Apple Says iOS Developers Have 'Multiple' Ways of Reaching Users and Are 'Far From Limited' to Using Only the App Store

[twolf2919]

Lies, lies, lies... once i fully paid for my device, i should be able to side load the software i purchase separately. Glad this is finally in court.

Why do you think you should be able to do that? Apple made it clear to you, up front, that you will not be able to do this if you buy an iPhone - so why did you buy it? That's how a free market place operates: a seller offers a good or service (including limitations on their use) and consumers decide whether they want said good or service. If they think it has too many restrictions - then they don't buy it! Buying it and then complaining about known restrictions is childish at best.

 

[twolf2919]

Because Apple's OS is better. But it is NOT better because of Apple's nanny rules about the App Store, it is better because of better code in the OS. It has better UI and better security. And I should not have to be subject to Apple's nanny rules just to use a superior OS.

Give me a break. One of the reasons the Apple ecosystems is safer than alternatives is exactly that: the "nanny rules". Requiring a single distribution point for apps allows those apps to be reviewed before being let onto the device.

An iPhone and its superior OS belongs to Apple, not to you. It's Apple's right to sell it however it pleases. It decided to sell the iPhone/iOS combination with those "nanny rules". You have the right not to be "subject to Apple's nanny rules" by, you guessed it, not buying the friggin' phone!

 

[acidblood]

Give me a break. One of the reasons the Apple ecosystems is safer than alternatives is exactly that: the "nanny rules". Requiring a single distribution point for apps allows those apps to be reviewed before being let onto the device.

An iPhone and its superior OS belongs to Apple, not to you. It's Apple's right to sell it however it pleases. It decided to sell the iPhone/iOS combination with those "nanny rules". You have the right not to be "subject to Apple's nanny rules" by, you guessed it, not buying the friggin' phone!

So macOS is not safer than the alternatives?

 

[twolf2919]

You buy a Ford car.

You then learn that others can’t sell you parts. There’s e.g. some sort of authentication chip requiring a digital signature from Ford.

However, the nice and friendly Ford will gladly supply this IC and a digital signature to anyone. All they need to do is pay a teeny, tiny markup of 30% on the cost of the part.

But sure, you can buy GM. That’s little relief to those who already sunk a fortune on a Ford car though.

By the way, when it’s put this way, it sure sounds like the Mafia, no? “Here, just pay 30% of your revenue. It’s for your... erm... protection”.

Completely farcical analogy. A more accurate one would start with:
"Ford has always sold its cars with the restriction that you can only buy parts from them."

But then "You then learn..." makes no sense, does it?

 

[Jason2000]

But sure, you can buy GM. That’s little relief to those who already sunk a fortune on a Ford car though.

But that still does not make it Apple's fault or negate the statement that there are alternatives. Bad argument.

 

[acidblood]

Completely farcical analogy. A more accurate one would start with:
"Ford has always sold its cars with the restriction that you can only buy parts from them."

But then "You then learn..." makes no sense, does it?

Sure does. Ask your mother (I say this in the most respectful way possible), or father, or someone non-technical that’s close to you, whether they’re aware that Apple forbids you to load apps unless it’s from the App Store, and that Apple clips on a 30% tax for the privilege, which any sane economic theory will tell you gets passed on to the customer.

Truth is, 99% of the human race (or even more) isn’t aware of this fact and its ramifications.

 

[dk001]

I got into Apple for the ecosystem interaction, the quality of the hardware, decent software, and the "it just works" functionality.

Over time the interaction has decreased, the quality is still there, the software has not grown as expected, and it has evolved into "sometimes it just works".

I won't be replacing my MB - I've grown to like my hybrid PC and my IPP is not quite a laptop
I added Android to my mobile space - between bugs and lack of functionality in iOS
It has become increasingly harder to identify good new software and more expensive - searching in the App Store is a pain to find what you want.
The "it just works" died a while back

PWA's would be a great alternative however, you sorta can't most cases in iOS Safari.
Other than in-app purchases, it has been a while since I actually bought anything in the App Store. All of my new app purchases last couple of years has been on the Android side.

