Besides, there doesn't need to necessarily be a competing store. Even the ability to install from a website would be enough IMO. Apple can put up a scary message before you install a non app store app, and epic can side load their app. If you want the benefit of the app store, you can pay the 30%. I suspect most developers would. Additionally, you still have to get your app signed through apples developer program, so if they revoke your certificate, they could still destroy you.

And I think we can let go of the idea that apple curates it's apps for safety and security. It's been shown repeatedly that they let scams through all the time, while scrutinizing and removing apps over tiny mistakes around phrasing of payment.

Sorry, I just completely disagree. Google's Play Store or w/e it is on Android is the fox in the hen house. Google is one of the offenders that Apple is making disclose data collection practices! I don't think they situation is exactly comparable and it's different enough that the prior precedent may not be applicable.

> Apple can put up a scary message before you install a non app store app, and epic can side load their app.

Yea until that becomes anti-competitive. Besides, that makes the user experience bad. Why do any of this at all? If you're sophisticated enough to want to side load apps, you're sophisticated enough to jailbreak your iPhone and get what you want.

I can already see it. You see some app in the App Store - you download it thinking it's an app but it's just a message: "Want to download our app? Go to our website!". Then I get all these pop-up warnings, download some malware on accident, whatever. IMO (and I'll vote with my dollars at least) it's just a dumb experiment to run. I see 0 benefit in doing any of this. 0.

> It's been shown repeatedly that they let scams through all the time

Failures like this aren't indicative of overall policy so I don't really see the point here.

(also hey there fellow Eric :) )

You don't think that it's a a good comparison to compare the only other large scale play store which implements the exact behavior I'm talking about?

And googles bad behaviors, and Google does have bad behaviors, is irrelevant to this conversation.

> Yea until that becomes anti-competitive.

How would that be anti competitive?

> If you're sophisticated enough to want to side load apps, you're sophisticated enough to jailbreak your iPhone and get what you want.

Jailbreaking your phone is a huge pita, even if you are technical, and it forces you to always be several versions behind. Not to mention very few companies will be making apps for jailbroken phones. This isn't a realistic alternative. If jailbreaking your phone were allowed by apple, then maybe it would be a reasonable compromise.

> Failures like this aren't indicative of overall policy so I don't really see the point here.

It is very indicative of the over all policy. It's very clear that the app review process is a tool for stifling competition, and that apple is abusing it.

--

The big argument I see is that the app store provides value, so the 30 percent is justified. If that's true, let apps side load, and keep the 30 percent fee, and let people side load.

If it's truly worth the 30 percent, very few apps would switch away from the app store. If it's not worth 30 percent, then we have introduced a mechanism for competition and it's healthier for the whole ecosystem.

> (also hey there fellow Eric :) )

Spelled the same and everything

Well, I didn't it wasn't good, just that I wasn't sure it's comparable. Google is a software company, and has tons of apps (Youtube, Gmail, Maps, etc.) that are big-time heavy hitters that exist on both their App Store and the Apple one. And given that they own the Play Store and aren't inherently inclined to follow Apple's privacy rules, I think it's hard to draw an exact comparison between the two.

> How would that be anti competitive?

I think people would start to say it discourages users from participating in a free market or something along those lines. But I also don't think the Apple App Store is anti-competitive.

> It is very indicative of the over all policy. It's very clear that the app review process is a tool for stifling competition, and that apple is abusing it

Sorry, I don't have much to say here that's isn't us going back and forth with. I couldn't disagree more and it's unlikely we'll reach any consensus.

> The big argument I see is that the app store provides value, so the 30 percent is justified.

I think that's one argument, but it's not the only one.

> If that's true, let apps side load, and keep the 30 percent fee, and let people side load.

> If it's truly worth the 30 percent, very few apps would switch away from the app store. If it's not worth 30 percent, then we have introduced a mechanism for competition and it's healthier for the whole ecosystem.

