Third party developers want to get their apps onto the iPhone, because the platform has a lot of users, and there's a lot of money to be made. However, they will be forced to play by Apple's rules, which (according to the argument) is good for the customer, as the custodian of the platform has a vested interest in keeping them happy.
Now, if 3rd party stores were allowed, Apple's bargaining power which allowed them to force 3rd parties to respect the user's interest would go away, allowing developers to deliver a worse (eg privacy-violating) product.
Users who do not like this deal are free to go with an Android device instead of an iPhone. The popularity of the latter might suggest that quite a few people are reasonably happy with the status quo.
You are literally saying that you agree that Apple has very serious market power, and has the ability to force the rest of the market, to do what it wants, using its illegal, anticompetitive behavior.
Go ahead and say that you want this. But you are just straight up admitting that Apple has anti-trust level market power, and is using illegal anti-competitive behavior.
Therefore, they would lose the lawsuit, under your argument.
People haven't thought it through at all. If they've even considered this aspect of it, I'd be surprised.
iPhone popularity is due to a mix of very good engineering, presentation, marketing and network effects.
Smartphones are also very, very new for people. Give them time and they'll rebel against a single point of control sooner or later.
It's the reason why I don't even really give a toss: there's nothing on iOS that you can't get on Android.
Not in the US market where iPhones have the great majority and where this trial is taking place.
There are also definitely iOS exclusives.
Who knows. Gaming consoles have had a decent run, but of course that may not be that good a precedent as they've not evolved into general-purpose computing devices to the same degree that phones have...
"It'll end up similarly to macOS AppStore. Developers will avoid it, so user will be forced to use other stores to make his phone useful."
So, kinda like on Androi... No, wait. It wont. Other stores will be in the margins likd on Android.
Epic have made instructions on how to do it [0], it's a four step process to be able to install the game that involves changing two system default settings that both warn you not to do what you're about to do.
[0] https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/mobile/android/new-...
Then don't. Nobody is forcing you. That's what this is all about, not forcing people.
With Apple in control, the developer faces the choice to play by Apple's rules, or lose out on the money to be made in their walled garden.
With Apple no longer in control, the user now faces the choice to play by the developer's rules, or lose out on the app.
That said, I'm actually not a fan of the walled garden approach, and won't be buying an iPhone in the forseeable future. It's just that I do understand the appeal.
>With Apple no longer in control, the user now faces the choice to play by the developer's rules, or lose out on the app.
Android has proven this is not true. Google has the same policies as Apple and does allow alternative app stores. Turns out the world works in a common sense way and everything turned out fine.
A really good example right now is riot. They distribute through their own launcher on PC rather than on steam. They have two sizeable games on mobile right now (wild rift and TFT). In a world where these are downloadable from the riot launcher on iOS rather than the app store, it seems likely riot (and other major publishers who do the same on PC) would follow suit? I don't see how having an app store without hearthstone, TFT, fortnite is the same quality as one with.
Then dont install those other app stores and only rely on apples curated list, if other app stores ever become a thing on ios.