Apple did themselves no favor using this argument.
MHO YOMV
X280 x2, MBP 2015, 12 ProMax, IPP 11 2020, Razer 2

 

[twolf2919]

So macOS is not safer than the alternatives?

What does macOS' safety have to do with anything? Just like with iOS, macOS would be safer (no matter whether by its nature it is safer than competitors) if the only way you could get apps onto it was through a single channel that reviews said apps. They couldn't do it with macOS because the market place already existed - i.e. people were already used to downloading or installing apps from multiple sources and if Apple didn't allow it, they'd just buy a Windows PC. When Apple brought out the iPhone, there was no market or competitor so it could do whatever the heck it wanted.

 

[acidblood]

What does macOS' safety have to do with anything? Just like with iOS, macOS would be safer (no matter whether by its nature it is safer than competitors) if the only way you could get apps onto it was through a single channel that reviews said apps. They couldn't do it with macOS because the market place already existed - i.e. people were already used to downloading or installing apps from multiple sources and if Apple didn't allow it, they'd just buy a Windows PC. When Apple brought out the iPhone, there was no market or competitor so it could do whatever the heck it wanted.

And yet it’s safe enough. I don’t even have an antivirus or firewall on my MBP.

So you don’t really need nanny Apple to tell you “Good app! Bad app!”. You can actually choose to be treated like a responsible adult (and save 30% on app prices).

To me it’s a simple question. Have a toggle to be set during setup, that can be changed later in Settings: “allow sideloading apps”. If you’re happy with your current experience: Just. Don’t. Toggle. It.

Sometimes I just wonder why people hate so much having a choice.

 

[twolf2919]

Sure does. Ask your mother (I say this in the most respectful way possible), or father, or someone non-technical that’s close to you, whether they’re aware that Apple forbids you to load apps unless it’s from the App Store, and that Apple clips on a 30% tax for the privilege, which any sane economic theory will tell you gets passed on to the customer.

Truth is, 99% of the human race (or even more) isn’t aware of this fact and its ramifications.

I assure you that neither my mother, father, and I bet pretty much anyone that's not an app developer gives a rats a$$ about. What they know and care about is that apps on iOS are stupidly cheap compared to the PCs they grew up with - and that they don't have to worry about installing and maintaining antivirus software in order to feel safe.

Yes, Apple charges 15-30% to those developers who want to sell their software to iOS device owners. The developer still gets 70+% that they would not get if there were no iOS device owners. And one of the reasons there are so many iOS device owners is because these people appreciate the Apple iOS ecosystem - which includes the single distribution point for apps and the extra safety that it provides.

 

[hans1972]

Apple's completely out of touch and is point blank lying at this point. This is absolutely disgusting.

Can you point at something in the quotes of Apple where they are lying?

 

[hans1972]

Excellent.

How do you sideload another OS into an iPhone again?

Is there some phone number I can call to ask “Hey Apple, will you digitally sign this Loonix OS image or whatever so I can sideload it into my iPhone”?

You can't. If you want that functionality, you have to buy a phone which offers the ability to freely load the software you want.

 

[ian87w]

And yet it’s safe enough. I don’t even have an antivirus or firewall on my MBP.

So you don’t really need nanny Apple to tell you “Good app! Bad app!”. You can actually choose to be treated like a responsible adult (and save 30% on app prices).

To me it’s a simple question. Have a toggle to be set during setup, that can be changed later in Settings: “allow sideloading apps”. If you’re happy with your current experience: Just. Don’t. Toggle. It.

Sometimes I just wonder why people hate so much having a choice.

In the Android world, plenty of lay people following blindly to instructions from bad developers to enable unknown sources and install dodgy APKs. This is more common than you think. And guess what happens next. Tech support problems. Apple probably wanted to avoid all that. I can understand that. That's why I went ahead with Android. I am free to choose.

 

[acidblood]

I assure you that neither my mother, father, and I bet pretty much anyone that's not an app developer gives a rats a$$ about. What they know and care about is that apps on iOS are stupidly cheap compared to the PCs they grew up with - and that they don't have to worry about installing and maintaining antivirus software in order to feel safe.