You'd have to convince me that, say, tracking users and avoiding Apple's privacy and security rules wouldn't be worth more for app makers. I think they're likely to change, to the detriment of users. So I'll personally oppose any changes here.

TBH I've done a lot of thinking on this topic, I'm pretty passionate about it, and I think I've arrived at a conclusion that is just and fair (in my view) and I'm unlikely to change my opinion in really any way - more likely to double down on it. I want to bring that up just to let you know where I'm coming from here.

Thanks

But if this to much for the Apple devs to implement they can stop selling in EU, focus more on China , they can increase the tax on that store a bit and not lose any money.

Ha ha, laws don't work like that. I am speaking my opinion and it seems I am not the only one that can see past the Apple giant PR. But if you are from EU you are free not to unlock your device or buy the US cooler version. What you are not free is to demand EU to not apply the existing laws for Apple because Apple is cool but apply them for MS and Google because those companies are not cool.

iOS will have the sandbox, if some shitty app ask "Do you want me to open the microphone now?" the user can still say NO, if the app asks "Please give me access to location!" the user can still say No, or Apple could even be clever and offer the user the ability to give fake location data,

From your point of view iOS users are so stupid that they shold not be allowed to use a OSX device or a browser(not sure if you know but browsers ahve access to camera, , location if the user allows it so go unsintall your browser (I think you don't have the freedom to remove it , sorry for you)).

THIS. Permissions must be enforced at the operating system level. Apple, Google, and others have repeatedly demonstrated that large companies do a really bad job at policing their app stores - and the fact that the task is intrinsically harder and technically inferior to building a better operating system doesn't help.

The only correct solution to many privacy and security issues (such as microphone access) is OS-level sandboxing and permissions control, not an un-scalable and error-prone attempt at auditing before publishing to an app store.

(note that I said "many" privacy and security issues, not "all")

But long story short, I like things as they are and don't want them to change. If developers don't like that they can kick rocks. I'd rather have no apps and no App Store than to see things change, frankly.

> From your point of view iOS users are so stupid that they

No.. that's not my point of view or relevant at all to anything I wrote.

> shold not be allowed to use a OSX device or a browser

Well, judging by all the requests I get to fix things on computers versus iPhones...

> not sure if you know but browsers ahve access to camera

Yes you have to give the browser permission.

>But long story short, I like things as they are and don't want them to change. If developers don't like that they can kick rocks. I'd rather have no apps and no App Store than to see things change, frankly.

Who would force you to change? you could buy the US iPhone version with the diamond handcuffs.

>Well, judging by all the requests I get to fix things on computers versus iPhones...

Then good job to Apple PR and fanboys, the stories about Apple malware and viruses were burried very deep.

>Yes you have to give the browser permission.

So why this model will not work if you sideload an app? Do you need genius to check the menus of the app so you feel secure?

I'm not sure how up to speed you are with the current state of the discussion around this topic, but the gist of it is that if you make changes to the App Store, then Apple's work with respect to privacy, security, etc. go out the window because major apps that want to abuse these things will move to third party app stores. Apple loses the ability to collectively bargain on behalf of users.

So, making the change almost surely will result in "forcing me to change". Maybe it won't, but I don't see a point in running that experiment.

> Then good job to Apple PR and fanboys, the stories about Apple malware and viruses were burried very deep.

Yea maybe they are. My own experience - nobody has ever had a problem with their iPhone. But PCs or even Macs? Yea I've had to do work. Almost always it's downloading and installing some thing they shouldn't have.

> So why this model will not work if you sideload an app? Do you need genius to check the menus of the app so you feel secure?

If you don't like iPhone and Apple so much why not just not use the products? I don't get this desire to change things that other people are quite happy with.

Without being overly smug here: Good.

Apple have been terrible stewards of the platform. Arguably better than Google, but that's a bar so low a deep-bore drilling machine couldn't clear it. The app store is overrun with scams, the approval process is nonobjective and unreliable, and prohibits entire classes of useful software on shaky moralizing grounds.

