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.
'Brutal Battle' Expected as Regulators Close in on Apple Around the World
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The whining self entitled bitterness on these forums is getting out of hand. The op assuming you meant them explicitly only solidifies the fact.
Not everything is about you. You know?
Appeasement is never the way forwards regarding an oppressor.
You fight for what you have. To suggest that Apple would still be in the wrong for daring to complain (‘act innocent’) in the hypothetical situation where they get regulated shows the truth behind the matter for a subset of people; it doesn’t matter what Apple say or do. They are wrong.
Wrong. To put customers at greater risk because you see the hammer coming down and do nothing to avoid it is worse. Far worse.
Are you not following this conversation? I don't like engaging in these types of discussions where people disagree so they pretend like they don't understand as means of responding.
I was just asking you a question. You don’t have to answer me with a rude response.
Im asking because the risk is inherent. If Apple appease the regulators before they regulate, then the damage is already done. If they do nothing and get regulated, the result is identical. This is government regulation. They won’t be happy until they get what they want. Appeasement will just ensure that that happens. Apples stance is to say no. It’s not in our or our customers best interest. Anything else will end in the same result as regulation.
Apparently we are on different pages.
I’m talking about devs leaving the App Store and moving to an alternate or their own site.
That's not correct at all. If Apple were to see what was coming and take steps to head it off, they could do so in a way that they are in control of, and that has the best end result for them and customers. If Apple belligerently ignores whats coming, then regulators will instead be the ones to decide what Apple HAS to do, and Apple will have to comply. And what regulators will come up with will make absolutely no sense and be infinitely worse than if Apple had handled it themselves.
But Apple won't do that, because they want to be able to point the finger at regulators, and accept none of the blame.
No we're not on different pages. You're coming up with irrelevant and incomparable examples as "proof" that developers will not abandon the Apple tax the moment they are allowed to. Despite the fact that many of them have even said they would.
The smaller devs who benefit greatly from Apple handling all of the payment processing and app discovery will stay right where they are. The bigger apps who have every ability to handle that themselves will gladly do so for the extra revenue boost. Not to mention adding features back into their apps that Apple made them remove.
To not be able to see this is as tone deaf as one could possibly be.
But it is correct. Look at the Dutch dating app fiasco. Even when Apple oblige, the regulators ask for more.
Look. These governments have one thing in mind. They want control over companies like Apple to be able to access our communications and our data. That’s just that. It’s not for us. It’s not to enable fair competition. It’s not for devs or other businesses. It’s for nothing other than ensuring that they can gain control of things they currently cannot access. Don’t be naive and thing that it’s for anything else. And don’t be naive and assume that appeasement is anything other than bowing down to demands before they’re demanded.
Can’t wait for all that personal data gathering and forced agreements for ‘sharing’ it with 3rd parties to ‘better the app experience’ to come back. Awesome. Power to the people.
That's not an example of what @Macative is suggesting at all. That's an example of the opposite where Apple waits until it's too late, with regulators intervening and putting together a list of specific items they expect Apple to fix in a specific way. @Macative was suggesting Apple implement changes before regulators get involved. Unfortunately for Apple, that ship has probably already sailed.
And if they had originally obliged prior to a regulation, what would have happened? Yes. The same thing.
Standing by one’s morals and what one believes in or what one thinks is better for their business or for their customers is absolutely the way forwards. People may not agree with what the company believes in, but that doesn’t matter.
Appeasing prior to being regulated or waiting to be regulated amounts to the same thing. Being forced into changing for (in this case) dubious reasons.
I can’t help it if you are on the other side of thinking to me, but it’s a moot point really. Any government forcing this type of thing on any company is dubious at best. It’s not cut and dried enough to be. Why aren’t they looking in to real issues? There are plenty of dubious practices made by Apple and many other companies regarding workers rights etc, in various countries. Or tax evasions. Or a whole host of stuff. Forcing the opening up of an eco system that is beneficial to the great majority of the customers that pay in to it, isn’t something that needs regulated. It’s being regulated in order for governments to control what they previously couldn’t control. I’m happy for you that you what to give this sort of control to your gov, but I do not.
Example. If there is a way for Apple to be forced to open an App Store that they cannot regulate themselves, then Any bad actor (or government, or Facebook, for example) can release ‘necessary’ apps, which bypass the strict data collection and/or backdoor proof Apple policies in order to track you for whatever purposes they desire. Most western govs want a way to bypass encryptions, for example. This is a road to that.
Turkeys voting for Christmas. Again! This stuff can’t be made up.
Last edited:
Proof? The proof is in the pudding. Look at the history of appeasement. It never ever works out in the way the appeaser wishes, only the way the oppressor wants.
Yes. As with all of our opinions in this matter. It hasn’t happened so it’s obviously all conjecture. What a strange accusation.
The only thing weird is you pretending to have proof when all you have is an opinion. You're allowed to have an opinion of course, but don't try to pass it off as proof of something.
I’m merely stating the obvious. But yes it’s of course an opinion. That’s obviously a given I would think. You suggesting otherwise is a common tactic, but it doesn’t negate anything.
I’m not coming up with any proof. I am simply stating that this did not happen with Android, why would iOS be any different?
I have yet to see any kind of sensical response.
My point is you can't start a tech company in a garage today that will take on the giants. That was possible in 1977. I don't want lawmakers inserting themselves into that either way.
Last edited:
"Nobody wants the thing that I want legislators to force companies to allow" seems like a strange argument.
To answer your question, developers have additional restrictions on iOS, especially around privacy and third-party payments. For example, Facebook has no incentive to leave Google Play, while they certainly have an incentive to avoid Apple's privacy rules.