Apple Privacy Chief: North Dakota Bill 'Threatens to Destroy the iPhone as You Know It'

[Rob_2811]

At the start yes, because they were able to gain access to the entirety of Apple’s user base. Which I believe is what helped them initially grow as quickly as they did. Granted, it’s practically household name at this point and Netflix probably doesn’t need Apple any more at this point, but I do believe that Apple was absolutely instrumental to their growth at one point.

Which also brings me to my earlier point - Apple helps grow the pie and lead to more consumers paying for apps that they otherwise would have. It’s not unlike paying more to rent a shop in a prime location with access to a more lucrative clientele. For example, here’s an old article about the disparity in earnings on an app between iOS and android.

Monument Valley: a clear example of why developing for iOS is more profitable than Android ⋆ MatruDEV

The developers of the great game Monument Valley showing the figures: nearly 6 million dollars in revenue almost 90% corresponds to iOS. A clear example that develop in the App Store is still more profitable than Google Play or Amazon.

www.matrudev.com

Do you really think these developers made it big on the App Store solely on their merit and the ecosystem that Apple so painstakingly built up played absolutely no role in enabling this?

There is nothing to support this, sorry. If anything the app store has ushered in an era of race to the bottom pricing of software. A place where charging $2.99 for a developers hard work is considered pricey.

Absolutely they were getting value. If they were paying that much, what were they raking in? $850M.

I do not think you can speak for netflix in determining if they were getting value or not.

I think the fact that they scrapped subscriptions via iTunes suggests that they didnt think they were getting value from it.

 

[I7guy]

There is nothing to support this, sorry. If anything the app store has ushered in an era of race to the bottom pricing of software. A place where charging $2.99 for a developers hard work is considered pricey.





I think the fact that they scrapped subscriptions via iTunes suggests that they didnt think they were getting value from it.

If you don't call $850 million in revenue "value", I'm at a loss. Yes, they got so big, they didn't need the subscriptions at that point.

As far as the "race to the bottom" for the other poster quoted, the price wouldn't be different outside of the app store. It's the nature of the market. Heck, legitimate windows 10 pro licenses can be had for $10, while MS charges what?

 

[Abazigal]

There is nothing to support this, sorry. If anything the app store has ushered in an era of race to the bottom pricing of software. A place where charging $2.99 for a developers hard work is considered pricey.

Why then does the iOS App Store report higher revenue numbers than the google play store, despite there being fewer iphone users?

For all the people whining about paying $6 a year for Tweetbot, I am certain that there will be plenty of users who do end up subscribing, and I can guarantee you that you are going to get even fewer subscribers on android, if it ever gets released there.

 

[Rob_2811]

Why then does the iOS App Store report higher revenue numbers than the google play store, despite there being fewer iphone users?

For all the people whining about paying $6 a year for Tweetbot, I am certain that there will be plenty of users who do end up subscribing, and I can guarantee you that you are going to get even fewer subscribers on android, if it ever gets released there.

They have both reduced the value of software to vitually nothing.

Your Tweetbot example proves my point people thinking $6 a year is expensive!

 

[I7guy]

They have both reduced the value of software to vitually nothing.

Your Tweetbot example proves my point people thinking $6 a year is expensive!

If they have reduced the value of software to virtually nothing, it's because Apples' innovations in the app store has opened up software development to the untold masses for a mere $99. That is the value the app store brings into the equation (which you just tacitly acknowledged) and maybe on the flip side what competition does to pricing.

 

[Seoras]

Option is usually good, but not in this case. The problem with even providing the option of non-app store apps is that developers would have the choice to make whatever app they want, however they want, and not pay Apple anything -OR- they can choose to obey Apple’s strict rules and guidelines (for quality, privacy, no shady practices) while paying Apple a big cut. The former is too enticing. Many many apps will start migrating their way out of the App Store, including major apps that we need to use. The selection of apps in the App Store will dwindle, and customers will be forced to roll the dice with unregulated apps to get the functionality that they had before. This is ultimately a very negative impact on the customer. Great for the developer though.
So this wouldn’t ultimately be giving the customer the choice, it would be giving developers the choice, and we the customers would be subject to their whims.

