The facade is focusing on the mobile app market as if it's the place where prices are too high. One of the reasons that smartphones and mobile apps became popular with consumers is because the prices were generally bargains compared to the desktop/laptop market and the functions that consumer level users liked on desktop/laptop were present in the apps on mobile.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
App Store to Be 'Split in Two' Ahead of EU iPhone Sideloading Deadline
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you buy android, you’re willingly embracing the spyware. No one would be stopping you buying an iPhone instead, etc.
Some of us want neither lock-in nor spyware. However, I’d be happy to compromise with apple so they can continue to limit side loading but they have to accept any apparently legal app that meets their security standards at the actual cost of providing the App Store and performing the review.
Taking away my choice as a consumer is not standing up for consumers.
One question that demolishes the "nothing will happen to you" or "more choice is good" or "your choice isn't being taken away from this"
Is there a law in place that every single iOS app must ALSO be on Apple's App Store?
No?
Then that invalidates all the "nothing will change" line of thinking. Just look at Epic as an example alone. Epic wants their own store. Epic sued Google as well as it was "too difficult" to side load on Android. Epic Games Store on PC gobbles up exclusivities where we need to leave Steam to install some games. There is more likelihood of this same thing happening on iOS than "nothing changes".
Therefore, this is not adding more choices, but taking the choice I and several others make with Apple. Android has far far FAR better phones out there. Android has a lot better operating system. Honestly, I don't know why you all love iOS so much but hate it at the same time. iOS has been playing catch up with Android for so long it's not even funny. It is not even that great of an operating system. I only chose iOS for its locked down environment.
Is there a law in place that every single iOS app must ALSO be on Apple's App Store?
No?
Then that invalidates all the "nothing will change" line of thinking. Just look at Epic as an example alone. Epic wants their own store. Epic sued Google as well as it was "too difficult" to side load on Android. Epic Games Store on PC gobbles up exclusivities where we need to leave Steam to install some games. There is more likelihood of this same thing happening on iOS than "nothing changes".
Therefore, this is not adding more choices, but taking the choice I and several others make with Apple. Android has far far FAR better phones out there. Android has a lot better operating system. Honestly, I don't know why you all love iOS so much but hate it at the same time. iOS has been playing catch up with Android for so long it's not even funny. It is not even that great of an operating system. I only chose iOS for its locked down environment.
Interesting way to look at it. It would not be the first time a major company fought something only to have it work out great for them in the end anyways, or at worst, have no ill effect at all.
I think that would be the ideal ending.
You should speak to him again - since I'm pretty sure the way you phrased it isn't correct.
Emulators are not illegal and you don't need permission from the copyright holder. As for breaking encryption or DRM, they are (albeit only) a few exceptions already allowed by the Library of Congress in the U.S. (for example).
Unauthorised distribution of games of course remains largely illegal, and admittedly fair use won't be a very common use case for many emulators.
Epic sued Google because it was "too difficult" to side load on Android. They tried this with Fortnite and it failed, so they just sued Google.
The emulator application itself isn't. An example if I develop my own PS5 game I can emulate it myself being the copyright owner. HOWEVER, I cannot emulate God of War Ragnarok because I do not have the explicit permission from Santa Monica Studio. See the difference there? If I had their permission it wouldn't be illegal. Some games give you permission to emulate. But many don't
SomeOrdinaryGamers explains this very well in his video.
Not going to happen. IT's a nothing burger overall.
people are on Android because of the cheap hardware.
You also have to keep in mind that Epic is intentionally losing money with their store in order to try and gain marketshare. Epic's managers have testified to that effect in court. The 12% commission is not viable.
Agree. And it won't be fair use either - at least for a long time.
That said, the emulators aren't illegal per se and...
...the Dolphin team "adamantly" denies that its software is illegal (even though Valve may be unwilling to publish it).
I don't think Apple is prohibited by law from offering emulators through their App Store - though just like Valve they may decline to do it,
They testified that that's due to expensive exclusivity arrangements and marketing.
There are other digital software licensing service providers that can do it for less than 12% - though they'll discreetly do it in the background. And not as an expensive, well-marketed "store platform".
Anyway... what is it yours or Apple's business if Epic takes some initial losses to promote their platform? That's their problem, isn't it? Apple has done it too.
because some people think it is the end of the world, but I have an advise for those people: Don‘t enable sideloading!
Fot all the other people and also for a lot of companies this is good news. So Apple is no longer in the position to be gatekeeper and competitor like Apple Music vs Spotify. And Spotify can offer a different Payment option in the app without owing Apple 30% and so on.
