Interesting that you seem to forget that when telling others to vote with their wallet.
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
Interesting the amount of all or nothing discussion that goes on here.
Ah, I guess you fancy yourself the grand arbiter of when voting with your wallet will work and when it will not. I see now.
What a disingenuous post -- underestimating the power of consumer activism. I guess you must be the expert in consumer buying habits and how they influence or not company decisions. It's all very clear, now. Thanks.
Is it a slippery slope, tho? I think it's pretty much a very well defined slope. I personally don't buy into the entire security stuff apple is pleading here. That's not my argument. But if I can force apple to run arbitrary software on their hardware, I can force Sony to run arbitrary software on their hardware as well, which would essentially kill the business model of pretty much every game console. You can discuss if that is a good or a bad thing, but it will sure as hell both disincentivize manufacturers from making them in the first place and drive costs for the hardware to at least twice of what they cost now, more if they actually want to make enough profit to warrant putting in the effort to make new consoles every few years.
There is competition in both markets. Neither Sony nor Apple do have a monopoly on their market. If you disagree with Sony cashing in 20 bucks or so for every game - buy a PC, go get Steam. If you disagree with Apple marking up app sales by 30% go get an Android phone and sideload your precious apps. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy these things. If you are the software distributor and you disagree with paying either the Sony or the Apple tax - don't offer your product for their platforms. The market will decide what kind of business model will preserve. Apple isn't what AT&T or Microsoft were back in the day. They hardly have a quarter of the market.
The point is: if Apple's insistence on the App Store on their products would be to the customer's overall detriment people would stop buying it. They don't, despite having more than enough equivalent options. There is no stifling of competition - instead regulating the market unless it's absolutely necessary (as it was with AT&T and Microsoft) is stifling innovation. The moment Apple sells 51% or more of smartphones and tablets the third year in a row I'm all behind this. Not before.
Glad you brought up consumer buying habits. While you tell people to vote with their wallet, you fail to take into account that consumers may buy a product even if they don’t like everything about it. How does a consumer effectively speak with their wallet when they like 90% of what an iPhone offers, say everything except for a lack of side loading, and only 60% of what an Android offers. There’s no scenario there where a consumer can get precisely what they want while voting with their dollars. Either way my dollars are voting for something I don’t fully support. And if I don’t buy an iPhone, how does Apple know the reason was specifically because of a lack of side loading and not something else? They have no way of knowing why I didn’t buy an iPhone.
No I didn't....that's an assumption on your part.
Companies have sophisticated ways to distill social media commentary (maybe apple doesn't...but I doubt it because it seems they do extensive market research). They are able, imo, to correlate sales to what consumers like and don't like. And while there is a mixed bag about the efficacy of "voting with your dollars" https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241757123_Voting_with_the_Wallet, that's a legitimate (and capitalist) way of forcing change. Much better in my mind, than government intervention, who usually, imo, kills a fly with an elephant gun.
It is. Just because you can see the slope doesn't mean it's not slippery. You've listed out what you see as a chain of events for allowing software from different sources on iOS to lead to the declines of game consoles and spiraling hardware costs, but there are problems with that chain of events.
For example: phones and game consoles aren't the same thing. I think it's the fact that they both have stores that gets people confused, but there's no reason to think that just because Apple is made to do it that every other company that sells a product with a digital store would have to follow suit.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding. If you don't like Sony store on the PlayStation... you can literary go anywhere to buy the same games without giving Sony a cut. there are multiple websites where you can buy PlayStation games. There are multiple physical stores you can buy games.
iOS have only Apples store. no other option exist
as before, if you disagree with Sony, you have multiple option to get your PlayStation games. on the iPhone you dont have that option. Changing platform is not an equivalent option.
you continually hear about ****** companies people hate with ****** practices, but because everyone is close to equally trashy. EA is regularly ranked as the worst company, and still consumers buy their product. AT&T is regularly seen as a ****** company, and still consumers give them more money.
Pretty sure Sony still gets a royalty if you buy a physical copy.
People buy iPhones because they like Apple and Apple's business model. Apple isn't one of the most hated companies- quite the opposite actually. Apple won in a free and fair market because they had a product consumers like. The problem is that some big developers want access to Apple's consumers but don't want to pay the landlord.
Unfortunately, there are few similarities between the two situations except that they are both large tech companies.
Correct.
People buy iPhones because they like iPhones. I'd bet good money that the average iOS user has never once given a thought to Apple's business model.
There's a lot more to it than wanting to avoid a fee. For example, there are apps that Apple simply doesn't allow on their platform regardless of what the dev is willing to pay. There are also things that Apple doesn't allow apps to do, but are actually very useful to consumer, for example, look at Little Snitch on MacOS, an app that is undeniably beneficial to users but cannot be distributed via the App Store because of the permissions it needs to work properly.