(Macs are somewhat of a different situation. Mac applications require more flexibility, especially for enterprise, so it would be harder to regulate.)

Do you want to give Facebook and Google the choice of being on the App Store or not?
I don't. I like that apple has forced them to disclose what they are doing in privacy labelling and ask my permission to be tracked.
If you open up iOS then heavy weights like those 2 will simply move to the App Store that lets them carry on as before.
I suspect they are part of the same cartel that the Gov Spooks and Epic are in who stand to gain a lot if this happens.

"..while Paying Apple a big cut" ?
Big? I'm paying Apple 15% now. That's very reasonable considering I don't need to deal with the payment processors, local tax rules or even issue refunds and take the hit for that from the CC company.
I'm happy to stick with Apple's App Store.
You could offer me an alternative at less but I'll stick with the tried and trusted brand.
I wouldn't spread bet either and offer my apps on all stores. It's just too much overhead having to re-build for each store variation and in-app purchasing API. (I've experience with this hassle having published on Amazon as well as Play!)

 

[jhollington]

I see what you're saying. You're making good points, but I still am going to refer to the long history of other major operating systems existing just fine without a single App Store controlled by the OS developer.

I think that's something of an Apples-to-Penguins comparison 😂

Windows, Mac, Linux, and the rest of the major desktop operating systems are fundamentally different to mobile devices. Perhaps that's partly because people's expectations on mobile devices have become different because of Apple and Google, but I think that's only part of it.... I've been a mobile device user going back to the days of the Pilot 1000, and even when there were separate stores to buy "apps" back then, it always seemed like a very different experience from buying or downloading software for my PC or Mac.

Part of that, I think, was the fact that I generally had far fewer "apps" for my desktop or laptop than I did for my mobile device even back then, and today that gap has grown even wider. I can count the number of apps on my MacBook on two hands, while the number of apps on my iPhone fills multiple pages and folders. I think part of that is the whole "there's an app for everything" economy, since so many things that are web apps on the PC end up being distinct standalone apps on the iPhone... In fact, I can think of at least a dozen on my iPhone right off the top of my head that don't have desktop counterparts, simply because they're normally otherwise accessed through a web browser.

Plus, I think the key point with Windows, Mac, and Linux is that there are basically NO App Stores that are dominant in any way. Most users "sideload" by the very nature of these operating systems, and of course have been from the beginning. Services like Steam are new concept to the world of desktop operating systems.

So maybe if they iPhone had grown up in the same world that the Palm and iPaq did, where installing apps from just about anywhere was normal, people would have grown used to it, but I feel like the result today would end up being a series of individual app store fiefdoms, all jockeying for position, rather than an active and dynamic cottage industry of independent developers all selling apps from their own websites.

If Apple doesn't want to lose developers to a competing App Store, perhaps Apple should take a hard look at that 30% cut they've been demanding since it's inception (Yes I realize they recently reduced the cut below $1M revenue).

Agreed, and in the respect, some competition wouldn't be a bad thing. In some ways, Apple has had it too good, for too long. My fear is that the "solution" could end up being worse than the problem, since most of Apple's opponents aren't nearly as altruistic as they're pretending to be right now. A bunch of multi-million dollar tech companies all jockeying for position could still result in leaving users out in the cold in much the same way as the streaming service wars have done... giving users more choices doesn't matter if all of the choices end up being equally bad, or the whole experience ends up being more costly and more cumbersome.

 

[subjonas]

Do you want to give Facebook and Google the choice of being on the App Store or not?
I don't. I like that apple has forced them to disclose what they are doing in privacy labelling and ask my permission to be tracked.
If you open up iOS then heavy weights like those 2 will simply move to the App Store that lets them carry on as before.
I suspect they are part of the same cartel that the Gov Spooks and Epic are in who stand to gain a lot if this happens.

