Apple to Allow Outside App Stores in Overhaul Spurred by EU Laws {DMA, DSA}

[saltycaramel]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

Pointless argument as you are not being forced to use 3rd party stores or to sideload anything.   

 

Yes we could be forced to because of exclusives.

 

(he’s the creator of altstore.io)

 

 

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, saltycaramel said:

 

Yes we could be forced to because of exclusives.

 

(he’s the creator of altstore.io)

 

 

As I said earlier:

 

Quote

 

I see,  the "it's their platform their rules" argument only applies to apple then?

 

EDIT: just to clarify, if a developer only wants to sell their software on a smaller 3rd party app store then that is their choice, they are selling their product, not limiting someone else's business.   Now if it was MS and they were insisting you had to use office only on windows, that would be a different story.  It's the market power that dictates the ethics.

 

 

 

 

[mr moose]

This thread:  it's not ok for developers to limit where I get their apps from but its essential that apple limit where I get there apps from.

 

A developers app is NOT apples product to limit,  a developers app is their own product to sell/serve from wherever they chose.  Until people get their head around this concept they will never understand why it is essential that we prevent ALL tech companies from using their market power to artificially limit competition and consumer choice.

 

 

 

 

[Obioban]

Looks like the regulation says they'll be required to allow side loading OR alternate app stores. Personally, I hope they opt for side loading. Adding the Mac's system for non app store purchases would be pretty bang on perfect. 

[suicidalfranco]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

Not difficult, but given their track record also not likely.

 

Pointless argument as you are not being forced to use 3rd party stores or to sideload anything.   

 

 

Nope You're being held a gun point to do so

[wanderingfool2]

6 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

 

Yes we could be forced to because of exclusives.

 

(he’s the creator of altstore.io)

 

 

As it stands now, we pay extra for Apples policies.  Paying additional fees since Apple takes the 30% cut.  Larger companies, that have the scale that they can do their own payment processing shouldnt be required to hand over the 30% to Apple, as it just means increased prices.

 

A key example would be floatplane, if they offered feature parity (where they could allow subscriptions) they would be a time they would be forced to increase the price everywhere as Apple doesn't allow you to use your own payment provider and they tried making it price parity across the platforms.  Floatplane had to rip out stuff to make it compliant with Apples rules.

 

Apple has multiple times proven they are willing to manipulate the market in their favor (e-books being a case), yet many consumers don't get to experience the ugly side of Apple because they aren't exposed to the inner workings of publishing an App on Apple.

[saltycaramel]

1 hour ago, wanderingfool2 said:

As it stands now, we pay extra for Apples policies.  Paying additional fees since Apple takes the 30% cut.  Larger companies, that have the scale that they can do their own payment processing shouldnt be required to hand over the 30% to Apple, as it just means increased prices.

 

30%/15% is pretty industry-standard.

 

It looks like both a lot of consumers and devs feel it’s a good deal, or we wouldn’t be here discussing the 15-year success story that is the App Store.

 

You’re arguing that “company X should earn less and product Y should cost less”, but that’s not how it works, as long as there are people willing to pay. It’s like saying “Teslas should cost less”. Or “iPhones should cost less”.

 

Also for some reason you’re assuming the “30%” is only a fee for “payment processing”. Not the case, ask Dutch dating apps that still have to pay Apple 27% after renouncing Apple’s payment processing service. That would make the payment processing fee just “3%”. The rest being for the other services (hosting, etc.), and for the privilege of being on the iPhone and reaching 1 billion high-spending iPhone users.

[wanderingfool2]

40 minutes ago, saltycaramel said:

30%/15% is pretty industry-standard.

 

It looks like both a lot of consumers and devs feel it’s a good deal, or we wouldn’t be here discussing the 15-year success story that is the App Store.

 

You’re arguing that “company X should earn less and product Y should cost less”, but that’s not how it works, as long as there are people willing to pay. It’s like saying “Teslas should cost less”. Or “iPhones should cost less”.

 

Also for some reason you’re assuming the “30%” is only a fee for “payment processing”. Not the case, ask Dutch dating apps that still have to pay Apple 27% after renouncing Apple’s payment processing service. That would make the payment processing fee just “3%”. The rest being for the other services (hosting, etc.), and for the privilege of being on the iPhone and reaching 1 billion high-spending iPhone users.

The developers have always complained about it, the reason why you are getting more attention now is that some of the major devs that Apple tried forcing their policies on stood up to them.  It's like trying to claim that everyone things Ticketmaster is a good deal, when in reality hardly anyone does...it's just what we have to live with because they hold too much control to break away.

 

if Tesla held the market dominance then yes, their margins should be reduced.  At this point though they haven't even come close to reaching that point.  In like 10 years time if half the vehicles on the market are Tesla's then yes I do think some regulatory action to limit a profit on selling of the product should be enforced.  Or lets say if FSD actually amounts to anything, and Tesla holds the marketshare, then they should be forced to license out the technology.

