My business requirement does not constitute your emergency.
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 Pushes Back Against India's New Digital Market Regulations
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, but don't act surprised when your business strategies land you in legal trouble.
There isn’t one, get real. Only two mobile platforms exist in this world: Apple and Android, and most devs are already on both. If they leave apple because they don’t like being taken advantage of, there’s no other platform they can find to sell their apps and get subscribers. They’d simply be giving up all their customers from the apple ecosystem and the respective revenue and sticking to Android as their single platform. No dev would ever want to do that unless they were idiots and your suggestion to ‘find another platform’ is simply unrealistic.
Agreed. It’s more like they begrudgingly complied with the new rules. I already edited the original post to say that instead.
Where there is an imbalance of power (in an important market), competition law may be enacted to safeguard the business interests of the many against the the business interests of the very few powerful.
As the western economies fall into an economic down fall lead by the US $peculative market$ and its interests, hopefully while avoiding a planetary extinction level war, it is smart for companies like Apple to keep on turning to the east and Asia for future growth. Our homes seam to be kept together with ever thiner strings, in the brink of collapse, not even Apple Card can save most us.
Sending Americans to war in TW, and later the rest of us westerners under a blanket made of a conjured morality, only to protect these companies interests while unemployment rises and poverty spreads through our homes, will just not be enough to keep these companies afloat.
Is it me finding Apple marketing videos increasingly CREEPY? Dystopian ... Fallout level? Management just got in.
Is simply ludicrous to think that companies bent on creating planetary level feudal market systems on top of the Internet have any interest in defending democracies, freedom of speech and people choice within and across feuds. They may as long as is a way to optimize profits, the buck stops there ... it's just a rhetorical instrument. No wonder we see all these push back against regulations that are simply aimed to protect peopler and smaller business players against manipulation. Regulations that aren't even new in concept, the same kind of regulations that are applied to many other industries. These companies believe that is in their rights to be above them, that have somehow ascended beyond the rule of law, systematically trying to drown the system with increasingly creative counter measures.
Anyway, let just put all this under the rug for awhile and enjoy WWDC.
Last edited:
I understand that the tune of the EU, except that the needle was threaded so finely so catch apple. Apple has a minority share all around.
Thankfully in the US we are far from that.
There always is a business alternative. Your business “emergency” does not make apple responsible if you don’t want to contract with them.
And some of these other manufacturers have their distribution platforms as well. Again the lack of innovation in developing operating systems is not apples problem.
Apple is not taking advantage of them.
There is always the web.
Again this is not apples problem. Don’t make the lack of ingenuity on someone who doesn’t want to contract with apple, apple’s problem
There is none, at least on iOS side. If Apple randomly decided to kick you off from their App Store, you are done. It isn't first time that Apple kicked the competitors out of their App Store for whatever the reason.
At least on Android, if Google decided to do the samething, you can offer the app in alternative store.
Why is rule has to be different on iOS, where MacOS allows sideload?
You have be kidding me.
Yes. Apple is monopolistic at least in App distribution and Apple can decidate App developers. If this is not take advantage of developer, then what it is?
People just perder apps. It is matter of fact.
Which competitors were kicked out the app store for a non-legitimate reason? Don’t take a one-off and make it a general business case. Nobody said(other than the EU) there had to be App Store competition. See epic for example.
Different operating system. Different platform. Different target.
It’s a legal monopoly not an illegal monopoly.
That’s not the point. The point is your business plan does not constitute the requirement for apple to let your app do whatever.
Back door, side door, front door. People are using the orientation of the door pejoratively.
There has always been a door, and it's been used for abuse too. That's why Apple will hate Epic until the end of time, they snuck contraband through the front door. The bouncer at the front is also arbitrary and capricious.
Even on Android the "side door" is guarded, you have to "unbolt it" from the "inside."
Every couple months Apple patches holes in the wall. Those openings are still there, you just don't notice them.
This is a really good metaphor!
