Apple's Difficult App Store Decisions Determined by Executive Review Board Run by Phil Schiller

[Abazigal]

Also, I feel that Apple needs to take a much more hands-on role in pushing the broader tech industry to a more privacy-focused state.

This would include banning more apps from the App Store that run afoul of Apple’s principles. I am looking at the recent app - FaceTune and I do have my concerns about it.

While we are talking about a small third-party app today, apps from Google and Facebook present the same kind of dilemma for Apple. If anything, I feel Apple needs to become even more assertive and proactive in managing these apps and I would fully support their efforts in doing so.

 

[developer13245]

I doubt reality would be so simplistic or straightforward.

Right now, developers make their apps available via the iOS App Store because that’s the only way their app can be sold. This also means that amongst other things, they are forced to comply with the App Store rules which I largely agree with as a consumer.

Yes, these rules may seem draconian and onerous to a developer, and I don’t care. If anything, I feel there is still more that Apple can do to implement anti-developer rules that benefit me as the end user. The recent introduction of Apple-sign-in (and Apple mandating that all developers support this feature) is something you won’t find me griping about.

You are right in that I could in theory still choose to buy my apps via the iOS App Store even if third party stores were made available, but this also assumes that the developer continues to make the app available in the iOS App Store.

What if the developer decides to remove his app from the iOS App Store in order to circumvent the 30% revenue cut, and insist that the app be downloaded from an alternative App Store?

This alternative second App Store would also have less incentive to subject their apps to the same degree of scrutiny as Apple. Apple isn’t perfect, but I can at least trust that the decisions Apple makes are in the best interests of me, the consumer.

Having the iOS App Store as the only place where consumers can purchase and download apps allows for the greatest amount of good to the greatest number of users. Yes, there will be this small group of users who are disadvantaged, and that’s what Android is there for, isn’t it?

My god...that sounds more like a battle cry for Socialism than an endorsement of Apple. Greatest amount of good? You do actually know that Apple's ONLY goal in life is to make money, right? At all costs? That's why they STEAL 30% right off the top of iOS developers. It's racketeering. You're paying for "protection" by Apple since there is no store front (computer database) and there is no alternative (Communism). But it's for the "greatest good" ??? WTF are they teaching in history classes these days??? Instead of the developer making the money, Apple is getting one hell of a big chunk for doing almost nothing.

But it's for your protection! Do like Guido says here and pay for our protection! You wouldn't want your store to suddenly burn down in the middle of the night by some unscrupulous individual, would you?

Well this entire multiple app store issue will be decided in court. We will see what the outcome is in the (probably far-distant) future. As far as Apple "doing almost nothing" it certainly seems like they are doing " more than almost nothing" by providing a virtual store, accounting, testing facilities, etc.

Of course it is the objective of any company to make as much money as you can. Thing is, the areas Apple is focusing on so happens to be in line with what I appreciate as a consumer.

Let me put it this way. My garden is not walled, it’s well protected, nourished, watered & kept in blossom by the best gardeners in the world. If there’s a weed, they wack it. If there’s a bad bug, they squash it. Everytime I walk in my garden I’m in awe of its palette & synchronicity.

I’ve seen the neighbours garden, and I am far less impressed. Sure there are way more flowers in the garden, but its formation is a mess & the lack of a fence just allows any dog to piss in it, weed to penetrate it & makes it harder to maintain.

As a consumer, why wouldn’t I support Apple taking the time and effort to vet these apps to create a safer marketplace for me? This is precisely why iOS apps tend to more polished than their android counterparts.

And since the iOS App Store is largely supply-driven, my app is not going to be any cheaper even without the 30% cut. So as a consumer, there really isn’t much downside, save for not being able to access certain apps like emulators or torrent clients but I find that tradeoff negligible.

And I disagree that Apple is getting free money for doing nothing. Look at the android side, and I think even the blindest of fools cannot deny the commendable job Apple has done keeping their walled garden as well-tended as it is.

This isn’t socialism. This is simply wanting a better user experience.

Right and we will see what the courts decide. (Can’t comment on Mac issues)

Also, I feel that Apple needs to take a much more hands-on role in pushing the broader tech industry to a more privacy-focused state.

This would include banning more apps from the App Store that run afoul of Apple’s principles. I am looking at the recent app - FaceTune and I do have my concerns about it.

While we are talking about a small third-party app today, apps from Google and Facebook present the same kind of dilemma for Apple. If anything, I feel Apple needs to become even more assertive and proactive in managing these apps and I would fully support their efforts in doing so.

