I don't miss it.
Not a huge deal though. In the past, pre-iOS-10 Safari was immune to the "no background playback" rule the app had, and before that, the site had no preroll ads while the app did, so it was a clearer difference.
If it isn’t on iOS it isn’t ubiquitous. It’s left the highest-earning viewers on the table.
Sure. Most wouldn’t. YouTube and Netflix would lose tens of billions of present value overnight. Hell, Apple might capture a good fraction of that surplus.
Not being able to use YouTube properly is also one of the reasons (among others) of why Windows mobile failed.
Youtube is a monopoly and there's no way around it.
People will swap phones to watch short-form videos? (But not the young; they’re on TikTok. Nor anyone in other streaming demographics.)
> Youtube is a monopoly and there's no way around it
Wat. Where are you getting this? Spotify has better churn statistics than YouTube.
Youtube Shorts is there especially because it's a different market that they want to capture.
> Wat. Where are you getting this? Spotify has better churn statistics than YouTube.
Unless you live in the few countries where YouTube has a competitor, they have a 100% market share on this kind of format.
Youtubers don't even bother to republish the video somewhere else because they know themselves that its a monopoly.
YouTube videos being the format?
Google owns YouTube. Google pays Apple tens of billions to keep its search front and centre. If Google thought YouTube had the leverage you do, wouldn’t you think they’d try swinging that around?
Youtube is the TV of the 21th century, it's not only the format but what you find there which is unique.
> If Google thought YouTube had the leverage you do, wouldn’t you think they’d try swinging that around?
Because there's no competition between both companies? Why would they do that? Google is pretty happy about their current position.
In fact in countries like Japan and South Korea nobody was using it until the last year or two.
This idea that any mobile device will fail unless it has X app is baseless. Everyone has a different set of X that is important.
People can usually replace the app X with an app Y but there's a few apps which are categorically needed on a phone otherwise it hurts the phone itself. Banks & government apps are part of those and Youtube is one as well.
Those are the ones really preventing a third company to join in.
If YouTube pulled itself from iOS devices, a shell company of Apple's would create a competitor in three months.
It would be more likely that Google bundled Chrome and YouTube into one app.
Hell, maybe they'd do that with mail and calendar as well.
It's for everyone, app store or not.
So they've basically made distributing popular free apps on an alternative app store really unappealing.
"Developers can choose to adopt these new business terms, or stay on Apple’s existing terms. Developers must adopt the new business terms for EU apps to use the new capabilities for alternative distribution or alternative payment processing. "
“ iOS apps distributed from the App Store and/or an alternative app marketplace will pay €0.50 for each first annual install per year over a 1 million threshold.”