In the end, In App Payment using Apples mechanism will get cheaper, since as soon as there are competitors (e.g. Paypal) the one with the best offer wins - free market!!
Mmm, but the EU isn't telling Apple they can't offer apps in their app store. Just that the App Store can't be the only way to get apps on the iPhones. The only one who has been limiting customer choice, has been Apple.
And if it's a free market - shouldn't people be able to install what they want on their phones?
Either way, there's no such thing as a "free market". It's regulated, both in the US and in the EU. Because history has shown corporations can't be trusted to regulate themselves.
Look, like I said in my first post. I don't like the concept of side-loading or multiple app stores. But Apple has been acting too much of a gate keeper, controlling what you can and can't do on your iPhone. As an example, not allowing Microsofts Xbox Cloud streaming app onto the app store is just nonsense, at least the reasons they gave.
And it's not like I think Epic is doing all their legal battles "for the consumer", they just want a piece of the pie. But again, Apple could probably found some middle-ground here, but they played a high stake game, preferring to maximise profit for a period, rather than having something a bit less profitable, but also less likely to be struck down by regulators.
You don't seem to know how the app store works you cant skip the 30 or 15% apple charges for everything you sell except big companies they are exempt like microsoft or amazon they say they check on every app they post in the app store but they don’t there are lots of racist apps in the app store such as 9gag, its a pain in the arse to upload an app they always reject it even if its a simple clock app
Most of Europe would have been better off if America had stayed out of WWI, because the naval blockade would have defeated Germany anyway and then no one would have been stupid enough to let Wilson get involved with the peace treaty.
WWII wouldn’t have gone so badly in Europe if Britain hadn’t decided to help America build their empire instead of Japan, although South East Asia wouldn’t be very happy about it if they’d stuck with Japan.
As for WWIII, well , France has nukes and they can use them without America’s permission, and they’ve probably learned to stop deciding to sit out a war after their allies are all committed
It anyone took (and kept) away your choice, it's Apple here.
Certainly not standing up for consumers.
Also, having less choice isn't "having choice".
Just use other apps then! What's the problem?
You think that's a problematic lack of choice?
Then that invalidates all the "Just use Android then" line of thinking.
Never compromised my security on Mac and I never buy apps on the App Store for it. Apple themselves as a selling point have boasted about how apps on iOS are essentially sandboxed and can't pose a security issue. But I can see how they'd flip the narrative now. If an app can be an OS-wide security issue, then there's OS-level vulnerabilities that need to be fixed.
And the whole point of the App Store is to draw all the sales to Apple's inside store to increase profits so it's not much different.
They already do. It's true that iOS apps tend to be higher quality because they have to work on essentially the same devices. But buggy apps that don't do what was promised are the majority of apps that aren't bigger/promoted by Apple.
Many fake and misleading ChatGPT copycats that even mimic their logo and don't even do anything, and a huge pile of other examples. The App Store is full of bogus.
I don't think the majority of users are interested in sideloading as all of us pretty much keep the usual apps like social media, music and entertainment. What sideloading would unfortunately enable is piracy and modded apps, together with a whole lot of "download our app from our website". I agree that it's not going to be great for the customer down the line and will only make things more complex. But I don't agree that it's such a threat to security and Apple definitely did this all by themselves by getting so greedy. Sideloading should've always been an option like it is on Android and Mac. Android has already proven that customers prefer the market that comes with the device.
Why do you get your way but to damned with our ways? Just don't install app that require side loading. There, iOS can stay as it is.
Without the right signatures you can’t access some fairly important APIs, supposedly for security reasons.
Worthless response because can’t defend the argument I take itNaa, you can still buy in a walled garden. Here you go.
Nokia 2780 Flip | Unlocked | KaiOS | Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile | Blue
With its simple, easy to use interface, and with the modern features you need, the Nokia 2780 Flip phone is a modern twist on the classic flip now with 4G. With its intuitive design it already feels familiar. It comes with two large screens, to make texting easy and seeing who's calling even easi...www.amazon.com
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
My getting the (new) choice of sideloading does not take away your choice of staying within the walled garden.
It does, by my previous statement and you said "just don't use those apps then if they leave".
...and that last part is a good thing.
It will at least in theory present an alternative to the App Store. If Apple gets - or remains - too greedy, or has too lopsided rules, a developer at least could offer product/service through their own website. Why would they though, as long as Apple offers fair rules and commission rates?
It just levels the playing field (at least a little bit), instead of leaving 100% unilateral pricing power to Apple.