Again, if you believe in Apple's App Store, no one will force you to buy apps elsewhere. Software products have been sold outside Apple's App Stores for a long time. Many Mac applications are available outside of the Mac App store. iOS should be no different.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Also, I feel that Apple needs to take a much more hands-on role in pushing the broader tech industry to a more privacy-focused state.

This would include banning more apps from the App Store that run afoul of Apple’s principles. I am looking at the recent app - FaceTune and I do have my concerns about it.

While we are talking about a small third-party app today, apps from Google and Facebook present the same kind of dilemma for Apple. If anything, I feel Apple needs to become even more assertive and proactive in managing these apps and I would fully support their efforts in doing so.

I can't tell if you're trolling at this point or just being naive. Do Apple's "principles" represent YOUR principles? For instance, I use MakeMKV, Handbrake and Subler a LOT to dump my purchased Blu-rays (and CDs, DVDs, photos, etc.) and create a server system that my whole house can access via KODI (and/or iTunes for that matter). What if Apple's "principle" for a future Mac App Store (enforced with Notarization that won't allow you to get software anywhere else for sake of argument in some future macOS version so it's more like iOS) is that they do not support Blu-Ray drives on Macs and/or don't support ripping movies for such purposes (either from some legal standpoint or more likely from their own desire to have anyone compete with their "iTunes" (or whatever they're going to call it in the future) MOVIE store? Tough???

Remember when Apple wouldn't allow Firefox, etc. on the iPhone because it "competed" with Safari? Is THAT the world you really want to live in? Where Apple kills all real innovation in the name of protecting its own financial best interests (i.e. no competition in areas it wants to completely control...i.e. where the real money is) ??? If so, I have to vehemently disagree. I don't want to live in the Apple equivalent of Communist China where they decide what you can and cannot view and/or do and penalize you for not behaving the way they want you to and use face recognition to enforce it). I mean if that's the kind of society you want to live in, go ahead and move there. Stop trying to bring it to the USA by encouraging companies like Apple to control every aspect of our lives. The US has always been about freedom and I should have freedom of choice to install whatever software I want to use on my own computer I bought and paid for.

 

[developer13245]

Also, I feel that Apple needs to take a much more hands-on role in pushing the broader tech industry to a more privacy-focused state.

This would include banning more apps from the App Store that run afoul of Apple’s principles. I am looking at the recent app - FaceTune and I do have my concerns about it.

While we are talking about a small third-party app today, apps from Google and Facebook present the same kind of dilemma for Apple. If anything, I feel Apple needs to become even more assertive and proactive in managing these apps and I would fully support their efforts in doing so.

You believe Apple is some "holy power" that has a divine right to rule. But you fail to remember (or accept) that Apple has betrayed this very principle you hold so high.

Uber was caught red-handed violating Apple's privacy policies -AND- ACTIVELY building in methods to avoid detection by Apple during app review. Uber built an geo-fence in their app to detect when the Uber App was in App Review at the Apple campus - which was used to avoid detection of privacy violations.

When Apple was alerted to the problem by a 3rd party privacy researcher (embarrassing for Apple) they also were able to verify the issue. Violation of these privacy guidelines caused other companies to be banned from the App Store, and some companies even got kicked out for honest mistakes (bugs).

But what happened to Uber? The CEO was summoned to the Apple campus for a free lunch with Tim Crook. Uber paid no consequences for it's blatant and willful privacy violations.

Apple's claim that they treat all developers fairly is such a bold face lie that every time they say it they look even worse.

Your belief that one single company can be responsible for your well being is the very hight of ignorance.
[doublepost=1563410456][/doublepost]

I can't tell if you're trolling at this point or just being naive. Do Apple's "principles" represent YOUR principles? For instance, I use MakeMKV, Handbrake and Subler a LOT to dump my purchased Blu-rays (and CDs, DVDs, photos, etc.) and create a server system that my whole house can access via KODI (and/or iTunes for that matter). What if Apple's "principle" for a future Mac App Store (enforced with Notarization that won't allow you to get software anywhere else for sake of argument in some future macOS version so it's more like iOS) is that they do not support Blu-Ray drives on Macs and/or don't support ripping movies for such purposes (either from some legal standpoint or more likely from their own desire to have anyone compete with their "iTunes" (or whatever they're going to call it in the future) MOVIE store? Tough???

Remember when Apple wouldn't allow Firefox, etc. on the iPhone because it "competed" with Safari? Is THAT the world you really want to live in? Where Apple kills all real innovation in the name of protecting its own financial best interests (i.e. no competition in areas it wants to completely control...i.e. where the real money is) ??? If so, I have to vehemently disagree. I don't want to live in the Apple equivalent of Communist China where they decide what you can and cannot view and/or do and penalize you for not behaving the way they want you to and use face recognition to enforce it). I mean if that's the kind of society you want to live in, go ahead and move there. Stop trying to bring it to the USA by encouraging companies like Apple to control every aspect of our lives. The US has always been about freedom and I should have freedom of choice to install whatever software I want to use on my own computer I bought and paid for.