What business alternative is there? Please, I would love to know how else I can reasonably distribute software on iOS.
How are they not? You keep mentioning this. Please enlighten us as to how this arrangement, architected to benefit Apple above all else, is not taking advantage of their customers (the software developers)?
The one Apple goes out of their way to cripple, in order to push their business model? PWAs are terrible on iOS, and I say that as someone that uses the MR PWA.
Do you know the difference? Please explain it to us.
This article is literally about how Apple is pushing back against incoming legal trouble.
I mean, it should be obvious that the alternative would be to develop for any other platform.
Because they voluntarily agree to it. I mean, this is pretty basic stuff. It's not like Apple pulled a bait and switch here. These terms were agreed to when Apple had very little market share and led to huge support by developers. And they have become more developer friendly over time, not less.
Enlighten us, beside Android, which other platform? If I am an app developer, it is pretty clear that I have to develop for iOS.
I can distribute my App through Google Play Store or any other store on Android. What is the option on iOS.
Any sensible person understand that developers are being hold hostage by Apple. It is only Apple way or highway. Apple has huge advantages over app developers and they can potentially remove an App if they wanted to.
Again, Apple has final say to what allowed on App and charging 30% whether or not developers agree to. There is no other way to distribute apps and Apple can unilaterally remove app if they wishes to.
Apple hold monopoly on iOS App distribution, it must be stopped.
This isn't about other platforms though. Apple has monopolized software distribution to iOS devices to the detriment of their customers (the software developers). That's what this is about.
Yes, and hostages cooperate with their takers because they know what will happen if they do not. As I have been saying this entire thread - If a developer wants their app to be successful, they need to be on iOS. There is no alternative (except in Europe, I guess).
You don’t remember Apple won’t allow Spotify update? You don’t remember Apple being fined by EU for such behaviour?
And it is not just EU and India now. Japan also joint the game.
Japan to open up Apple and Google app stores to competition
The regulations will oblige Apple and Google to allow users to download from app stores other than the ones on their proprietary platforms.
Different operating system. Different platform. Different target.
It’s a legal monopoly not an illegal monopoly.
Legal monopoly still monopoly and it must be teared apart.
And in my opinion, Apple’s monopoly is worse than Microsoft and Google. Apple is such disgusting, and most monopolistic company ever existed.
Mac, Windows, Linux, web, various embedded OS, etc.
It doesn't officially exist unless you are in the EU. But we all know that.
And I think any reasonable person would consider that statement nonsense. You're describing something that's completely normal - a business setting terms for access to its property - and pretending that it's equivalent to a threat of violence..
The weird part is that you think it's strange that a company should be able to control its own property.
No, that's what you want it to be about to make your argument easier. You want to pretend that there are no other options. It's like complaining that if you want to buy cookies from Walmart, your only option is to pay Walmart.
Then why did they agree to more restrictive terms when the iPhone wasn't popular?
So Waze for instance, should skip developing its app on iOS then? Sure, that makes complete sense...
Some types of apps essentially only work on a mobile platform.
I don’t know why you mentioning Mac, Windows, Linux when all of them aren’t mobile.
When the term and conditions are highly favourable to the corporation and there is no alternative way.
When the business is highly monopolistic and use its market power to dedicate market and developers, then it should be subject to regulation.
He is only doing on purpose, as he has no argument
Should? No. Could? Yes.
Because mobile was never specified in the conversation.
I absolutely agree.
I wouldn't, because Walmart does not have a monopoly on cookie distribution in my area. If they did, you best believe I would be very upset.
Let's continue your analogy. "Android Town" has Walmart, Target, Amazon Fresh, et al, where I can sell my cookies. "iOS Town" only has Walmart, and they're screwing me with unfair terms. I want to sell my cookies in "iOS Town," so unfortunately I have to agree to Walmart's terms. I cannot, as a humble cookie maker, expect my consumers to uproot their lives and move to a different town to consume my cookies.
Times were different and the situation changes. This outcome is obvious in retrospect, much less so back then.