Yes, Apple charges 15-30% to those developers who want to sell their software to iOS device owners. The developer still gets 70+% that they would not get if there were no iOS device owners. And one of the reasons there are so many iOS device owners is because these people appreciate the Apple iOS ecosystem - which includes the single distribution point for apps and the extra safety that it provides.

You sound like Tim Cook or some Apple VP making excuses for Apple’s awful practices.

Truth is, the majority of developers that bothered to put an opinion out there are against Apple’s policies. Laws are being proposed to open up iOS. Much as I hate politicians and think that 99.9999% of the time more laws are the wrong answer, there’s an indisputable point: politicians have figured out people are in favor of this. That’s the only reasons they put these things out.

 

[acidblood]

You can't. If you want that functionality, you have to buy a phone which offers the ability to freely load the software you want.

So you concur that the original poster made an absurd suggestion. Thanks for the support.

 

[hans1972]

And yet it’s safe enough. I don’t even have an antivirus or firewall on my MBP.

So you don’t really need nanny Apple to tell you “Good app! Bad app!”. You can actually choose to be treated like a responsible adult (and save 30% on app prices).

To me it’s a simple question. Have a toggle to be set during setup, that can be changed later in Settings: “allow sideloading apps”. If you’re happy with your current experience: Just. Don’t. Toggle. It.

Sometimes I just wonder why people hate so much having a choice.

iOS is much safer than macOS. If iPhones had the same security as a Mac you would see massive successful attacks every few years infecting millions of iPhones.

The problem with side loading, in addition to security, is that it allows developers to circumvent the App Store. I want every app to be on the App Store or not available at all. It forces developers to give up iOS entirely if they don't like the App Store. Very few do and they put their apps on the App Store.

Why do I like that? I want only _one_ place to find all my apps.

I do not want maximum choice, I want conformity. Choice only benefits those who the information and knowledge to take advantage of choice and want to invest the time. I want Apple to a lot of choices for me and just provide a simple way to get apps which are pretty safe and pretty decent.

In fact, I think Apple should censor even more, esp. when it comes to quality of the apps.

 

[hans1972]

So you concur that the original poster made an absurd suggestion. Thanks for the support.

No, the suggestion implicitly said you should choose some Android phones if you want such functionality.

And sometimes, you can't get what you want, because no one wants to provide that functionality to you.

 

[hans1972]

You buy a Ford car.

You then learn that others can’t sell you parts. There’s e.g. some sort of authentication chip requiring a digital signature from Ford.

However, the nice and friendly Ford will gladly supply this IC and a digital signature to anyone. All they need to do is pay a teeny, tiny markup of 30% on the cost of the part.

But sure, you can buy GM. That’s little relief to those who already sunk a fortune on a Ford car though.

By the way, when it’s put this way, it sure sounds like the Mafia, no? “Here, just pay 30% of your revenue. It’s for your... erm... protection”.

I have no problems with this as long as you are informed before you buy the car or the information is common knowledge for any customer who do a minimum of research.

 

[ksec]

This is a lie. PWA in iOS basically limited to a link in the Home Screen opening a web page on the Internet without Safari controls.

So in practice one can’t install web apps in iOS. Apple tech to support PWA installs is really feature poor not to mention non standard. Safari approach to the support of PWAs is like IE support was more than a decade ago regarding the web when MS aim was to funnel the web tech into into the Windows OS ... it was stopped from being able to do so by regulators. By assuring that in Windows people could install alternative Browser / Engines by default leading to more innovation than IE could keep up. IE, a cancer that even today has impact in LOB apps.

For instance in iOS, PWAs cannot rise notifications like apps do, local cache is very limited, opening a we page in Safari does not direct to the PWA installed and many other things that other browsers/OSs support. Default apps ... None to do with security. The reason I guess its because if they did supported as it could and should be done, as SJ initially thought it should be done, many many apps would be out of the App Store.

The difference between Safari PWA support and Native apps on iOS is the same has between paying to watch a movie in a big screen or trough a tightly controlled key hole. Yes, you have options, but in highly competitive market like digital services, servicing customers trough a key hole is not much of a viable option.

