Apple Says Revised U.S. Sideloading Bill Would 'Undermine the Privacy and Security Protections' iPhone Users Rely On

[Aydo2000]

1. https://fossbytes.com/apple-data-collection-explained/ - The data Apple collects for its ad business
2. Facebook has its appstore on iOS? News to me.
3. I quoted F-droid to show that Appstores can be free as somebody said nothing can be free.
4. Apple's service revenue is not a point of discussion here as I am not debating it.
5. You may be a BA, but until you expand your horizons and know all the facts, you cannot know how a company makes money. Do you know all the revenue streams that Apple has? There may be many that we are not even privy to. Their ad business depends on data collection and that is the reason why it tripled once ATT came into place as it restricted the data on iOS to only Apple. https://www.emarketer.com/content/apple-ad-revenues-skyrocket-amid-its-privacy-changes - Please pay attention to the last paragraph. I am quoting it here:
"Though Apple is reaping the benefits now, the sheer scale of its growth will be hard for antitrust regulators to ignore for too long. Even though its iOS 14.5 changes were made in the name of privacy, regulators are unlikely to take kindly to how much of an advantage they give Apple’s own ad business."

I can’t answer all your questions now.

But read my comment again and then compare it to the Forbes link you papered. Remember the difference between information and data and what user profiling is and who does it.

I said Facebook has its own App Store. I didn’t say it was on iOS.

I have been in business sector for the last 30 years and I have co-authored white papers and peer reviewed academic studies within the topics of digital privacy and data governance including international laws. I will have to ignore your suggestion about me widening my horizon. I am not the one who is severely misinformed here. I am trying to inform you respectfully. Please keep it civilized. I am not youngsters like most users here.

 

[Beautyspin]

I read the PDF this Macrumors article provided.

Part 3, "Unlawful Conduct", has (10) sections.

This Bill is all about making a 'fair and level playing field'. I did not see anything about not gathering and using user data. Section (6) said, for a "covered platform" like Google, Google can't use data acquired by a business using Google's platform to compete with that business. However, Google and Facebook are one of the 'umbrella companies' that buys businesses.

This Bill is about fairness. It appears all apps could still be required to be in the App Store for security and privacy vetting but apps would choose their own customer payment setup.

Another thing this Bill addresses is Google paying Apple big ? to make Google the default search engine for iOS. This would be a no-no, Section (1).

What the European DSA and DMA proposals mean for online platforms | Brookings

The Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act represent a step toward rewriting the rules of the internet but could still be strengthened to make platforms more transparent.

www.brookings.edu

This may give a better summary.

 

[dk001]

I think so. Or Google will pay fines until it becomes simpler. However, I do not know how much simpler it can be when all you have to do is toggle enabling Installation from Unknown Sources.

It could be simplified a decent bit however that also would depend on the OEM.
There are some Android devices that do not allow sideloading.

 

[Aydo2000]

Just curious where you got that 70% figure from. It seems high after factoring in software company cut, wholesale/distributor cut, shipping costs, etc. If a software product retailed for $300, for example, I don't think Circuit City or similar stores kept $210.

Also, it's not "simply" as these stores had the typical brick and mortar overhead like real estate, equipment, insurance, utilities, staff, marketing/advertising, etc. They didn't quite have the captive audience that an Apple App Store has.

I know it because I have been in business sector for decades. You can find the info online easily. While you are at it, you can check what Epic used to charge developers back in the 90s. Yes, same Epic who made a fuss and sued Apple for nonsense reasons and lost miserably.

You are right. It was unreasonable which is why App Store became so successful. Apple made a point by flipping the revenue share numbers.

Also yes, brick and mortar stores did not have the reach App Store has. That’s why the profit margins were higher and so were the software prices. They had to keep it that way to make it sustainable.

Because App Store had a much better scalability and reach, much lower cut was doable while devs could lower the prices for their apps. That’s in addition to having the option to have ad supported model which Apple did not take any cut for hosting the app.

You answered your own questions.

Insurance, rent and such are mostly fixed cost. Circuit City didn’t have to provide API and constantly innovate the platform either. Much different model. Everything costs money but how the business model is structured makes a difference in scalability.

 

[Beautyspin]

Lots to unpack. If you are not okay with apple ads, just opt out. I'm okay with getting ads regarding apple products and apps in the ios store.

You are assuming wanting all of this legislation to be enacting. I'm am assuming hoping the scenario you want won't materialize. Having said that if you feel you are being fleeced as a developer then go somewhere else. Build a game, go to android. Oh wait. It's cheap, easy and lucrative to build an app on the ios app store. Yeah, you need some knowledge, but that sweat equity is needed regardless.