I don't want Apple to bargain on my behalf. I want apple to fuck off, get out of my way, and stop telling me what I can run on my hardware.

If you don't like iPhone and Apple so much why not just not use the products?

If Apple doesn't like the EU's rules why not just stop doing business there?

What rules? These are proposals for rules, and also lawsuits. There are arguments that have merit on both sides. But yea sure, if it was me and I were Tim Cook and had unlimited authority and the E.U. made Apple open up to 3rd party App Stores I'd pull the iPhone from Europe. Bad business decision most likely, but principled at least. Instead they're likely going to just do something else about it. There's always work arounds. Closing off APIs, charging gargantuan fees to be listed on the App Store for big players like Spotify, etc.

There are plenty of companies chomping at the bit to get on the App Store top lists and happy to pay a fee to do so.

> don't want Apple to bargain on my behalf. I want apple to fuck off, get out of my way, and stop telling me what I can run on my hardware.

I think Apple platforms aren't for you then. They're highly opinionated and always have been.

> The app store is overrun with scams, the approval process is nonobjective and unreliable, and prohibits entire classes of useful software on shaky moralizing grounds.

So the solution is third party app stores that are even worse?

Are you trolling? Apple and principles ? They are giving Chinese customers information to the government and do bussiness with Saudi Arabia that would execute all those gay Apple executives if they could, are this principles??? Or you mean "Ferengi principles"

The E.U. Happily bows down to China all the time so if you really want to do this whole anti-China thing everybody is happily playing in the mud - Apple, and the E.U. .

If Apple does not like EU rules for fair competition, warranties and repaiar Apple should not do bussiness there instead of breaking the laws.

People complaining about bad keyboards, bad video cards, bad batteries and even lawsuits forced Apple to not screw the users and recall bad products or offer free repair. If you like being screwed be my guest and do not use those limited"recall/repair" programs that complainers obtained (remember when Apple ass kissers would accuse people they put food int he keyboard because Apple is perfect)

Btw you have the option to buy an US version of iOS device, with the US version of the store, and never would change. you can;t say that FB will ask US people to buy an EU version of the phone so for sure on that US version Apple can continue protecting you.

And if Apple does not like Facebook tracking people maybe they should lobby for anti-tracking laws. They should also not allow lootboxes, gems or other gaming related shit (to be consistent with their puritanical PR spin)

Now of course if Apple is forced to permit third party stores, they’re going to be forced to make it really easy to get on these stores. Epic, Google and Amazon are going to make sure of that. So this isn’t going to be like obscure alt stores on Android that the nerdiest 2% tinker with, it’s going to be a shitshow.

If Google then makes Google Maps and Gmail exclusive for the iOS Play Store, all bets are off and the biggest reason why I prefer the iPhone is destroyed. And I will be sad and angry that other people wilfully supported its destruction.

So is fine if Apple does not put iMessages on other stores or let open source people to create a bridge to talk with iMessages.

If there are many people like you say 50% that won't unlock the phone then Google and FB will put their apps on all stores because there are more users. But if you are just 1% then it is fair that the 99% should not suffer because you want unfair stuff because it advantages you.

It’s not a question of who wants Apple to remain the sole gatekeeper of executable binaries, but rather who enjoys the benefits that come from that, even if they don’t explicitly realise it. I contend that it’s far more than 50% — especially because the few people who actually “care” about App Store diversity have already jumped ship to Android. (Or if they haven’t, they have proven that they don’t actually care.)

Is about your own hypocrisy. Apple is limiting iMessages and is fine with you but the notion that Google would limit the Maps app to their own store makes you mad. It makes sense that you are selfish and don't care about the larger picture

Anyway if you could look at the real world and not at the fantasy created by the FUD you would see that on Android there is no Facebook app store and Facebook is stiull present on the google Play store(and yes Apple and Apple users are not more special that for only for them Facebook will make a new store)

As this is how you choose to converse, I'm no longer interested in discussing this with you.

To be clear, I'm not decided on my opinion yet, I can see merits on both sides of the argument.