 

I'm not assuming the "30%" is for fee payment processing.  I'm saying Apple has tried enforcing making a $20 subscription to an App on a webpage to also be $20 in the App itself.  You aren't even allowed mentioning that 30% of the "price" is Apple's doing.  A large company like Netflix has their own payment processors, they have their own ways of distributing, they have their own tax and accounting department.  Apple is literally paying pennies on the dollar for applications on their App store.  Even as it stands, it's like a 4 to 1 earning.  For every $15 spent, Apple takes $5 of which the cost to Apple is only $1.

[KaitouX]

8 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

 

Yes we could be forced to because of exclusives.

 

(he’s the creator of altstore.io)

 

 

While there are exceptions like Fortnite, most apps that try to become exclusives to 3rd party stores just lose users.

It isn't really a problem on Android, so I'm not sure why you would assume it would become one on iOS.

I personally use a 3rd party store in my phone mostly to bypass region blocking, but other people around me seems to never use anything other than the Play Store in their phones. He uses Meta as an example, but Amazon and others tried it on Android and barely could make a dent into Play Store market share.

[saltycaramel]

Question: what about new platforms?

 

Will Apple be forced to allow sideloading and/or 3rd party app stores on the upcoming xrOS (the headset OS) as well? 
 

For sure xrOS market penetration will be negligible in the first few years, far from a “gatekeeper”, but what if it inherits thousands of iOS/iPadOS apps in windowed mode? (just like on the Mac in recent years) Suddenly we’d be back to square one: on the shiny new platform, Apple’s AppStore would be the only way to install apps. 

[wickiwick]

I’m expecting this to get buried, but doesn’t this mean that Apple’s famously hardline stance against porn and other illegal content on its App Store and on its devices is now going to go up in smoke?

[darknessblade]

1 hour ago, wickiwick said:

I’m expecting this to get buried, but doesn’t this mean that Apple’s famously hardline stance against porn and other illegal content on its App Store and on its devices is now going to go up in smoke?

You could say that. as when sideloading/3rd party appstores are allowed on IOS, I can guarantee you that there will be content that caters to those that want said content

[kumicota]

On 12/16/2022 at 9:20 AM, FakeKGB said:

What's preventing developers from pulling their app from the App Store and moving it to a third-party store?

The same thing on Android, a developer refusing to publish on App Store is the most dumb thing he can do.

[darknessblade]

11 hours ago, kumicota said:

The same thing on Android, a developer refusing to publish on App Store is the most dumb thing he can do.

Unless that dev is a company like

 

-Twitter

-Netflix

-epic-games

 

who do not want to give apple a 30% cut from their app_revenue, just because someone bought something in app

[Dracarris]

8 hours ago, darknessblade said:

Unless that dev is a company like

 

-Twitter

-Netflix

-epic-games

Which are exactly the companies that already have a special non-30% deal.

[Thaldor]

Just to say that there is at least one kind of huge thing apart from the Apple tax and the more known Apple limitations (like certain apps). The requirement of MacOS, while code is code and you can 99.9% make iOS app probably with some creative hacking even with DOS machine, Apple still refuses to let you even test your app on your iPhone if you do not have MacOS. As in you do not need Xcode to develop for iOS because the runtimes and whatever, you need Xcode to dev for iOS because f**k you for not buying into the walled garden.

For example Unity3D does include full iOS support even on Windows installation, with some hacking you can compile the iOS game with Windows and if you have jailbroken iPhone you can just transfer it and start testing. But officially you need MacOS to compile the game and to even get it to iPhone to test it. You could use VM for that but often it is far easier just get some piece of junk Mac from recycling for 50 animal carcasses and use it only for the iOS compiling. You literally need Mac for iOS development for that 0.01% of the work to get the signatures and to fulfill the Apples completely artificial requirements.

 

Not to mention the happy few times when Apple has decided that someones app has so great functionality that it gets stolen to the iOS and the original app gets banned from the App Store because now it copies Apples own feature. Did the original developer get even credits for that? Of course not, isn't it enough that they can claim (and be sued if done too publicly) that their code was so great Apple decided to steal it?

[kumicota]

11 hours ago, darknessblade said:

Unless that dev is a company like

 

-Twitter

-Netflix

-epic-games

The same thing happen on Android, none of those companies do that.

Epic tried that with Fortnite and if you search for it, you would see that it was a bad business plan

[HenrySalayne]

3 hours ago, Dracarris said:

Which are exactly the companies that already have a special non-30% deal.

Could you elaborate on that?

