that's where I disagree. understand what I'm saying now?
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.
Apple Announces Ability to Download iPhone Apps From Websites in EU
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
re-read my original statement "macOS/Linux/Windows didn't start off with store only.". contextually we're discussing installing third party native apps.
unless of course you think web-apps are just the same in which case, app developers should have clearly built web apps as the alternative instead of whining about it. or do you not think web-apps are the same? ;-)
No deflection whatsoever. I was replying to claims that the DMA was designed to target U.S. companies.Nice deflection there. This had nothing to do with “dominance”, “market share”, “anti trust”.
It wasn't - it was designed to target gatekeepers in digital software/services - which just happen to be mainly from the U.S. (due to various factors).
Nice deflection there (as you would say), after I countered "your" 23% market share figure with "my" more than 50% of revenue
But nonsense, governments don't "hate" successful companies. Successful companies employ people and provide tax revenue. I'm not seeing how they would have any issue with Epic, Spotify and others becoming successful.
Restricting others from communicating to consumers or to access their products conveniently isn't "hard work" - it's denying others enjoying the fruits of their hard work to the fullest.
PS: I mean, in Apple's case, it they actually seem hard (at) work in throwing wrenches into third-party developers' businesses.
Keyword is force. That never works.
Laws are rarely going to be able to satisfy everyone but that doesn’t mean they shouldn't exist or be enforced when a country/region feels it's necessary. For example, I'm sure many consumers would be happy to get a product for free or very low cost but that doesn't mean the company offering that free/low cost item should be able to do so by engaging in antocompetitive behavior (predatory pricing) to try to run their competition out of business.
There are people who may like Apple's iOS "walled garden" but that doesn't mean Apple should be able to stifle app access competition on a major mobile OS platform by restricting sideloading and alternative app stores. Even with the law enforced, users will still be able to get apps from the App Store and choose not to sideload. This would hopefully also push Apple to make the App Store even more appealing to customers and make iOS even stronger/better for things like sideloading and thereby make it a better experience for a wider range of people, as well as a more competitive one when it comes to app access.
See how that works?
And you're free to disagree. 🤷♂️
Seems to be working actually, based on the frequent news articles on Apple's capitulation as of late.
Not sure about that when I read all the comments over here.
Since 2008 we have the app store and what we call today the Google Play Store ... 16 years later, people are discussing this issue as if tomorrow may never come.
Sounds like projection to me. There are countless posts about the doom and carnage that is to come if *GASP* people are allowed to install software from outside of the App Store on their iPhones. Oh the absolute horror!!! And the children!!
jesusSounds like projection to me. There are countless posts about the doom and carnage that is to come if *GASP* people are allowed to install software from outside of the App Store on their iPhones. Oh the absolute horror!!! And the children!!
It just happen to be that the EU threaded the needle and define the terminology and laws such that apple is considered a public utility. The case for ticktoc is not relevant to this discussion as the underpinnings are different.No deflection whatsoever. I was replying to claims that the DMA was designed to target U.S. companies.
It wasn't - it was designed to target gatekeepers in digital software/services - which just happen to be mainly from the U.S. (due to various factors).
Nice deflection there (as you would say), after I countered "your" 23% market share figure with "my" more than 50% of revenue
But nonsense, governments don't "hate" successful companies. Successful companies employ people and provide tax revenue. I'm not seeing how they would have any issue with Epic, Spotify and others becoming successful.
Restricting others from communicating to consumers or to access their products conveniently isn't "hard work" - it's denying others enjoying the fruits of their hard work to the fullest.
PS: I mean, in Apple's case, it they actually seem hard (at) work in throwing wrenches into third-party developers' businesses.
Ironically without the children the future may never come...Sounds like projection to me. There are countless posts about the doom and carnage that is to come if *GASP* people are allowed to install software from outside of the App Store on their iPhones. Oh the absolute horror!!! And the children!!
You're mistaking caring about something vs buying a device for something.
I buy iPhone because I like it better than Android. But that doesn't mean I don't want Apple to make iOS better by allowing sideloading.
Wrong. They literally should do what they think is best for the customers that enjoy the walled garden. Sideloading/alt app stores is breaking down the walled garden. See how that works?
Thanks for pointing out what I'm literally doing on these forums? Giving opinions, agreeing, disagreeing, explaining my reasoning, etc...
Anyways, I'm moving on.
Thank you immensely for the fitting example of the hyperbolic rhetoric I had just mentioned that was being projected. "If folks are allowed to side-load there will be no children and no future!!" 😂
Weird that you get indignant because I tell you that you're free to disagree even though you're the one that first responded to me telling me I should buy an Android if side-loading is important to me. 🤦♂
Moving on indeed.
NEVER works? That's kind of how laws do work, as long as they are being enforced. "Force" is even part of the word enforced.
Since you think "force" never works, does that mean you think we should live in a lawless society where people and companies should be able to do whatever they want and not be "forced" to behave certain ways?
People should be allowed to drive 150 mph on a highway instead of being "forced" to follow the speed limit? People should be allowed to steal/shoplift instead of being "forced" to follow theft laws?
Companies should be allowed to pay workers $5/hour instead of being "forced" to pay the minimum wage? Companies should be able to engage in anticompetitive behavior instead of being "forced" to follow antitrust laws?
Wrong. A company doing what they may think (or claim) is best for their customers does NOT give them the right to violate laws.
If a company thinks paying its employees only $5/hour is best for their customers because it would allow the company to charge a lower price, it doesn't mean they should be able to ignore minimum wage laws. If a company thinks being open on Sundays is best for their customers because it gives them greater shopping convenience (another day to shop), it doesn't mean they should be able to ignore relevant blue laws that may exist in their state.
You aren’t a developer, if you were you would be aware of the concept of multi homing.
You can have you app in the iOS store AND any other store as well. Just how a game on Steam can also exist on the GoG store.
Why do you think just about nobody care for the Macappstore and abandon it for the steam store or any other Mac specific game stores?
If I want to find a game with the characteristics of x,y and z. On what platform do you think a user will have an easier time finding what they are interested in without leaving the store?
iOS AppStore, Mac AppStore or the steam store?
Well side loading is extremely dumb on android as well and have been for years now. You need to jailbreak them as well.
Who changed the rules of the game? Didn’t Apple read the contract saying the ToS can be changed at anytime and they agree to the new terms by accessing EU customers?
Or can’t new laws be changed for older companies 😳
So why does it seem that a vast majority of American companies will benefit massively from the DMA and the access they get to apples AppStore?
Seems very slanted against EU companies if they are the ones you think the legislation is written for.
It was obviously a very bad idea to bring up such an important issue in a side-loading discussion.
The Trotsky's idea to destroy all nation states to the benefit of the transnational capital is very much alive and well even today. Attacking the children is definitely sets you on a path to get there.
Nobody is attacking children, bud. Thank you though for yet another example of hyperbolic rhetoric from the anti-consumer, pro-trillion-dollar-corporation side of things.
We do live pretty much in a zero trust environment. Considering that Apple is also at odds with the US government it is not very clear to me that Apple is actually chasing Trotsky's ideas in fact Apple might be trying to resist it(for whatever reason) and is being punished.
No. They should do what they are allowed to do by the laws in the countries they operate in. Only then, they can do what they think is best for whomever they choose.