I am sure we are not talking about personal choices but rather talking about principles. Go somewhere else is not an option for me when Apple is the one in the wrong here. Are we in some dictatorship where it is either Apple's way or high-way? Apple should refrain from abusing its position as a gatekeeper. If not, bankrupt it by fining heavily until it complies.

Like I said, the ball is Apple's court. It can always opt out of doing business in all those countries that are hell bent on curbing Apple's abuses.

 

[dk001]

I think that’s mostly my typing while the sun is face at the roof top pool in the resort I am vacationing. Couple of drinks have an effect too. Can’t blame everything on autocorrect ?

Have a couple for me .... can't start mine till tomorrow.

 

[Karma*Police]

I say let government run its business of making laws that it thinks are best for its people. If Apple does not want it, they can shut shop and leave the country. Even Apple has a choice.

You mean like Cuba, Russia, China, and Venezuela? Maybe you should live in one of those countries? But I commend you for having so much faith in gov’t officials who have shown throughout history that what they care about most is power, and holding onto it. Even if that means killing millions of its own people.

Apple? As big as they are, if sideloading is such a big issue, consumers can literally put them out of business.

 

[Mousse]

Honestly the only apps I really sideload on Android are ones that Google, for whatever reason doesn't allow or the app has been "retired" even if it still runs fine. There are a lot of them and most folks do not realize they exist.

Word.
I too get most of my apps from the PlayStore. I only sideload apps not available on the PlayStore: AFWall+ (root based firewall), older, better versions of MX Player (no ads, no excessive permissions).
The PlayStore only has the latest (not greatest) version of the app. A lot of older versions of the app are far superior to the newest version--no ads, no excessive permissions requirements, no ads, no new bugs, no ads, no bloat, no ads.

Apple and their gatekeeping. They're trying to foolproof iOS. Noble as the idea might be, they underestimate the ingenuity of fools.??? Nothing is foolproof.?

 

[Beautyspin]

I can’t answer all your questions now.

But read my comment again and then compare it to the Forbes link you papered. Remember the difference between information and data and what user profiling is and who does it.

I said Facebook has its own App Store. I didn’t say it was on iOS.

I have been in business sector for the last 30 years and I have co-authored white papers and peer reviewed academic studies within the topics of digital privacy and data governance including international laws. I will have to ignore your suggestion about me widening my horizon. I am not the one who is severely misinformed here. I am trying to inform you respectfully. Please keep it civilized. I am not youngsters like most users here.

I am sorry If I came to sound brazen as that was not my intention. All I can say is that, if you have read the article, you will know that Apple does its own profiling based on the data it collects. I know the difference between data and information. An expert on data would recognize the correlation between the trifold increase in Apple's ad revenue and the implementation of ATT by Apple, which resulted in immediate hit to other's revenue. Even normal reporters who have reported the news have been able to make the connection. Again, I am not questioning your ability to make the connection. I am just saying, maybe you are not focusing on the right stuff.
Since I cannot argue with you without telling you that you are wrong and since you seem to take umbrage to any such comments, I will stop this thread. Just to let you know, you do not know me and my field of expertise or my age. I just do not think it is necessary to advertise it here.

 

[Beautyspin]

It could be simplified a decent bit however that also would depend on the OEM.
There are some Android devices that do not allow sideloading.

Oh! I did not know that. Any OEM that you know of that restricts sideloading?

 

[Gasu E.]

Exactly, users aren’t morons like Apple thinks.

That's extremely condescending. Billions of smart phone users have ZERO technical sophistication. That doesn't make them morons. But since they don't know about underlying processes, they end up having to learn how to use technology on a step-by-step basis. Maybe you are aware of all the educational materials that have been created teaching people how to avoid phishing. In my old company, we had mandatory annual "how to" training on stuff like this. There have been companies subject to major security breaches just because an employee clicked on the wrong link in an innocuous looking email. Apple has tried to simplify this for the iPhone consumer base. You want to call millions of people "morons", fine. I prefer to call them "regular people".

 

[PlayUltimate]

Silly comparison why? Do you think our cell networks and smartphones would have developed as quickly as they did if AT&T still had a monopoly on telephone service?

AT&T was broken up in early 1984. Motorola's first commercial cell phone came out in 1983. (And there were more specialized incarnations prior to that.) Based the growth of the cell phone industry in Europe, which is arguably still ahead of the US, it likely would have grown regardless. Like the demise of dial-up internet and AOL, cell phones were a technological change that was ready to happen and would have likely prevailed eventually. Further, the break up of AT&T, which was pushed by MCI to open up the long distance business, had little to do with the infant cell phone industry.

 

[ipedro]

You can sideload on Android. Yet most, if not all, major services put their apps on the official PlayStore.
Why would this be different on Apple devices?

