Is that actually a good example? Doesn’t Spotify have far more users than Apple Music even on iOS?
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 Calls Facebook-Commissioned Study on Preinstalled App Usage 'Seriously Flawed'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is that actually a good example? Doesn’t Spotify have far more users than Apple Music even on iOS?
If you serve meat knowing that some people are vegans/vegetarians, then you are an *******.
Still not a bad analogy. GM still controls the final pricing and their profit margins on those options they sell. They are not allowing a 3rd party to open a shop on their website and dealers are not allowed to do so on their websites or in person.
Spotify was probably not the best as they were around pre-apple music really. but given the prevelance of Apple music as the default of choice, the argument itself could still apply.
But we could apply the argument to a lot of the third party apps these days on our phones. This is one of those places that it's not exclusively Apple behaving in an Anti-trust behaviour way.
the more pre-installed, first party bundled apps and services that we get already provided to us, while somewhat convenient, IS a problem as it is an anti-competitive setup.
Now, there's always the argument to be made that those app developers could always just, leave iOS. But as users of iOS, is that really in our best interest? do we really want iOS no longer to be the prime development target for innovation and applications? are we prepared to rely more and more on first party apps if that happens? overall, anti-competitive behaviours that we see from these massively vertically integrated tech companies needs to give us all pause. Facebook also guilty of this with occulus and their own apps so they're a bit hyporcritical with their whining. But that doesn't mean the overall point they're trying to make was wrong.
I don't see how these comparisons are relevant but the fact that Facebook is more popular than Apple Mail is extremely telling.
There is absolutely nothing that stops a car purchaser from ripping out the stocks seats and paying a 3rd party to install new ones. GM would have zero ability to prohibit this, nor would they have any control over demanding payment from that 3rd party.
not exactly "Apples to Apples" comparisons.
Facebook: I don't have your apps on my devices because I don't trust you. We know what you did with your Spyware VPN app Onavo -- and that you never apologized for that gross violation of user privacy. When I have to, I access FB through a web browser. I tell friends to de-install FB apps and run them through the browser, too.
Did you ever think that has something to do with the lack of popularity of your apps on iOS?
Did you ever think that has something to do with the lack of popularity of your apps on iOS?
Last edited:
One of the reasons I buy an iPhone is for the pre-installed apps, including a pre-installed App Store which is unlikely to infect my phone with malware. I realize there's an analogy to Windows pre-installing software in the past - but I think many Apple customers want the total package with their devices. Arguably we are paying for the very thing many are now saying is a "problem"...
The majority of apps used by iPhone and Android users are made by Apple and Google, according to a study commissioned by Facebook that was shared with The Verge.
The first-of-its-kind Comscore study ranks the popularity of preinstalled iOS and Android apps alongside third-party apps, indicating that the most popular apps are preinstalled. The results show that on iOS, stock apps such as Weather, Calculator, and Clock, are more popular than YouTube, Facebook, and Amazon. The statistics are similar for Android, where pre-installed Google apps dominate the rankings.
According to the findings, 75 percent of the top 20 apps on iOS in the U.S. were made by Apple, while Google made 60 percent of the top apps on Android. The top four apps on both platforms were made by their respective parent company.
The unique study reveals a number of quirks including the fact that Apple's Calculator app has more users than Gmail on Android. Facebook is the only third-party developer with more than one app on the iOS list of apps and the only developer with three apps on the Android list.
Comscore procured data from apps and websites last December to produce the study, alongside information from a study of 4,000 people that asked about the default apps they used during November 2020. The study excluded browsers in the rankings and "embedded operating system features" such as voice assistants.
Facebook said that it paid for the Comscore study to show the "impact of preinstalled apps on the competitive app ecosystem," hinting at the apparently anti-competitive nature of Android and iOS. Facebook has found itself increasingly at odds with Apple, criticizing the company's limitations on third-party developers, privacy measures such as App Tracking Transparency, the inability for Messenger to be selected as the default on the iPhone, and more.
The report suggests that some app categories that already have a pre-installed app, such as Weather, are difficult for other apps from third parties to compete in. However, it is worth noting that default apps do not win out in every category; for example, Apple Maps and Apple Music do not appear in the rankings at all, while Gmail is represented alongside Apple Mail.
Speaking to The Verge, Apple scolded the report as "seriously flawed in a number of ways."The spokesperson for Apple criticized the report's methodology and said that the results contradicted Comscore's recent April 2021 rankings on app usage, even if those previous rankings excluded pre-installed apps.
Nevertheless, Facebook clearly hopes that the study will point to the power platform owners have over what apps users choose to use on their devices.
Article Link: Apple Calls Facebook-Commissioned Study on Preinstalled App Usage 'Seriously Flawed'
It is bad. GM doesn't control one of the two existing car websites, or one of only two car dealers.
I don't want FB or any other bloatware pre-installed on my devices.
Stock apps are necessary, and have the choice to be removed.
I don't want my Mac and iDevices to become like a HP or Dell computer preloaded with so much useless crap.
Stock apps are necessary, and have the choice to be removed.
I don't want my Mac and iDevices to become like a HP or Dell computer preloaded with so much useless crap.
All of these companies can seriously suck it. Let's call it really what it is. They want a place to peddle their software where they get to keep all of the profits for themselves while leaving Apple to cover all of the costs for development of the very platforms they expect to use for free. The ones complaining about pre-installed apps being unfair would be singing a different tune if their app was included in the pre-install list. If they don't like it they are more than welcome to go build their own mobile OS and phone if they want free access with all of the profits.
