Brazil Recommends Sanctions for Apple Over App Store Rules

[I7guy]

Have those metrics been cherry-picked to benefit one side of the argument and are they being spread to influence the thoughts and opinions of others?

In other words, does it quack like a duck?

Are they true? If so they are metrics and you can interpret them as needed.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

Are they true? If so they are metrics and you can interpret them as needed.

Not sure where you got the idea that facts and truth could not be propagandized.

 

[BaldiMac]

No, that's also a misunderstanding of ad hominem fallacy, since I dismissed it by directly addressing your claims validity. Even by your definition, this conversation is propaganda.

But here are some additional definitions:

Propaganda: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause

Propaganda: The systematic dissemination of information, esp. in a biased or misleading way, in order to promote a particular cause or point of view, often a political agenda.

I think you somehow got it in your head that I'm disagreeing with you. I was actually agreeing with you.

 

[The_Gream]

I agree with open NFC access, but not open App Store access and side loading. Open NFC spurs competition. Open App Store invites malware and is a security and privacy risk.

Just curious what part of the NFC needs to be opened?

There are APIs for hotels, automakers, POS companies etc. they just need to file with Apple for the privilege to access.

If you are referring to Banks needing access, then I would say no, they should just work with Apple to better integrate their stuff in to Apple Pay. If not then every Bank would have their own wallet and require you to use it for mobile payments.

 

[uacd]

-

 

[tennisproha]

I think you somehow got it in your head that I'm disagreeing with you. I was actually agreeing with you.

Not quite. Propaganda is something with the intention to manipulate. You can't really say the report is propaganda because we don't know what we don't know.

We can infer from history, in which case I would argue Apple tends to be more transparent than it's competitors so we have less reason to believe they aren't being transparent.

 

[tennisproha]

Just curious what part of the NFC needs to be opened?

There are APIs for hotels, automakers, POS companies etc. they just need to file with Apple for the privilege to access.

If you are referring to Banks needing access, then I would say no, they should just work with Apple to better integrate their stuff in to Apple Pay. If not then every Bank would have their own wallet and require you to use it for mobile payments.

Actually I was just arguing for the APIs. I agree they shouldn't open access outside of that process.

 

[somethingelsefl]

I'd prefer no store, and just download/install apps directly. I don't need nor want a middleman, Apple, the carriers, or otherwise.

I don't even care if the App Store is default. Just me let take an .ipa and do with it as I wish.

...then, maybe, I can get Firefox with plugin support.

Whoosh. Completely over your head.

 

[Rogifan]

I agree with open NFC access, but not open App Store access and side loading. Open NFC spurs competition. Open App Store invites malware and is a security and privacy risk.

So the iPhone can’t be secure and private unless you can only get apps from Apple’s store?

 

[Timo_Existencia]

So the iPhone can’t be secure and private unless you can only get apps from Apple’s store?

No. But a closed eco system is fundamentally more secure than an open eco system.

This is a straw man.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Let me remind you that when the iPhone launched, the original vision was for anyone to develop apps for it using HTML5, Java and some other widely available and free development kits. You were able to go to someone's website and use their apps under their own business terms and through their own infrastructure... did you know you can still do that? You know who choses that route? No-one.

Yeah, of course I remember.
And native apps are superior in many ways to HTML5 web apps. Which is why when word got round that Android would have them, Apple was quick to pre-announce an IDE of their own.

Did it work? Hell yeah. No one was complaining, not even governments, until some years ago when Epic and Spotify decided together that they didn't want to pay Apple a fee anymore

And rightly so. Cause after having acquired substantial numbers of customers and the markets maturing, the Apple "Tax" was just that: A "tax" and cost drag on their business for no value provided (most certainly not more than provided to Uber nowadays).

Why is Apple getting away with: Cause they've been taking hostage the subset of developers that could not and can't provide their services with HTML5 web apps (unlike Uber - which could).

 

[frownface]

It's only a matter of time before every country does this, why wouldn't they? The legal system is built on precedence and most countries have similar laws.

Plus there's juicy fine money on the table; not that that should be the motivator. But i'm sure the thought has crossed the minds of many lawmakers.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Plus there's juicy fine money on the table; not that that should be the motivator. But i'm sure the thought has crossed the minds of many lawmakers.

...which can be avoided by complying in good faith.

Although obviously, some companies don't want to.
You don't hear much about Microsoft, Amazon or even Google, do you?

 

[mdriftmeyer]

I miss the days when phones weren’t the majority computing platform. And I had a Palm device that didn’t have an app store and just allowed normal installation of programs.

all ten apps

 

[frownface]

...which can be avoided by complying in good faith.

Although obviously, some companies don't want to.
You don't hear much about Microsoft, Amazon or even Google, do you?

Yep.

But so long as the fines costs less than the extra profits they make by not complying; they'll continue to do so. Especially if they have many lawyers on retainer who'll litigate and delay for years.

 

[AppliedMicro]

But so long as the fines costs less than the extra profits they make by not complying

Yes. But at up to 20% (EU DMA fine alone) of worldwide turnover for repeat infringers, it could get costly.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

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

Your source only states how much Apple blocked, not how much happened despite Apple's limited efforts or how much happened vs was blocked on the Google Play Store or on other platforms.

So, no, it's still just a theoretical benefit, not proven. The data is likely out there to prove the opposite - if Apple could actually be favorably compared to Google, they would have gone ahead and done that in their PR. The fact Apple didn't bring up competition suggests the competition outperformed them.

 

[tennisproha]

Your source only states how much Apple blocked, not how much happened despite Apple's limited efforts or how much happened vs was blocked on the Google Play Store or on other platforms.

So, no, it's still just a theoretical benefit, not proven. The data is likely out there to prove the opposite - if Apple could actually be favorably compared to Google, they would have gone ahead and done that in their PR. The fact Apple didn't bring up competition suggests the competition outperformed them.

Does Google have fraud prevention in the Play Store? This is Apple's transparency report so it's not really useful or appropriate for them to make comparisons to competitor in a metric report if it's meant to be strictly a report and not a sales pitch.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

The companies alleged that Apple engaged in anti-competitive practices by requiring in-app purchases to be made exclusively through its own payment system and by restricting developers from informing users about alternative purchasing options — a practice known as anti-steering.

I think you guys should look up for the definition of anti-steering. By definition what Apple does is steering, not anti-steering.

I understand that mega corps have been trying to redefine the term.