Agree, but it's worse than anyone thought (see my post from another topic):

Apple Reportedly Considering Moving Up to 30% of Production Out of China to Diversify Supply Chain

 

[I7guy]

Again, if you believe in Apple's App Store, no one will force you to buy apps elsewhere. Software products have been sold outside Apple's App Stores for a long time. Many Mac applications are available outside of the Mac App store. iOS should be no different.

What iOS should represent or not will be decided in court as SCOTUS has allowed the case against to proceed. While we all have our opinions on the matter the case will be decided in court.

 

[Abazigal]

Again, if you believe in Apple's App Store, no one will force you to buy apps elsewhere. Software products have been sold outside Apple's App Stores for a long time. Many Mac applications are available outside of the Mac App store. iOS should be no different.

It’s ironic that you cited the “not invented here” analogy to support your argument earlier of how third party app stores could be comparable, superior even to the ios App Store, yet assert here that apps on iOS should be distributed the same way as with windows and macOS just because that’s the way it has always been done. Without recognising that the “old way” wasn’t perfect and had its share of drawbacks either.

Yes, that was the way it was done on windows and macOS, and I feel that it is not without its issues. There isn’t one unified method of updating and managing them. There’s an increased chance of malware when you are purchasing apps from third parties outside the purview of the App Store. I don’t have to share my credit card information with the developers if I go through iTunes. Issues that I don’t have with the iOS App Store.

Could one not argue that it is that Mac App Store that should be more like the ios App Store, rather than the other way around?

 

[developer13245]

What iOS should represent or not will be decided in court as SCOTUS has allowed the case against to proceed. While we all have our opinions on the matter the case will be decided in court.

Yes, the SOCTUS is hearing the case, but this specific case was not brought by developers (and was contested as such), but by consumers. The case could go either way, but if the SCOTUS ruling allows Apple to keep their store monopoly, the fight is not over - especially since developers have not brought this action.

Developers have taken a "wait and see" attitude toward this issue because developers know they will be blacklisted by Apple if they initiate ANY action against Apple.

Apple has even directly threatened developers in their App review "advice" by saying "Don't complain to the press" - that's a direct quote.

You seem to have some desire to be "Lorded over" by an authoritarian figure, e.g. Apple, SCOTUS, etc... This is very strange. I think it's EXTREMELY STUPID for this issue to be decided by the SCrOTUmS. In many of my past MR forum posts I've outlined how holding such a stupid monopoly will harm Apple (and already has) in the long run - Summary: lack of innovation kills even the most strident dictators. I've had my own products in the App Store continuously since 2008, and have seen the constriction of innovation Apple causes.

Apple has their head so far up their own arse they don't even realize it.

 

[Abazigal]

I can't tell if you're trolling at this point or just being naive. Do Apple's "principles" represent YOUR principles? For instance, I use MakeMKV, Handbrake and Subler a LOT to dump my purchased Blu-rays (and CDs, DVDs, photos, etc.) and create a server system that my whole house can access via KODI (and/or iTunes for that matter). What if Apple's "principle" for a future Mac App Store (enforced with Notarization that won't allow you to get software anywhere else for sake of argument in some future macOS version so it's more like iOS) is that they do not support Blu-Ray drives on Macs and/or don't support ripping movies for such purposes (either from some legal standpoint or more likely from their own desire to have anyone compete with their "iTunes" (or whatever they're going to call it in the future) MOVIE store? Tough???

Remember when Apple wouldn't allow Firefox, etc. on the iPhone because it "competed" with Safari? Is THAT the world you really want to live in? Where Apple kills all real innovation in the name of protecting its own financial best interests (i.e. no competition in areas it wants to completely control...i.e. where the real money is) ??? If so, I have to vehemently disagree. I don't want to live in the Apple equivalent of Communist China where they decide what you can and cannot view and/or do and penalize you for not behaving the way they want you to and use face recognition to enforce it). I mean if that's the kind of society you want to live in, go ahead and move there. Stop trying to bring it to the USA by encouraging companies like Apple to control every aspect of our lives. The US has always been about freedom and I should have freedom of choice to install whatever software I want to use on my own computer I bought and paid for.

Apple is not a political system. It’s a company offering me a user experience. One that I value and appreciate very much.

