Nope, apple shouldn’t do “whatever” it wants, nor should any company. But they should be allowed to operate legally, without government butting in.
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.
Epic vs. Apple Takes a Twist As 35 US States and Department of Justice Weigh in to Back 'Fortnite' Maker
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The iOS App Store has thousands of low quality apps right now. Being a walled garden does not precent these low quality apps from showing up there. All it does is ensure the apps do not violate any Apple patent/copyright and do not brick your phone by using them.
Apple isn’t falling. The App Store may become a garbage dump, like some want, but apple isn’t falling. Just take one’s head out of the sand to see what they are doing.
Yet they routinely sue corporations to do exactly that…..
And in my opinion, it’s to grab headlines rather than protect consumers.
Perhaps Apple should split payment processing and come up with a different structure for charging for everything else? Apps that don’t have IAP (or even ones that do but it’s rarely used by the majority of users) still utilize all of Apple’s software development tools, SDKs, beta software, etc. If IAP commission is covering most of the cost of running the App Store and providing developer tools/support then clearly a small number of apps/developers are subsidizing all other apps/developers on the store.
If every app on the App Store was free with no IAP, where would the money come from to subsidize the App Store? The answer is how the App Store is getting subsidized today.
No it would not. Where is my choice to stick with Steam if I want Final Fantasy 7 Remake? It will be developers forcing my choice on if I allow side loading or not. NOT my choice.
In many respects it already is. I’d be curious how many people download apps based on browsing the App Store? I can’t remember the last time I did. Most of the games on my phone I downloaded because of ads I saw on Instagram or ads in other games. None of them were downloaded because Apple put me on to them. Honestly I think the whole side loading conversation is a red herring but one that Apple is happy to have. They’d rather be talking about that than the IAP commission and alternate payment options. It’s much easier to steer the conversation to security with side loading than it is with IAP since non-digital goods and things purchased in a browser don’t use Apple’s IAP.
You are missing the point massively with my post. I am tired of repeating myself here. One last time - Epic will REMOVE apps on Apple App Store and buy exclusivity rights where you can ONLY buy the app on the Epic Games Store. Proof? Look at what Epic is doing on PC. How can they POSSIBLY compete with Steam? Doing the same thing. How can they possibly compete with Apple App Store? Doing the same thing. It WILL happen, I can guarantee it.
And Epic is not doing this for Joe Somebody's random game. Things like Borderlands 3 and Final Fantasy 7 Remake. They are very popular. Epic is doing it because it is the only way they can compete with Steam.
This is like saying every single smartphone is a closed device. You need to toggle side-loading on Android you know. People countering this argument need to stop playing semantics and technicalities. When we refer to choice of open vs closed - we mean absolutely no setting and way to bypass the closed garden. You know very well Android is not a "closed" system, but your same argument here, Android is closed?!
Stop with the they should just buy xxx BS, it’s getting tiresome, as if apple can buy everyone ?????
So what? You use a different app. You have choice, don't you?
Any developer is free to develop and offer in the Apple App Store.
Or, alternatively, you allow this one app to run that wasn't downloaded from the App Store.
Offering on the first-tier "platform-owner" operated store, the Apple App Store, should be a no-brainer, shouldn't it?
So let me get this straight...
One "essential" app that doesn't use Apple's own App Store is supposedly a big problem, in that it "forces" users out of Apple's ecosystem and denies them choice.
Yet the fact that's there's exactly two (in some places three) "essential" Mobile App distribution platforms, the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store, is supposedly testament that consumers (let alone developers) have true choice?
That doesn't make any sense, sorry.
I didn’t say every app should be free with no IAP. I said split out IAP from the rest. Keep IAP about payment processing and support. But I am curious if you took the price of an iPhone or iPad how Apple would divide it up between BOM, R&D, salaries, etc. Couldn’t one argue a portion of every iPhone sale goes towards the maintenance of the App Store? Back when it was first launched Steve Jobs said Apple would run the App Store as a break even business. It wasn’t until Apple execs realized how much $$ was to be made with IAP (and iPhone sales growth slowing after the 6/6S super cycle) that the company prioritized the App Store as a money making business (and started referring to it as ‘services’).