Android does not impose the strict limitations on tracking and other privacy blocks that prevents apps from monetizing user data. They have no reason to side load on Android (yet, many do). You don't see Mark Zuckerberg complaining about Android like his life depends on it. Apple on the other hand, implementing privacy blocks has been nothing short of an existential crisis for Meta.

The second Facebook and other large data gathering apps (including Google apps) have an alternative to getting their apps on an iPhone that goes around Apple's privacy protections, they will put the app link on their site and have no reason to be in the App Store. You may not care about Facebook but it's just a matter of time before it gets to an app that you depend on and the floodgates will open and everyone will be side loading.

 

[Wildkraut]

I don’t think you even know what the world prior to App Store looked like.

Are you old enough to remember Circuit City? They used to keep 70% of the software sales simply by putting developer’s CDs on their shelves. All the packaging cost (CDs, labels, boxes, etc.) and logistics were a cost to the developer. There was no digital distribution nor a digital platform with wide reach to millions of paying customers that allowed you to host your app for free (ad supported model) or option to only give 15%-30% of in-app purchases (depending on annual revenue) on to a platform that provided API, market reach, support for you and the customer, security measures that you are not held liable for and much more.

So please look into what life used to be prior to App Store before you say anything further.

No, I had to search because I’m not an American resident, but I’m old enough to know how the world looked prior AppStores, definitely better in my opinion. This Circuit City wasn’t widely available like Apple and Google AppStores, nor had the potential to Gatekeep a billions of international users, it was a non-international single store, without any monopoly relevance. Apple and Google reached a critical mass that needs regulations.

 

[Aydo2000]

No, I had to search because I’m not an American resident, but I’m old enough to know how the world looked prior AppStores, definitely better in my opinion. This Circuit City wasn’t widely available like Apple and Google AppStores, nor had the potential to Gatekeep a billions of international users, it was a non-international single store, without any monopoly relevance. Apple and Google reached a critical mass that needs regulations.

First of all, Circuit City was a physical store. Not a digital platform.

Second, Circuit City had a pretty good dominance in the US. It was the largest electronics stores in the US with hundreds of stores across the nation with no alternative around to challenge it.

Lastly, you may wanna check the definition of monopoly. Apple does not have monopoly in any category. iOS market share is around 25% and the App Store is open to any developer who wishes to have their app hosted. There are plenty of alternatives to the App Store like Google Play Store and others and Apple does not prohibit any developer from hosting their apps in other digital platforms. They are free to do whatever they wish to do.

Just because App Store is the only store on iOS, it does not make them a monopoly. Courts around the world already ruled on that. If you think that’s what monopoly means then most companies would be considered monopolies. Is Mercedes a monopoly because they don’t sell BMWs in their dealers? The answer is no. There you have your answer.

 

[ksj1]

Lot's of astro-turfing on this thread. People keep repeating the same thing and not listening.

To repeat it again, the App Store and the Play Store are not comparable for the simple reason that the Play Store doesn't limit what data apps can collect about you, or tell you what apps are collecting about you.

Sideloading has a different context on the two platforms because of that. Major apps have no reason to sideload and impose that on their users in the Play Store. They just collect whatever they want, so why would they?

 

[VulchR]

So tired of Apple whining about this. The bill means you have to allow sideloading. Nobody is being forced to do it.

They don't want to lose the tight control they have of the platform.

I don't think you understand. The moment Apple is forced to allow sideloading, companies will abandon Apple's app store and consumers will have no longer have a choice. They will have to get apps from the Wild West. Consumer choice will go down, not up. And it is not as though people buying iPhones are unaware of the requirement that apps be loaded via Apple's approved store. This is government overreach, and I say this as a leftie. The majority of apps sold are based on Android, so it is not as though Apple has anything like a monopoly. This is about some tight-wads having a hissy fit about the prices in the App store, some greedy developers, and politicians willing to exploit the former two.

If Congress wants to legislate something about the app store, then make Apple guarantee the security of the apps it approves. Make it possible to hold Apple jointly liable with the developer (with Apple's % of any penalties being equal to the % commission they charge) if a security breach occurs as a consequence of an app sold in Apple's store.

 

[webkit]

I know it because I have been in business sector for decades. You can find the info online easily.

That's why I asked as I wasn’t able to find anything corroborating that software retailers like Circuit City kept 70% unless by "kept" you were referring to markup and not percentage cut of the retail price. I found an article from the mid-1990s that talked about software costs but the breakdown was software companies taking 45% to 55%, distributors like Merisel, Ingram, Techdata, etc. taking up to 10% and retailers taking the rest which would be around 35% to 45%.