How I would like Apple’s ecosystem to be run has no bearing at all with my political inclinations. To me, there is no contradiction between supporting democracy, and preferring that the Apple platform be run like some sort of a benevolent dictatorship. Democracy is what allows for the best qualify of life in the country I reside in, just as Apple running its platform with an iron fist is what allows for the best computing experience (at least for me). Likewise, I can prefer Face ID on my iPad, while being opposed to facial recognition used by governments.

It’s ridiculous to try and conflate the two, like I am like some kind of communist for having the audacity to like what Apple is doing. You want Apple to be more open because you feel it meets your definition of fair play and because you think that is what will allow for a better experience for it users. I simply don’t agree, and that’s all there is to it.

At the end of the day, we all just want our own vision of what the best user experience for a smartphone entails be translated into reality. No need to make it sound any more politicised than it really is.

 

[I7guy]

Yes, the SOCTUS is hearing the case, but this specific case was not brought by developers (and was contested as such), but by consumers. The case could go either way, but if the SCOTUS ruling allows Apple to keep their store monopoly, the fight is not over - especially since developers have not brought this action.

Developers have taken a "wait and see" attitude toward this issue because developers know they will be blacklisted by Apple if they initiate ANY action against Apple.

Apple has even directly threatened developers in their App review "advice" by saying "Don't complain to the press" - that's a direct quote.

You seem to have some desire to be "Lorded over" by an authoritarian figure, e.g. Apple, SCOTUS, etc... This is very strange. I think it's EXTREMELY STUPID for this issue to be decided by the SCrOTUmS. In many of my past MR forum posts I've outlined how holding such a stupid monopoly will harm Apple (and already has) in the long run - Summary: lack of innovation kills even the most strident dictators. I've had my own products in the App Store continuously since 2008, and have seen the constriction of innovation Apple causes.

Apple has their head so far up their own arse they don't even realize it.

My feelings are irrelevant. Apple (probably) won't change and suits can be filed to make them change. All it takes is some law firm taking on the case on a contingency basis. While you think Apple has done a "cranial-rectal" inversion, it seems they know exactly what they are doing, like it or not.

 

[developer13245]

It’s ironic that you cited the “not invented here” analogy to support your argument earlier of how third party app stores could be comparable, superior even to the ios App Store, yet assert here that apps on iOS should be distributed the same way as with windows and macOS just because that’s the way it has always been done. Without recognising that the “old way” wasn’t perfect and had its share of drawbacks either.

Yes, that was the way it was done on windows and macOS, and I feel that it is not without its issues. There isn’t one unified method of updating and managing them. There’s an increased chance of malware when you are purchasing apps from third parties outside the purview of the App Store. I don’t have to share my credit card information with the developers if I go through iTunes. Issues that I don’t have with the iOS App Store.

Could one not argue that it is that Mac App Store that should be more like the ios App Store, rather than the other way around?

Wow, you've actually just argued with yourself! At what point will the Apple App Store become the "old way"? When Apple became the sole decider of what is "new/old/better/worse" the market lost a competitive arbiter of what the best solution will be. This, by definition, is a dictatorship.

Yes, software distribution has evolved in the last 30 years, and must continue to do so. Apple cannot be the sole party who decides the future.

Also, you are operating from a seriously misinformed perspective. I've sold software directly to customers for almost 20 years and NEVER needed to take credit card information. There have been 3rd party on-line payment license / key solutions for decades. Do some homework before typing on the keyboard.
[doublepost=1563417031][/doublepost]

My feelings are irrelevant. Apple (probably) won't change and suits can be filed to make them change. All it takes is some law firm taking on the case on a contingency basis. While you think Apple has done a "cranial-rectal" inversion, it seems they know exactly what they are doing, like it or not.

Hold on... Let me make one thing ABSOLUTELY CLEAR: I don't care about your feelings AND never said anything about them. The fact that you mention them says something very strange.

There is no doubt Apple is in the position they are, and will fight to keep things the way they are. Their decision making track record is not the greatest, and no one can deny that the iPhone is Apple's "One Hit Wonder". Without the iPhone they're "not even batting .500".

Apple is iOS now, and they will fight dirty for the status quo because if they loose iOS they are done.

This will be dirtier than a bare knuckle mafia brawl.

 

[I7guy]

Wow, you've actually just argued with yourself! At what point will the Apple App Store become the "old way"? When Apple became the sole decider of what is "new/old/better/worse" the market lost a competitive arbiter of what the best solution will be.