"..while Paying Apple a big cut" ?
Big? I'm paying Apple 15% now. That's very reasonable considering I don't need to deal with the payment processors, local tax rules or even issue refunds and take the hit for that from the CC company.
I'm happy to stick with Apple's App Store.
You could offer me an alternative at less but I'll stick with the tried and trusted brand.
I wouldn't spread bet either and offer my apps on all stores. It's just too much overhead having to re-build for each store variation and in-app purchasing API. (I've experience with this hassle having published on Amazon as well as Play!)

“Big” is subjective but yes, exactly, we’re making the same points.

 

[Abazigal]

They have both reduced the value of software to vitually nothing.

Your Tweetbot example proves my point people thinking $6 a year is expensive!

It’s more an issue of the aggregating power of the internet, and less the App Store. The internet enables a developer to sell to virtually anyone in the world, but that is also equally true for every other developer in the world.

Without the App Store, apps would be pricier, and there would also be way fewer people buying them.

 

[Tech198]

Apple would probably either make a special update only for North Dakota, or just not sell an iphone there, if this passed.

We only like fair competition, and can't handle closed eco-systems. Truth be told, you can see by the number of companies who raise issues surrounding such over the following years.

It could be just due to policiy changes, but i don't think it is. Sooner or later they would attack anyway.

 

[9927036]

Fair point. Over the course of time vulnerabilities, bugs, annoyances have been found in Apple software. Microsoft just released patch Tuesday with patches containing fixes for critical vulnerabilities. Apple has a good track record of patching those types of vulnerabilities.

My point was companies don't declare security and privacy done and after the declaration and subsequent parties don't work on them further.

I agree with you. I would say that the above is not a vulnerability but a conscious decision on Apple's part. The issues has existed since the early days of iOS 13 and is still not fixed. Note also how they granted themselves permission to "bypass" a VPN on macOS.

 

[ignatius345]

computers are not your cell phone. Cell phone contains more sensitive personal data than a computer and thus need to be more protected.

LOL, what do you use your Mac for? No email, no Messages, no web browsing? You just use it as like a doodle pad? Give me a break, man. What you're saying here is just obviously false.

also it’s too late to backtrack and close down macOS. It’s not too late to keep iOS protected and safe until Android lovers force there demands upon Apple.

I'm not even going to touch this.

Fact is, the MacOS has been growing closer to iPadOS and iOS as time goes on. It's not too late for Apple to lock down the Mac the way it has the other devices, and for those who care to use their Macs as we see fit, it's a scary proposition.

 

[I7guy]

I agree with you. I would say that the above is not a vulnerability but a conscious decision on Apple's part. The issues has existed since the early days of iOS 13 and is still not fixed. Note also how they granted themselves permission to "bypass" a VPN on macOS.

It could be that some software has to operate in a privileged mode for whatever reason. I'm sure that Apple makes design decisions such that these decisions would affect the operation of the software in the best of the possibility of ways.

 

[Ethosik]

LOL, what do you use your Mac for? No email, no Messages, no web browsing? You just use it as like a doodle pad? Give me a break, man. What you're saying here is just obviously false.


I'm not even going to touch this.

Fact is, the MacOS has been growing closer to iPadOS and iOS as time goes on. It's not too late for Apple to lock down the Mac the way it has the other devices, and for those who care to use their Macs as we see fit, it's a scary proposition.

I’m sorry, but the standard desktop operating system idea is just not working. I worked in a managed services provider and one company got their entire business encrypted due to ONE EMAIL. We had backups, but restoring from terabytes of data and making sure the malware was gone took time.

Malware Statistics & Trends Report | AV-TEST

Provides visualizations of malware statistics that have happened in the last year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 year time period.

www.av-test.org

Malware has always been an issue on Windows mostly.

 

[cristianvaldez]

If only Apple charge 15% for app purchases and 10% for in app purchases and suscriptions on third party apps, this problem wouldnt even exist, because developers wouldnt complain!