[Dracarris]

7 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Could you elaborate on that?

https://9to5mac.com/2020/07/30/apple-developers-equally/

 

IIRC, around that time (just around the Epic-Apple lawsuit time?) we discussed several cases here which got special treatment by Apple after complaining enough. However, since I can't find any credible sources for that after a quick research I maybe have to step down on that claim.

[saltycaramel]

On 12/14/2022 at 9:05 PM, saltycaramel said:

- Epic wants the best for gamers and game devs

 

Some corporations want the best for us

 

oh oh oh

 

 

Ladies and gentlemen, Tim holier_than_thou Sweeney, our crusader against Apple’s reign of terror in the App Store. Yeah, thanks but no thanks.

[Obioban]

Fortnite maker Epic Games has to pay $520 million for tricking kids and violating their privacy

 

Apple may be (is) acting in their own self interest, but that doesn't mean that the alternative is necessarily better for the end user. 

[mr moose]

17 hours ago, Obioban said:

Fortnite maker Epic Games has to pay $520 million for tricking kids and violating their privacy

 

Apple may be (is) acting in their own self interest, but that doesn't mean that the alternative is necessarily better for the end user. 

What's that got to do with this? 

 

 

[saltycaramel]

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

What's that got to do with this? 

 

 

Makes Epic look shady and untrustworthy.

 

Makes Tim Sweeney’s crusade against Apple’s control feel ironic. 

 

Makes me think less favourably of (de facto) forcing millions of iPhone users to also use an Epic Store and other 3rd party stores.

 

Lots of iPhone users are in a multi-year (or even multi-decade at this point) trust relationship with Apple, not with Epic or other companies. That’s one of the reasons they keep coming, the consistent, safe and simple experience. That’s what they expect when they buy an iPhone.

 

Also unsophisticated users would probably blame Apple for any bad experience that happens to take place on an iPhone, including bad experiences with 3rd party stores.

[mr moose]

22 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

Makes Epic look shady and untrustworthy.

 

Makes Tim Sweeney’s crusade against Apple’s control feel ironic. 

 

Makes me think less favourably of (de facto) forcing millions of iPhone users to also use an Epic Store and other 3rd party stores.

 

Lots of iPhone users are in a multi-year (or even multi-decade at this point) trust relationship with Apple, not with Epic or other companies. That’s one of the reasons they keep coming, the consistent, safe and simple experience. That’s what they expect when they buy an iPhone.

So nothing then.  One company doing shit things doesn't make another company doing shit things any less shit. 

 

22 hours ago, saltycaramel said:

Also unsophisticated users would probably blame Apple for any bad experience that happens to take place on an iPhone, including bad experiences with 3rd party stores.

"unsophisticated" users would likely blame any company for their own failings regardless who it is, that doesn't justify unfair control over a market.   Let's just see how well that sentence stacks up when we replace apple with Microsoft or google, or oricle, or nokia, or samsung, or any fucking company that isn't apple.   It doesn't stack up at all.

 

 

 

 

[wanderingfool2]

On 12/21/2022 at 5:34 AM, saltycaramel said:

Makes Epic look shady and untrustworthy.

 

Makes Tim Sweeney’s crusade against Apple’s control feel ironic. 

 

Makes me think less favourably of (de facto) forcing millions of iPhone users to also use an Epic Store and other 3rd party stores.

 

Lots of iPhone users are in a multi-year (or even multi-decade at this point) trust relationship with Apple, not with Epic or other companies. That’s one of the reasons they keep coming, the consistent, safe and simple experience. That’s what they expect when they buy an iPhone.

If one company is working against the issue you have, it doesn't matter whether or not the company is good or bad in that respect.  It's still a company that is championing for a cause that you agree with.  It doesn't mean you have to agree with their tactics, iirc most people were at the time saying that Epic was only doing so out of greed.

 

The vast majority of the apps will still be on the App store, except this time you might also have them on the 3rd party store where they will be able to charge you less.  It's an alternative and realistically apps will remain on the store (except maybe a few big name developers who are trying to cash in, but that will be the exception not the norm).  Look at Android and the Galaxy store with Samsung, I can still find all the Microsoft Apps.  A developer wouldn't simply pull their App from a store unless they had a reason to.

 

On 12/21/2022 at 5:34 AM, saltycaramel said:

Also unsophisticated users would probably blame Apple for any bad experience that happens to take place on an iPhone, including bad experiences with 3rd party stores.

I would still think they would blame Epic for terrible experiences with the App itself.  If they were to try blaming Apple, then those users would also likely be blaming Apple anyways...because Apple permitted the App in question anyways (not talking about the 3rd party stores, but the App itself).  If you wanted to try claiming about making purchases too easy as well, well the App store itself would still have to get to a degree reviewed by Apple, at which point they could raise the red flag and not allow the store if there was lets say no confirmation method for purchases.

 

App wise though, I really could argue that those users already complain about Apple.  Use Apple's IAP, and try getting a refund and your account still gets banned.