Also, you are operating from a seriously misinformed perspective. I've sold software directly to customers for almost 20 years and NEVER needed to take credit card information. There have been 3rd party on-line payment license / key solutions for decades. Do some homework before typing on the keyboard.
[doublepost=1563417031][/doublepost]

Hold on... Let me make one thing ABSOLUTELY CLEAR: I don't care about your feelings AND never said anything about them. The fact that you mention them says something very strange.

There is no doubt Apple is in the position they are, and will fight to keep things the way they are. Their decision making track record is not the greatest, and no one can deny that the iPhone is Apple's "One Hit Wonder". Without the iPhone they're "not even batting .500".

Apple is iOS now, and they will fight dirty for the status quo because if they loose iOS they are done.

This will be dirtier than a bare knuckle mafia brawl.

It seems like you have a decision to make if you want to stick with Apple as a development platform, given your extreme distaste for the way they operate.

 

[Abazigal]

Wow, you've actually just argued with yourself! At what point will the Apple App Store become the "old way"? When Apple became the sole decider of what is "new/old/better/worse" the market lost a competitive arbiter of what the best solution will be.

Also, you are operating from a seriously misinformed perspective. I've sold software directly to customers for almost 20 years and NEVER needed to take credit card information. There have been 3rd party on-line payment license / key solutions for decades. Do some homework before typing on the keyboard.

It figures that a developer would be arguing in favour of a system which best suits him while I as a consumer would argue from an angle which best meets my interests as the end user.

And I am supposed to be the hypocrite here?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Yes, that was the way it was done on windows and macOS, and I feel that it is not without its issues. There isn’t one unified method of updating and managing them. There’s an increased chance of malware when you are purchasing apps from third parties outside the purview of the App Store. I don’t have to share my credit card information with the developers if I go through iTunes. Issues that I don’t have with the iOS App Store.

I take it you've never heard of PayPal........

 

[developer13245]

It figures that a developer would be arguing in favour of a system which best suits him while I as a consumer would argue from an angle which best meets my interests as the end user.

And I am supposed to be the hypocrite here?

Yes, you're a hypocrite because as a developer I have to compete with other developers for customers. A fair market ensures consumers have choice and thus protects consumers.

When Apple gives preferential treatment to some developers, they cause harm to the market and consumers. I've given many examples of Apple's preferential treatment. Apple thought it was Ok for Uber to willfully violate users "basic human right" of privacy, so you may have been exposed to harm, for which Apple DID NOT sanction Uber as they did other developers. This single example discredits your entire argument and Apple's also. Apple was the SOLE decision maker about what to do about Uber's human rights violation. This is not acceptable, and again, a constitutes a dictatorship. This is undeniable, yet you refuse to consider it.

And - I mean really? You can't understand that the only way Apple can sell Macs with soldered on RAM and Secondary storage is due to their monopoly position with the iOS App Store? How ignorant does someone need to be not to understand this?

Any computer vendor selling product with non-upgradable RAM and Storage would be out of business. Apple's computer market share is faltering anyway, but they either don't get it or just don't care. Again, this is how dictatorial ignorance causes downfall.

(Yes, I know the yet-to-ship-vapor Mac Pro will have upgradable RAM and Storage, but who really cares about a $5000 computer, when Apple considers everyone else "losers" who shouldn't be allowed to upgrade these components).

 

[Rob_2811]

Also, I feel that Apple needs to take a much more hands-on role in pushing the broader tech industry to a more privacy-focused state.

This would include banning more apps from the App Store that run afoul of Apple’s principles. I am looking at the recent app - FaceTune and I do have my concerns about it.

While we are talking about a small third-party app today, apps from Google and Facebook present the same kind of dilemma for Apple. If anything, I feel Apple needs to become even more assertive and proactive in managing these apps and I would fully support their efforts in doing so.

They will never take any kind of sanction against the likes of Facebook regardless of how much they violate the app store rules. Apple needs them, nobody would care about a phone you couldn't run Google Apps, IG, Facebook etc on.

So while the Apple privacy thing is a nice gesture its mainly just a marketing shtick because their App Store is filled with apps from vendors who's entire business model is built on mining data and Apple has benefitted enormously from having them on their platform.

 

[Abazigal]

Yes, you're a hypocrite because as a developer I have to compete with other developers for customers. A fair market ensures consumers have choice and thus protects consumers.

Having choice is not necessarily protecting them. Especially when consumers are not getting more of what they want, but instead being saddled with more issues to contend with.

When Apple gives preferential treatment to some developers, they cause harm to the market and consumers. I've given many examples of Apple's preferential treatment. Apple thought it was Ok for Uber to willfully violate users "basic human right" of privacy, so you may have been exposed to harm, for which Apple DID NOT sanction Uber as they did other developers. This single example discredits your entire argument and Apple's also. Apple was the SOLE decision maker about what to do about Uber's human rights violation. This is not acceptable, and again, a constitutes a dictatorship. This is undeniable, yet you refuse to consider it.