Also yes, brick and mortar stores did not have the reach App Store has. That’s why the profit margins were higher and so were the software prices. They had to keep it that way to make it sustainable.

Because App Store had a much better scalability and reach, much lower cut was doable while devs could lower the prices for their apps. That’s in addition to having the option to have ad supported model which Apple did not take any cut for hosting the app.

I recognize that there is overhead with an app store but I was just pointing out that what Circuit City and other stores had to do wasn't "simply" putting CDs on a shelf especially as they didn't have the captive audience that Apple's App Store enjoys.

 

[Aydo2000]

That's why I asked as I wasn’t able to find anything corroborating that software retailers like Circuit City kept 70% unless by "kept" you were referring to markup and not percentage cut of the retail price. I found an article from the mid-1990s that talked about software costs but the breakdown was software companies taking 45% to 55%, distributors like Merisel, Ingram, Techdata, etc. taking up to 10% and retailers taking the rest which would be around 35% to 45%.

First of all, each market has different purchasing power and market threshold. Second, the numbers you are referring to can differ depending on who takes on what responsibility. Not all retail or distribution channel will take on marketing costs. The margins are way different and that can change drastically for bulk enterprise distribution also.

If you didn’t live in the 90s as an adult who worked in business sector, I would respectfully ask you to quit thinking that you know everything from an article that you aren’t quite sure about. Google can’t teach you actual life experience.

US market is vastly different than the rest of the world but the whole concept was still the same. Less cut doesn’t necessarily mean more money for the developer. Business 101.

 

[macjoshua]

Like I said, the ball is Apple's court. It can always opt out of doing business in all those countries that are hell bent on curbing Apple's abuses.

Funny how Apple choosing how they want to license their software is "abuse". I would love to see Apple ditch the EU, but sadly Tim Cook is all about money, so at some point Apple will cave and we'll end up having to run antivirus apps on iOS to deal with morons who side load apps and unwittingly text contacts malware.

 

[bb9]

Let people sideload, but:

1. Separate their online services from mine so if their stuff gets corrupted or they corrupt the servers, it will not affect me

2. Charge accordingly to cover the extra setup and expenses Apple need to put in place in order to make this happen -and do not charge me

3. Apple need to give me an option to turn off all sideload apps so I do not see them and they can not be on my device.

 

[macjoshua]

They could add a warning dialogue before installing untrusted, side-loaded apps, like they do on a Mac. Make it easy to disable them from being installed, so I can prevent my parents from installing malware, and make it a multi-step process for everyone else.

It was a fun ride to not worry about malware on iOS, but consumer rights advocates seem determined to make sure everyone suffers the same awful experience as Android users.

 

[siddavis]

EU says Apple abusing its gatekeeper status for music streaming

The case backs complaints from Spotify Technology SA which accuses Apple of imposing its in-app purchase system to take a cut of its subscription fees.

fortune.com

https://www.eureporter.co/business/competition-2/2021/04/30/vestager-accuses-apple-of-abusing-its-role-as-gatekeeper-in-music-streaming/

Overshadowed but not overlooked, Apple faces gatekeeper questions

Apple may not have attracted as much scrutiny as Amazon, Facebook and Google during last week’s Congressional hearing, but its chief executive was forced to defend the company against allegations it has abused its gatekeeper role to target rival app developers.

globalcompetitionreview.com

I could go on, but I am sure I made my point. The EU believes this and hence the new regulations.

OK, so my point is if they are violating existing laws, bring charges and adjudicate it. If the operating model violates anti-trust laws (there are plenty), they should make the case (and they are doing that in your references). This OP is about a new/revised bill that forces Apple to change a fundamental operating model. Legislating to protect consumers when consumers have very viable alternatives is overreach in my opinion.

 

[siddavis]

AT&T was broken up in early 1984. Motorola's first commercial cell phone came out in 1983. (And there were more specialized incarnations prior to that.) Based the growth of the cell phone industry in Europe, which is arguably still ahead of the US, it likely would have grown regardless. Like the demise of dial-up internet and AOL, cell phones were a technological change that was ready to happen and would have likely prevailed eventually. Further, the break up of AT&T, which was pushed by MCI to open up the long distance business, had little to do with the infant cell phone industry.

Also, I believe the first automatic cell network went live in Japan years before that. But hey, we can't let these facts get in the way of knowing that all the highly regulated industries have flourishing competition and innovation. /s

 

[dk001]

Oh! I did not know that. Any OEM that you know of that restricts sideloading?

Not a specific OEM that I know of.
My daughter has a cheap Android tablet - will get the name later - that you cannot open dev menu. A coworker has a Xaiomi phone that he cannot. Did some checking and it looks like most can as long as they are running Android 10 or newer.
I may have to retract that statement …
Thx!