similar companies to support alternative app stores.
what do you want to do on the iPad that requires more openness?
The ability to create and install custom keyboard layouts (available for decades on MacOS with no problems) would be most welcome for the things I do.
The reason I shared the article is because some posters to this thread, including this particular post that I responded to, keep calling Apple’s App Store a monopoly. A judge in the US court system ruled that it is not.
Which apps, specifically? There’s a whole lot of “but my freedom!” ringing through this thread and a whole lack of actual specifics on what people are being stopped from doing.
Thanks! That seems reasonable. A quick App Store search shows quite a few apps that claim to allow the creation of custom keyboards. Do those not work? (I’m genuinely asking – I didn’t do much more than the search).
In terms of the monopoly question, the court in Apple v. Epic found that Apple was not a monopoly and that’s the major legal precedent at the moment.
Does Saks Fifth Avenue sell Maybelline or Cover Girl makeup? When I worked across the street from their flagship store, I had to walk blocks away to buy products from these brands at a crowded drug store and wait on long lines to reach a cashier.