Apple eventually did get Uber to stop their tracking, IIRC. This means that Apple ultimately did act in the interests of their user base, even if the process wasn’t as “thermonuclear” as you would have liked.

Also, doesn’t this just support my point all the more? You admit that there are bad actors in the App Store, and your solution to this is to open up the App Store so that these apps then can then no longer be under Apple’s jurisdiction, and can then go on to do even worse without fear of repercussions?

How is this better for me as the end user again? How is this protecting the consumer again?

And - I mean really? You can't understand that the only way Apple can sell Macs with soldered on RAM and Secondary storage is due to their monopoly position with the iOS App Store? How ignorant does someone need to be not to understand this?

I don’t get this argument. Not everyone who buys a Mac is an iOS app developer. I personally would never upgrade the internals of a PC on my own, and to my understanding, soldered components allow for a thinner device. Also, they are attached to a custom controller that encrypts the entire device with a key that is fused into silicon. Being able to unplug a drive defeats this security feature.

While soldered parts do allow Apple to sell spec upgrades at a markup, I think it is really the ignorant who think that this is the only reason why Apple does this. It’s a side benefit, but not the key driving decision.

Any computer vendor selling product with non-upgradable RAM and Storage would be out of business. Apple's computer market share is faltering anyway, but they either don't get it or just don't care. Again, this is how dictatorial ignorance causes downfall.

(Yes, I know the yet-to-ship-vapor Mac Pro will have upgradable RAM and Storage, but who really cares about a $5000 computer, when Apple considers everyone else "losers" who shouldn't be allowed to upgrade these components).

Is it supposed to be Apple’s fault that every other computer vendor out there is pushing the same filling (windows) and not their own custom OS? What do they expect when neither the ideas or the product is *theirs*?

 

[developer13245]

Having choice is not necessarily protecting them. Especially when consumers are not getting more of what they want, but instead being saddled with more issues to contend with.

Consumers are protected by having a competitive market that yields choice. Anti trust law is very clear about this.
Also, fraud is illegal. We have a system of laws to deal with that.

And:

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

― Benjamin Franklin

Apple eventually did get Uber to stop their tracking, IIRC. This means that Apple ultimately did act in the interests of their user base, even if the process wasn’t as “thermonuclear” as you would have liked.

Also, doesn’t this just support my point all the more? You admit that there are bad actors in the App Store, and your solution to this is to open up the App Store so that these apps then can then no longer be under Apple’s jurisdiction, and can then go on to do even worse without fear of repercussions?

How is this better for me as the end user again? How is this protecting the consumer again?

You fail to understand that Apple was NOT AWARE of Uber's malfeasance until it was brought to their attention by a 3rd party researcher. If sole reliance was placed on Apple to find and correct this problem you would have NEVER known about it. How many other human rights violations has Apple swept under the rug just because the perpetrators were too "well connected" to power that the little people didn't need to know? Apple CANNOT be the sole decider of human rights abuses.

Also, 3rd party researches will not go away if Apple's App Store monopoly ends - in fact they will probably increase in both number and robustness.

3rd party app stores will also create competition in protecting users. Do you think a 3rd party store will survive if they allow malware to be distributed on their store? Do you think an independent software vendor will survive if they allow harm to come to users?

Really, your argument here is just plain nonsense. You really just want some nanny to take care of you. I get it, Apple is that to you.

I don’t get this argument. Not everyone who buys a Mac is an iOS app developer. I personally would never upgrade the internals of a PC on my own, and to my understanding, soldered components allow for a thinner device. Also, they are attached to a custom controller that encrypts the entire device with a key that is fused into silicon. Being able to unplug a drive defeats this security feature.

While soldered parts do allow Apple to sell spec upgrades at a markup, I think it is really the ignorant who think that this is the only reason why Apple does this. It’s a side benefit, but not the key driving decision.

Is it supposed to be Apple’s fault that every other computer vendor out there is pushing the same filling (windows) and not their own custom OS? What do they expect when neither the ideas or the product is *theirs*?

Again, Mac market share is faltering. Proof is in the numbers.

I understand some users don't desire an upgradable computer. That is fine. Apple thinks NO ONE should have an upgradable computer. That is NOT OK. Again, you are taking the absolutist position here.

Again, You can choose to stay with the Apple App store - no one will force you to go elsewhere. You obviously have difficulty understanding this.

[doublepost=1563422955][/doublepost]Oh, Linux, LineageOS....

