I still don't understand why this isn't a widely supported position.
Make it like the Mac already is, basically.
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.
Brazil Recommends Sanctions for Apple Over App Store Rules
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I still don't understand why this isn't a widely supported position.
Make it like the Mac already is, basically.
Sure, but those days never existed, so in that case, it may be something to dream of or pine for, but not something to miss.
It’s fine if you just don’t like Apple & their business model. But trying to claim Apple is being “anticompetitive” with a 9.1% marketshare is just silly. If you want to have a serious conversation, fine. But don’t insult our intelligence.
Business is not a democracy.
They DO have a choice, one choice that lets them sign up and download from pretty much anywhere. The ONLY place it can’t download/buy apps from is the Apple App Store. So, for someone who has a primary requirement that “My device must allow me to install what I want however I want to install it”, if they’re NOT buying a non-Apple device, then they’re not listening to their own requirements!
They sure did; remember Palm and Windows CE mobile devices? You bought apps from anywhere you like
Nah, the current regulators aren’t trying to vy for some higher political office like Vestager was. Even before taking office, it was clear that they felt their priorities lay elsewhere. They were locked in discussions with Apple (something Vestager never allowed) in order for Apple to produce a document they broadly agree with. It’s not perfect and folks that were expecting something like Vestager’s grandstanding ultimatums will be disappointed. But, those regulators have other things they want to accomplish, so getting this behind them is just their first job.
Stronger than that, they're making a case for why Apple makes for a lousy nanny.
The theoretical benefits aren't here, but the issues are very real.
PDA’s rather than smartphones, yah, you’re right, those had some degree of popularity. If they were better at being what people wanted to buy, they might even still be around today.
And I guess that’s the point, really. What a good number of people seem to want to spend money on is something quite different from what the majority of people are willing to spend money on. To the point where if something a particular user specifically wants isn’t available for them to buy, one major reason why is that there’s not enough other people that want the same thing such that someone could build, market, and sell it and make a profit doing so.
There may have been hundreds of thousands that relished buying apps from anywhere, but millions upon millions that preferred just having whatever they want to buy in one main location.
Last edited:
What happens if Apple refuses to pay the fine? Brazil bans Apple products? That seems like a win for Apple. A loss for Brazilians. Maybe it is time Apple said “Up Yours” to these countries. Who are doing nothing but seeking money for nothing.
Not theoretical, proven. Case study in the opposite is the Google Play Store littered with junk.
The App Store prevented more than $9 billion in fraudulent transactions
In the last five years, the App Store has protected users by preventing over $9 billion in fraudulent transactions, including over $2 billion in 2024.
www.apple.com
Always has been the case, which is why I find it so laughable folks hold up the "security, privacy, safety" marketing BS straight out of Apple's mouth.
So "up yours" to Brazil, the EU, the USA, a few others I'm forgetting about I'm sure...
Obviously it's more of "bend over" for China...
Tough business corner Apple keeps further painting itself into here...
close the app store all you want, who really cares. having an issue with "side loading" is looking at a user and saying "you shouldn't be able to install what you want."
sideloading is some weird new-agey term for "use an operating system as it has always been designed to function, by installing things you choose to install."
i absolutely despise when macOS actively prevents me from installing something because it doesnt come from the app store, and it wasn't signed in some way that makes apple happy. and then i have to go through security settings to "approve" this action, and then i'm still asked if i want to go through with it, courtesy of ridiculous warnings.
otherwise, go to windows and double click an exe. life is happy, and i havent seen a virus in at least 15 years. something about being a user who is capable of understanding safe material makes my device interactions perfectly fine.
even when i was jailbreaking iphones i never had an issue. this whole "no sideloading" thing is idiotic, and it's amazing how easily impressionable americans are that apple can convince customers it's a bad thing. too bad our gov't doesnt have the same spine and general care of the population that the EU has for theirs.
It's weird that the term "sideloading" doesn't appear anywhere on this "Install and uninstall apps from the internet or a disc on Mac" Apple support page
Install and uninstall apps from the internet or a disc on Mac
On your Mac, download and install apps from the internet or a disc. If you no longer want an app, remove it.
"Sideloading" = "Installing Apps"
Not theoretical, proven. Case study in the opposite is the Google Play Store littered with junk.
The App Store prevented more than $9 billion in fraudulent transactions
In the last five years, the App Store has protected users by preventing over $9 billion in fraudulent transactions, including over $2 billion in 2024.www.apple.com
That's a link from Apple.
It's propaganda to support their position.
you may be tech savvy but the population as a whole is not. I'd much rather hop through a few pop-ups knowing the software has been vetted than having to waste time deep diving into the code of everything I download.
And if it's opened up, you'll have a bunch of 'anti-virus' companies peddling their bloatware doing poorly what Apple already does well, which is mitigating malware spread.
It depends on how much the fine is. I’d be willing to bet that, like the EU, they will make the fine smallish because what they want more than anything else is to keep those App Store dollars coming in. They just want a reason to take some money off the top and they just provided themselves with that reason.
If you want to examine the actions of regions that want change more than money (heh), look at China and Indonesia. Both willing to prevent the sale of hardware in the region until Apple met their demands. Guess what? Apple met those demands.
They're metrics. You have data that contradicts them?
Whether one believes it’s propaganda or not depends on your individual point of view.
as far I remember, this is actually possible.
now the real question is whether that old version will work on a newer OS in the future.
the sad truth is that the dev can change the backend anytime and this would render all prior versions unusable. I suspect there are only a few exceptions where the game doesn't demand network connectivity...
No. Virtually all Android apps are distributed through Google's Play Store. Very few can not be downloaded from that. Not too mention the reliance on Play services.
I'm forced to use Google Play on iOS almost as much as I have to use Apple's App Store on iOS.
They do exist on the Mac.
And on Microsoft Windows.
So let's lobby politicians to allow us the same choice and rights on mobiles too.