Exactly, you could have given Apple some benefits of doubt. And spin for certain direction. But increasingly ( for some strange reason ) they are acting hypocritical. They dont have to bring up PWA and Web Apps as a platform... but somehow they did.

 

[I7guy]

Sure does. Ask your mother (I say this in the most respectful way possible), or father, or someone non-technical that’s close to you, whether they’re aware that Apple forbids you to load apps unless it’s from the App Store, and that Apple clips on a 30% tax for the privilege, which any sane economic theory will tell you gets passed on to the customer.

Truth is, 99% of the human race (or even more) isn’t aware of this fact and its ramifications.

Also, ask the parents if the know what the yearly developer fee is? If they do, they probably know about the commision, if they don't they probably don't know about the commission. What is the point? The point is that a consumer isn't required to know what the yearly dev fee is, what the commission is, how long it took to develop the app, how long was the beta test period etc. An iphone users place in all of this is to download an app they want, without worrying about the development, testing, and fees a dev has to pay and most importantly, what the devs income is for the app.

This is such a disingenuous post.

 

[hans1972]

The App Store should have two tiers: the Apple-Approved, politically-correct apps curated by their department of henpecking minions and another tier that just hosts apps without the mommy brigade deciding for you what apps are acceptable. Drop the fees and let developers pay for placement, and advertising.

No, it should work like a gated community. Security, conformity and walls to keep the riff-raff out. If you want excitement you go outside the walls in a protected vehicle, called going on a Safari.

 

[hans1972]

I really do not understand why Apple Legal cited PWAs as point in Apple's defense. Their Legal team does understand the vast limitations of a PWA versus native app via App Store. This is going to be an interesting case for sure.

An alternative doesn't have to be equally good.

 

[twolf2919]

And yet it’s safe enough. I don’t even have an antivirus or firewall on my MBP.

So you don’t really need nanny Apple to tell you “Good app! Bad app!”. You can actually choose to be treated like a responsible adult (and save 30% on app prices).

To me it’s a simple question. Have a toggle to be set during setup, that can be changed later in Settings: “allow sideloading apps”. If you’re happy with your current experience: Just. Don’t. Toggle. It.

Sometimes I just wonder why people hate so much having a choice.

I don't have any antivirus software on my MBP either. But your experience and mine are not anywhere near proof that "it's safe enough" because you and I aren't your typical users! I would never click on a link in an e-mail and I suspect neither would you. I would be able to distinguish between a system dialog asking me to give my login & password information and one that was created by an app - that 99% you refer to probably would not.

So I reject your statement "And yet it's safe enough". And, unsurprisingly, I don't buy your conclusion that 99% of Apple users don't need a nanny Apple.

I am a responsible adult - I even have two computer science degrees - yet I appreciate Apple's single, reviewed App Store.

Your 'solution' is a bit naive: suppose Apple implemented just that. So now there are insecure iPhones and secure iPhones. What if my wife decides she wants to side load some Chinese apps she really wants. She and I share the same Apple ID and iCloud storage. So now I'm no longer secure either!

I have a much simpler solution for you, which doesn't impact Apple's support costs or my security: buy an Android phone if you want to be able to side-load. Why are you so hell-bent on changing Apple? The company has had the same policy since the beginning of the iPhone. Why is it even an issue? It's not like Apple ever increased the commission or that Apple suddenly began locking down the iPhone to only get apps from a single store!

 

[hans1972]

And yes, this filing is a huge blunder by Apple, because Apple has fairly obviously deliberately crippled PWAs compared to literally every other browser in the world for years, and it will definitely come up in discovery that they did this intentionally to protect App Store revenue. Stupid.

Apple never crippled PWA in Safari. They chose to just not implement a lot of functionality.

 

[Smith288]

Apple doesnt want to lose the golden goose with 15-30% of their revenue...

But if forced, they should be able to provide a way to install apps in keeping with walled garden while also not giving a developer a distribution method for free. Side loading doesn't give me any more access past the walled garden so if they can build around that principal in installation, they will....if forced to, of course.