 

[Abazigal]

Again, You can choose to stay with the Apple App store - no one will force you to go elsewhere. You obviously have difficulty understanding this.

[doublepost=1563422955][/doublepost]Oh, Linux, LineageOS....

I think you are the one who doesn’t get it.

I choose to stay with Apple because of the superior user experience it offers. The way Apple runs their App Store is one of many enablers.

If you don’t like how the App Store is run, Android is the other way, and it sounds like you would be fine with the lackadaisical attitude with which google manages their play store anyways.

And:

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

― Benjamin Franklin

You do realise that this quote doesn’t mean what you think it does, right?

 

[I7guy]

They will never take any kind of sanction against the likes of Facebook regardless of how much they violate the app store rules. Apple needs them, nobody would care about a phone you couldn't run Google Apps, IG, Facebook etc on.

So while the Apple privacy thing is a nice gesture its mainly just a marketing shtick because their App Store is filled with apps from vendors who's entire business model is built on mining data and Apple has benefitted enormously from having them on their platform.

Yes it’s true that some apps mine my data. I dont care about those and don’t download them and thank the creators for being in compliance with App Store policies.

The ones who mine your data like Facebook, which don’t disclose the entirety of their privacy policies are the ones that should be sanctioned. Hopefully Apple will get around to it at some point. However if this is what apps do in front of Apple, I can imagine what they do jn an unregulated App Store behinds apple’s back.

 

[developer13245]

I think you are the one who doesn’t get it.

I choose to stay with Apple because of the superior user experience it offers. The way Apple runs their App Store is one of many enablers.

If you don’t like how the App Store is run, Android is the other way, and it sounds like you would be fine with the lackadaisical attitude with which google manages their play store anyways.

Why do you keep assuming what others including myself "would be fine with".

It's obvious you've lost the argument when all you have left is to mind read and construct straw men.

I despise Google more than Apple. Increased competition is needed to mitigate damage being inflicted by both companies.
(see my updated avatar)

You do realise that this quote doesn’t mean what you think it does, right?

I know what the quote means and it especially applies to this situation. Developers are forced to pay a 30% tax to Apple that somehow you believe provides "Security" to you as a customer. Again, I've cited direct examples of Apple NOT properly providing such security but you fail to understand this.

But the worst part about this is how Apple hides their app store fee. Developers are NOT allowed to price their Apps differently than the mandated $x.99 price tiers, which include the fee. For example, developers cannot charge $1.79 for an app and then expose the customer to Apple's %30 fee + taxes. This is an egregious example of Apple's willful obfuscation.

 

[FFR]

Why do you keep assuming what others including myself "would be fine with".

It's obvious you've lost the argument when all you have left is to mind read and construct straw men.

I despise Google more than Apple. Increased competition is needed to mitigate damage being inflicted by both companies.
(see my updated avatar)




I know what the quote means and it especially applies to this situation. Developers are forced to pay a 30% tax to Apple that somehow you believe provides "Security" to you as a customer. Again, I've cited direct examples of Apple NOT properly providing such security but you fail to understand this.

But the worst part about this is how Apple hides their app store fee. Developers are NOT allowed to price their Apps differently than the mandated $x.99 price tiers, which include the fee. For example, developers cannot charge $1.79 for an app and then expose the customer to Apple's %30 fee + taxes. This is an egregious example of Apple's willful obfuscation.

As an iPhone user.
If I can’t pay through apple, I’m not subscribing.

 

[Abazigal]

I know what the quote means and it especially applies to this situation. Developers are forced to pay a 30% tax to Apple that somehow you believe provides "Security" to you as a customer. Again, I've cited direct examples of Apple NOT properly providing such security but you fail to understand this.

If you knew what Benjamin Franklin’s quote really meant, you wouldn’t be using here in this context.

https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/h...jamin-franklins-quote-on-liberty-vs-security/

The letter wasn’t about liberty but about taxes and the ability to “raise money for defense against French and Indian attacks. The governor kept vetoing the assembly’s efforts at the behest of the family, which had appointed him.”

 

[developer13245]

If you knew what Benjamin Franklin’s quote really meant, you wouldn’t be using here in this context.

https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/h...jamin-franklins-quote-on-liberty-vs-security/

The fact is Apple forces a 30% tax on iOS App Store Apps, with no freedom to purchase apps elsewhere.

You assume no other company can do better than Apple, but that is a false assumption - especially when no one is allowed the opportunity. Again, the Mac works just fine with 3rd party apps installed without the App Store

I doubt reality would be so simplistic or straightforward.