 

[gregmancuso]

Apple doesn't have to fix everything if it not their fault. Apple is doing now and there is no difference with people install apps from other stores.

Apple won't fix your phone if you have 3rd party batter, 3rd party display. Apple won't fix your phone if you have app installed from other store.

So your argument is invalid

That is a facetious argument. There is no way - politically, PR, or realistically - they could do this. Of course you are limiting your comment to hardware issue only (I presume). But every user on the planet will inundate the Genius Bar and AppleCare with performance or iOS functionality issues. Sure, they could void warranty and not fix phones, but the iOS troubleshooting, PR hit to Apple by fobbing off customers, and likely legal ramifications would make even warranty void problematic.

Again - this becomes everyone's problem. I have been working with computers since the 80's, a developer for part of that, and worked with OS's that were obsolete when I began my career. Having manually pushed the leader for paper tapes in career I guess you could call me a bit of a geek, but even I have no interest in needing to maintain multiple stores, search across all stores to find an app, or do my own troubleshooting when something goes wrong.

Sure, the Apple app Store is not perfect, but it better that the alternatives of multiple stores or no stores.

Phones ARE different from Mac and PC. There is an inherent difference in expected reliability. There is a tighter control over their functionality often driven by government regulation (GSM signaling, emergency services (e.g., 911 / 999) access, sub channel location for emergency calls, and the fact that it is a PHONE with the expectation that the primary use case of CALLS are ALWAYS available with all other uses being secondary and without interference.

 

[Romeo_Nightfall]

As a customer you may have little choice in the matter since it will be up to developers as to which app store they want to use. It's not guaranteed that developers will flee to the lower cost store, but it's also hard to see it as outside the realm of possibility.

That’s kinds whataboutism - developers are mostly very good faited people - and experts - so for SURE they wont place their precious app on a crap store!

That’s guaranteed !!! No fear about that - its minimum risk if risk at all

 

[Stromos]

If only Apple charge 15% for app purchases and 10% for in app purchases and suscriptions on third party apps, this problem wouldnt even exist, because developers wouldnt complain!

So you would be okay with iPhone prices coming up to compensate right? For the devs!

 

[Romeo_Nightfall]

Not sure thats what they meant. If you could buy a porsche from the dealer for 100k, or the same exact vehicle from a third party dealer for 90k, which one would you do assuming everything was exactly the same? See Spotify battle for example.

They meant a shady dealer - an I would buy 100k dealer - and not the shady dealer - maybe i would use paypal - but that doesn’t help greatly anymore - 😆

But if a nice dealer around the corner offers it for 95k i would buy there - and THATS the point apple fears like the devil the holy water!

 

[dk001]

That’s exactly what people are doing when they demand Apple open up iOS. They want an open system they need to go to Android or ****.

Why?
Not being sarcastic, rather looking to understand your point.
I use both iOS and Android. There are some great apps / functions on Android I wish I could use on iOS.

 

[dk001]

Every single business is about the money. Even hospitals. But it is still invalid to say some hospitals actually care about their patients? Why is it IMPOSSIBLE for Apple to care about privacy and security? "Its only about $$$$". Uh that is the definition of a business.

One again taking it out of context. This is about the $$$.
One of the arguments Apple and walled App Store supporters are using as a rebuttal is security and privacy. This is being used in a "worst case the sky is falling" scenario aka "fear mongering".

I respect your right to call out issues you perceive however I will call you out when you deliberately use it out of context to spread fear.

 

[gregmancuso]

Or maybe he's just unhappy that Apple charge monopoly rents, 30% is not reasonable for hosting and payment processing

It is not "hosting and payment processing." As others have pointed out it is hosting with global distribution capability, payment processing in local currency, tax withholding and reporting at the local level, compliance assurance, and a measure of legal protections. To call it nothing more that a file server and a chip reader is being intentionally deceitful - or ignorant.