There may be no alternative "phone" app but so what. I am buying a iPhone I would expect the ONLY phone app capable of interacting with the phone hardware is the first-party app. The same holds true for Android where I would expect only the Android phone app (or manufacturers' branched app assuming that is possible with Android licensing).
There are plenty of alternatives to the phone app for making calls VOIP calls - Teams, Zoom, Google Voice, 8x8, the list goes on. Many of these allow for a bridge to a POTS phone number.
And as for Springboard - how many alternative desktops are there for Windows? Even the various Linux desktops are branches of a couple of common codebases. How many desktops would you expect? or want. Even in its heyday Cydia didn't have alternatives to Springboard in its catalog - skins, yes, but not desktops.
This is a silly straw man. There are some apps that should be considered core services or basic functional apps froth manufacturer - phone, camera, calendar, browser, mail, settings, notes, media player, App Store (yes I am including App App Store on this list), etc. These are all either required or apps providing basic functionality. Most of which may be deleted from your device if you don't want to use them. All of which also come with every windows, Mac, linux, and android device (well, phone obviously is only on the android options). All of which have have alternatives that are quite successful. I'll grant that Weather may not be required but I would be surprised to not find a basic weather app on a new device.
Last edited:
A study commissioned by Facebook in this matter is like Coca Cola commissioning a study on the benefits of sugar. Who inte world takes this seriously? Accept lawyers…
Is he really or is it on the person who is a vegan going to a house that serves meat? You don't get to pick and choose what someone else serves you for a meal when you are a guest at their house.
the question on this analagy is who invited who?
if me, with food allergies that are series is being invited over to someones house for a meal, I have some expectation that they are taking those allergies and intollerances into consideration (hence why they're inviting me)
if I on the other hand invite myself over to your open party? than it's a little more straight forwards
But inviting a vegan to your home, than plopping down a giant steak on their plate is absolutely just being an ******* of a host.
I was actually surprised to see the Phone app in the number 1 position. It is rare to see someone actually talking on a phone anymore - text and social media are the way most people under 50 seem to communicate anymore. looking at my mobile bill the most of the phones (all iPhones) have at most 30 - 60 minutes of talk time but they have thousands of messages every month (which is quite a lot considering that count does not include Messages - only SMS to non-iPhone contacts.
So, what about those of us who liked the "walled garden" approach? I like the simplicity of iPhones and iOS. I like a central app store, I like the pre-installed apps.
I understand the need to fight monopolies to some degree, but I also don't think you should punish companies just because they have the best products. Apple developed the iPhone and iOS, and I don't see why their success entitles others to leech off that same success by default.
Facebook has its own battles separate from this topic, and I don't think this is going to help them in their arguments.
I understand the need to fight monopolies to some degree, but I also don't think you should punish companies just because they have the best products. Apple developed the iPhone and iOS, and I don't see why their success entitles others to leech off that same success by default.
Facebook has its own battles separate from this topic, and I don't think this is going to help them in their arguments.
Microsoft's problems were not the bundling of IE. Do a little research - there were LOTS of issues raised and proven. The IE mischaracterization of "it was bundled" is not one of them. The fact that IE was on installed, artificially embedded into the OS making its removal impossible, and the fact Microsoft actively leveraged Windows to try to force Netscape out of business were the issue.
Bundling basic stock apps is not an issue from a basic logic standpoint nor from an antitrust or competition standpoint.
Would you be apposed to something similar to what Microsoft had to do with IE? Instead of pre-installing the default IE, you got a setup option screen that gave you choice. IE was still highlighted as "Microsofts own". But you could easily click to chose any one of the other "approved" browsers. Which would than install for you and set as default.
after that, you never have to think about it again.
Somehow though, since then, the world seems to have gotten in bed with antitrust behaviour and allowed mega corporations a lot of leeway to avoid a lot of regulations around anti competitive behaviour.
Every single one of these companies would be afoul of antitrust laws if they were being enforced today like they were 20 years ago.
Funny, but how about those Android phones, including premium ones like my S21, that have Facebook, along with its hidden App installer and services, pre-installed on them, and no option to uninstall them other than disabling them? How about them?
lol you don't see how it's in any shape the same?
that's pretty one sided opinion there.
"it's ok when Apple does it, BUT NOT MICROSOFT CAUSE THEY"RE EVIL@"
it's not ok that anyone fo these companies is allowed to behave in this way. Apple's apps are very much "integrated" into ios the same way that IE was integrated into Windows. They do not have to be, and are being done so with verticle integration monetization in mind.
it's literally no different than what Microsoft was doing in the 90's
I didn't know you could change the phone app on Android. Just did a little look online. These are calling out dialer apps. Not necessarily the same as phone apps. I can make a phone call from Outlook on my iPhone. Does that mean I have an alternate phone app? I have access to an alternate phone call initiation tool (dialer). I don't know the answer to that - would need to look deeper into the Android dialer options and how they work.
A simple search came up with one - Beeper. A look at the web site lists current support for 15 messaging protocols and services with six more coming. And it is open source so you can extend your own. It lists SMS, but that may only be on Android - its not clear and I have no desire to try out the app to see.
Last edited:
I don't know enough about antitrust law and anti-competitive practices to really voice an opinion from that perspective - mine is more of a simpleton's outlook. Apple made the phone and software, it is what it is and I don't understand the issue if their pre-installed apps are the most popular, especially when you can use a multitude of other apps or the web if you like. Even if you couldn't, its their product.
I'm not really disagreeing with you as I'm not familiar with the laws. Just seems to me a way to strong-arm Apple into allowing alternate App stores or selection screens with apps listed seems like a way to placate those who want to piggy-back off of Apple's success. And even then, who gets to decide what apps you can choose from? There's a billion browsers out there, there's a multitude of email clients.