Precisely, the only people who care about this kind of thing, one way or the other, exist as an exceedingly small minority on forums like this. And regulators, since it’s part of their job to care about this kind of thing.
Gotta tell you after going through this thread and doing some high level research, I am a bit perplexed.
So it looks like there is a want for alternative payment options and alternative app stores.
I have a couple - please anyone weigh in - of points/questions.
1. For alternative stores, who says it has to be via sideloading?
2. If it is sideloading, why is it being touted as a significant privacy/security hit? Well under 1% sideload on Android and most are not in the US (restrictive internet access). Well under 1% Jailbreak globally. Where is the "OMG!!! Think of the ..." impact? The numbers are not there.
I see a lot of good arguments, and a lot of poor ones, from both sides of this issue. Can we get just these couple of points defined as I am not seeing this anywhere. I am seeing a whole lot of assumptions (both sides).
Thx.
btw - late minute thought ... as most consumers don't know or give a rats ass about sideloading and similar, how is voting with your wallet supposed to have any effect?
So it looks like there is a want for alternative payment options and alternative app stores.
I have a couple - please anyone weigh in - of points/questions.
1. For alternative stores, who says it has to be via sideloading?
2. If it is sideloading, why is it being touted as a significant privacy/security hit? Well under 1% sideload on Android and most are not in the US (restrictive internet access). Well under 1% Jailbreak globally. Where is the "OMG!!! Think of the ..." impact? The numbers are not there.
I see a lot of good arguments, and a lot of poor ones, from both sides of this issue. Can we get just these couple of points defined as I am not seeing this anywhere. I am seeing a whole lot of assumptions (both sides).
Thx.
btw - late minute thought ... as most consumers don't know or give a rats ass about sideloading and similar, how is voting with your wallet supposed to have any effect?
No one, but that's the most likely solution as Apple wouldn't want to officially support someone else's app store. Also, it doesn't even need to be an app store, they could just allow users to install apps from any source (just like on MacOS).
"Privacy" is to Apple as "national security" is to America—it's the thing you say when you don't have a good explanation because it's a thing most people will generally agree is good even if you can't really draw a clear line between it and the thing being discussed.
This reminds me of that one time a guy tried to blow up a plane with his shoes 20 years ago... and we're still taking off our shoes at the airport today.
I'd rather that practice be removed than worrying about app stores.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Regulators should care about this kind of thing. Actually they should care about how business is conduced. Doesn't mean things need to change though, after review.
What I mean is that consumers choosing to buy iPhones, even at higher price points, with their side loading limitations, is a tacit endorsement of Apple’s current way of doing business and flies in the face of the argument from many developers that accuse Apple of being monopolistic and anti-consumer.
The same devs who want access to Apples' platform, Apples' customer base at a cost of $0? Or want to sell their porn, drug and vape apps? Or are making or have made $$$ and now don't want Apple as a middleman?
Sure, but I think it’s more of an unintentional endorsement, the same way that people will hit agree without reading a EULA because they don’t care as long as they get to do the thing they want.
I don’t appreciate Apple packaging me up as a product for developers, same as I don’t appreciate Google packaging me up as a product for advertisers.
For sure, some of these devs with with large scale commerical apps can reach you via the world wide web. With the ios app store, apple is clearly the gatekeeper; which for me I don't care. Some may care, some may not.
This is so true.
After all, who would ever say they are against "Privacy" or "National Security"!
What? The US. accused Microsoft of using legal and technical restrictions to limit competition. If the EULAs and walled gardens Apple has built don't bear a striking similarity to those practices, I don't know what does.
Attachments
Last edited:
indeed but vastly lower than the store royalty. Online is zero.
I would dare to say 99% of iPhone users don't care or buy iPhones because of apple's business model.
People buy iPhones for it being simple to use, beautiful user interface, iMessage, compatibility with apples ecosystem etc. etc. but still hate that it's limited in what you can and can't do in the store. Just look how many custom skins exploded after apple allowed iOS shortcuts to be used to customize icons when they finally allowed it to be more open.
But this one negative thing is outweighed by other positive things. My point is that even hated companies with bad practices gets customers, simply for other parts outweighing the negatives sufficiently for consumers to still spend their money on them.
It is 100% not an endorsement when it's more complicated than that. For example, me i would never buy an Android phone simply how horrible the user interface is compared to iPhones, the great interoperability between iPhone, Apple Watch and the beats products as seamless.
Still the most negative thing I find is how locked down it is and have jailbroken my device ever since my first iPhone as i am sufficiently technologically literate compared to the masses. Unfortunately, apple have made it harder and harder to do for it to be worth the trouble right now.
I bet many people would love to be able to replace the official Mail, Apple Maps, calendar etc. with better 3d party solutions with complete integration, but can't for arbitrary reasons from apple.