Right now, developers make their apps available via the iOS App Store because that’s the only way their app can be sold. This also means that amongst other things, they are forced to comply with the App Store rules which I largely agree with as a consumer.

Yes, these rules may seem draconian and onerous to a developer, and I don’t care. If anything, I feel there is still more that Apple can do to implement anti-developer rules that benefit me as the end user. The recent introduction of Apple-sign-in (and Apple mandating that all developers support this feature) is something you won’t find me griping about.

This is the main problem with your thinking. You don't care about developers. Fine, but when no developers are writing software for Apple platforms you then will have a problem.

You are right in that I could in theory still choose to buy my apps via the iOS App Store even if third party stores were made available, but this also assumes that the developer continues to make the app available in the iOS App Store.

No, I'm NOT assuming developers will continue to use Apple's iOS App Store. This is called freedom of choice - this is what you fear. You believe developers have no rights in the Apple ecosystem except walking away from the platform, which is what they end up doing. You have no idea what it takes to develop an app.

What if the developer decides to remove his app from the iOS App Store in order to circumvent the 30% revenue cut, and insist that the app be downloaded from an alternative App Store?

When the developers remove Apps from the iOS App store you still have access to paid apps you purchased. Apps accessed via subscriptions will expire then you will have nothing.

This is what APPLE fears the most. Developers will walk away from the Apple App Store and it will wither.

This alternative second App Store would also have less incentive to subject their apps to the same degree of scrutiny as Apple. Apple isn’t perfect, but I can at least trust that the decisions Apple makes are in the best interests of me, the consumer.

Having the iOS App Store as the only place where consumers can purchase and download apps allows for the greatest amount of good to the greatest number of users. Yes, there will be this small group of users who are disadvantaged, and that’s what Android is there for, isn’t it?

Again, you don't care about developers. Neither does Apple - they believe developers will put up with their covfefe forever, but they are wrong. The trash heap of tech history is full of examples of such stupidity. Apple will be there eventually.

Finally, Something else you don't understand:

I have apps in BOTH the iOS and Mac App stores - and - revenue visibility into other apps on both platforms.

I KNOW the revenue of multiple apps both stores, and their respective rankings. This information includes "Top Grossing" apps on the Mac App store.

This provides me a perspective few here have. The Mac App Store is basically a joke. If Apple looses the control they have on the iOS app store it will become a joke.

 

[developer13245]

Apple knows this.

 

[Abazigal]

The fact is Apple forces a 30% tax on iOS App Store Apps, with no freedom to purchase apps elsewhere.

You assume no other company can do better than Apple, but that is a false assumption - especially when no one is allowed the opportunity. Again, the Mac works just fine with 3rd party apps installed without the App Store

That’s my point. The Mac App model works fine. My opinion is that the ios App Store works even better than the Mac App Store in this regard.

This is the main problem with your thinking. You don't care about developers. Fine, but when no developers are writing software for Apple platforms you then will have a problem.

Caring has nothing to do with it.

The simple fact of the matter is that as with any profession, there will always be bad actors. While not perfect, the ios App Store does an admirable job of weeding out the bad players, at no real cost to me as the end user.

You as a developer is basically expecting me to give up some measure of security and ease of use so that you can earn more money, at no appreciable benefit to myself. Nothing wrong with that, but let’s not pretend that your motives are any more noble than this.

At least I don’t.

No, I'm NOT assuming developers will continue to use Apple's iOS App Store. This is called freedom of choice - this is what you fear. You believe developers have no rights in the Apple ecosystem except walking away from the platform, which is what they end up doing. You have no idea what it takes to develop an app.

When the developers remove Apps from the iOS App store you still have access to paid apps you purchased. Apps accessed via subscriptions will expire then you will have nothing.

This is what APPLE fears the most. Developers will walk away from the Apple App Store and it will wither.

Then walk away. They just won’t earn my money, and I know I did spend quite a bit last year on iOS apps.

Again, you don't care about developers. Neither does Apple - they believe developers will put up with their covfefe forever, but they are wrong. The trash heap of tech history is full of examples of such stupidity. Apple will be there eventually.

Like I said earlier. Care has nothing to do with it. There are bad players and if the industry can’t police itself, then don’t complain when Apple steps in to do what must be done.

Finally, Something else you don't understand:

I have apps in BOTH the iOS and Mac App stores - and - revenue visibility into other apps on both platforms.

I KNOW the revenue of multiple apps both stores, and their respective rankings. This information includes "Top Grossing" apps on the Mac App store.

This provides me a perspective few here have. The Mac App Store is basically a joke. If Apple looses the control they have on the iOS app store it will become a joke.

Like I said above, it’s all about the money.

And guess who loses?

Us end users.