 

[MacAddict1978]

Why doesn't anybody ask users what they want? I specifically chose the iPhone because it is locked down. If I want the ability to side-load, use secondary app stores, and alternative payment methods, I'll go to Android.

You shoot down your own point friend. Android offers the consumer the "choice." No one says you have to side load or use an alternate app store, and you can enjoy all the safety and features you do today if you so CHOOSE to. That isn't a negative to Android either....its one of its many benefits over IOS.

I'm grown. I don't need Apple deciding what is and is not appropriate apps and content for me. Google policies apps, but give me the option to side load if I so desire. Apple's control freak nature and predatory practices absolutely deserve to be called out. They packaged this as privacy concerns which isn't really their issue, it's losing app store revenue and that 30% cut they take.

The security features and the device and OS level can still restrict sideloaded apps from going rogue and keep a device secure to a good level. On Android, you can download apps that check side loaded apps for malware and viruses, and same can be true of IOS for those who are willing. Again, it's a choice. If I spend a grand on a freaking phone, I should be able to fire the babysitter that came with it. Can have the best of both worlds.

 

[dk001]

To me, it's not a question of whether there is a cut or not, but what the company is doing to justify that cut.

Apple does a lot of stuff for the App Store. They release APIs that developers can incorporate into their apps to improve the functionality for their users. They integrate biometrics into their payments. They vet the apps on their platform (I recognise this isn't perfect, and acknowledge the existence of problems like subscription scams, but it's still a step up compared to Android where malware is rife). They have recently added stuff like being able to view and manage my subscriptions all in one place. Apple's adding a lot of value to the equation that other payment providers can't and don't.

So to me as a consumer, Apple being paid a commission that will never affect me seems perfectly reasonable. I say this because apps, being software, mostly have no marginal costs. As such, they are likely priced to maximise revenue, and even if Apple reduces their cut, I am not likely to see a corresponding drop in app pricing. Developers will simply pocket the difference, because that's what they have deemed is the optimal price for said app.

The end result for me as a consumer is that it's extremely convenient for me to purchase and download apps from the iOS App Store, and I have been able to benefit from numerous apps that are exclusive to the iOS platform, from notability to Apollo, because again, that's where the money is. I just renewed my subscription for Tweetbot, and I intend to do so for Fantastical as well later in May. All this is processed through iTunes.

Microsoft hasn't demonstrated that they are willing to invest an equivalent amount of resources into managing their app store the same way Apple has. So if you do less (or worse, nothing), then you deserve less of a cut.

This is what I fear will end up being compromised were the App Store be opened up - its vitality and viability. This may be one area where consumers and developers ultimately want very different outcomes, and if the story of King Solomon has taught us anything, it's that when people meet in the middle, the baby dies.

I sympathise with the developers' plight in this regard, and this is one area I absolutely will not capitulate in, were it up to me or if I were in any position to vote or otherwise make a difference.

Great argument however it reads like "in order to protect you, let me bubble wrap you".
I need to take exception where you claim Android is rife with malware. Unless a user unlocks the bl and deliberately sideloads (bl is locked and sideload turned off by default) questionable apps Android is pretty darn safe.

 

[MacAddict1978]

It is not "hosting and payment processing." As others have pointed out it is hosting with global distribution capability, payment processing in local currency, tax withholding and reporting at the local level, compliance assurance, and a measure of legal protections. To call it nothing more that a file server and a chip reader is being intentionally deceitful - or ignorant.

SMH. Yeah, that's not how any of that really works. You make it sound like this requires Apple to have massive resources to deliver this.

It's software driven. If I wanted to open my own home grown online store, the payment processing software automatically knows tax rates and things for various countries. So does tax/accounting software.

Apple has to do this with or without an app store to sell hardware and accessories in those countries. Its all one system on the back end.

99% of all these functions are software driven. Even an app for mom and pop businesses like QuickBooks offers international features.

The invention of real time currency conversion 20 some years ago was also a boon.