The Apple iOS platform is not a closed garden then.
Anyone can quickly sign up with their email address and password for a developer account - and then from their Macs install their own Apps on their iPhones. There are even "store-like" platforms that conveniently automate the technical process.
The catch? It's time-limited by Apple's signing process.
Last edited:
Yes. Because if you want an open environment - you have Android. If you want a closed walled garden - you have iOS. Currently, there is a choice. This is gone if Apple is forced to allow side-loading. No more choice. Where will my walled garden choice be after this? And don't respond with "well just don't side loading" like everyone does. This is equivalent to saying Android is a closed and walled garden environment because you need to enable side-loading.
People love to play semantics and technicalities in these discussions. When we (not just me) say "closed walled garden" we refer to no setting, no options to open it up it is truly a closed walled garden. That choice will no longer exist. Apple will definitely lose sales due to it. I certainly would if iOS essentially becomes Android. Why spend $1,000+ on an iPhone when there are far better and cheaper Android phones out there?
Again, stop playing semantics and technicalities. There is no setting in iOS directly where I can toggle side-loading. THIS is what we are referring to. Not spending an additional $800+ on a Mac to allow this. If I have an iPhone and NO OTHER APPLE PRODUCTS, I cannot enable side-loading. It is a walled garden. If this ends up Apple forcing an option, that is no longer the case.
Just stop getting to the weeds here. You clearly know what we are talking about by a truly closed system.
So..? What's your point? These developers are obviously happy to let their products, their own promotion or word of mouth speak for themselves and don't need Apple's "advertising" that's been forced upon them.
Wrong.
They're also providing the "storefront and till" so to speak, as well the tax processing where required.
2Checkout "as an authorized reseller" - so as the seller - for the software company I bought from.
The ones that Apple is giving out for free anyway, you mean?
As I said, some developers or companies are perfectly fine without Apple's hand-holding and supplementary services being forced upon them.
Expect, they aren’t removing anything but yet, you keep spouting it off as fact ?
Nobody said development work wouldn’t have to be done on both platforms, if your goal is to be in both platforms..
Very simple - and yes, I am going to say it:
You don't side-load apps from third-parties then. Because you don't have to.
As long as Apple is offering their Apple App Store services, you are free to choose to buy your apps only from them. Just as today.
You'll be staying in the "walled garden" that your phone manufacturer (Apple) and operating system developer (Apple) have set up and are providing for you. By buying only apps from their (Apple's) App Store.
Yes, how about we stop play semantics and technicalities?
Just stop contorting or twisting reality by claiming that adding choice is supposedly taking away choice.
We do have a status quo today. Allowing sideloading would only add an additional option or choices to today's status quo. Adding new choices to the status quo does not mean denying, restricting, abolishing or taking away choice. Quite the contrary!
Last edited:
No need to work yourself up into a tizzy because I pointed out your rank hypocrisy and lack of consistent logic. Just be better.
There is no need to apologise, you won't hurt my feelings!
I think its quite likely that we wouldn't just be talking about 'one' essential app. Suppose that Netflix decided that they would rather distribute their software through the non Apple store, even though this is not essential. My point is it just takes one App that I really want, or need, for me to flip that toggle button and unlock my phone out of its walled existence. At the moment this is not possible, and all Apps are in one place. For me as a consumer, I prefer this because I don't have to go trawling through different stores to find what I want, and I have peace of mind that my phone is protected from malware and most scam software. From a developer point of view, I personally find it much easier to only list my apps on a single store, and even made the decision to stop supporting Android because the uptake of my apps on that platform was poor in comparison to iOS.
This is just my own personal opinion of course, and other people will feel differently, especially developers.
It just strikes me that at the moment people have a choice between two different systems. One giving the user and developers almost complete control, with the ability to have multiple stores and side load whatever you want, the other providing a protected space, with many restrictions and limits on both users and developers, which some people prefer.
The argument to undo that closed system is removing that fundamental choice. The x percentage of iOS users get more control/choice, but ALL mobile phone users loose the fundamental choice between open and closed systems because there will be no closed systems.