Apple should just sell two versions of the iPhone. One has access to Apple's App Store and the other is wide open and doesn't. Customers decide which one they want. If you want Apple's walled garden and Apple's watchdog over privacy, choose the App Store version. If you want to just install anything, you get the open version but with no access to the App Store and Apple doesn't monitor what applications do. You have to buy your software from online vendors. Problem solved.
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.
EU Competition Chief Tells Apple Not to Use Privacy as a Shield Against Competition
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s ok, they know better. So much so that if something bad or risky happens, I will go directly to them to solve those issues instead of Apple since it’s their forced proposed changes and paradigms. Right? right…
I would so get behind this idea, even myself I’m wondering which one I would get put that way, probably the AppStore one for the convenience, auto-update, auto-backup, all synced devices, etc… but heck, can even see some people gettong both, one for the personal sensitive stuff and one for free for all.
They could have enforced nothing but needed cookies, but they loved ripping off data for commerce too much.
Which just like every government in the world, only varies in how much they are willing to cave in and shove their own political bs propaganda into everyone’s throat.
I was reading a book recently and the author says egalitarianism was the main value during ancient times before agriculture and society. Look at the world we are right now.
She studied economics and immediately got a top position in politics. Probably hasn't worked a day in her life outside politics.
I wish that we’d get someone in the court system that actually understands technology. I feel most of this crap is based on accusations from clueless judges/officials being bought and sold by an army of “yes-men” (aka lobbyists).
I want my car brand to offer a different software store for the car software.
I want my washing machine brand to offer a different software store for the washing machine software.
IT IS A DEVICE.
I want my washing machine brand to offer a different software store for the washing machine software.
IT IS A DEVICE.
“The important thing here is, of course, that it's not a shield against competition, because I think customers will not give up neither security nor privacy if they use another app store or if they sideload.”
huh. Sure sounds like the EU has reached a judgement before the trial is over. Sure seems unbiased to me!
huh. Sure sounds like the EU has reached a judgement before the trial is over. Sure seems unbiased to me!
Giving iOS device users the option and personal choice to get their apps from outside of Apple's app store is limiting consumer choice?
The irony is lost on you.
In order to "lock Tile" out of the ecosystem, all Apple had to do was
1) Invent the iPhone, Watch, HomePod, AirTags and iPad
2) Make 15 iterations of the operating system
3) Invent the Mac
3) Make a gazillion iterations of the operating system.
4) Get all of those devices and OSes to communicate together.
5) Develop their own UWB chip for use in their devices
6) Manufacture iPhones with that UWB chip
7) Create an app store
8) Make the OS able to communicate in the background, seamlessly, and without reducing privacy in order to disseminate the location of UWB devices, and that can notify users when they've left the devices or the devices have left them, in real time.
9) Engineer a device with a UWB chip that can communicate with iOS and MacOS.
10) Install a massive server farm to process all of the data of all of the devices in order to track the AirTags
11) Create a mapping tool that allows them to determine the location of the devices and show them on a map
Sure you can say that not inviting competitors to share your product technology is anti-competitive, but that's how markets work. If Tile wanted a system for doing what the AirTags do, all they had to do was all the things Apple did to create theirs.
Also, how does paying the "Apple Tax" weaken security? You're describing licensing, and companies have licensed technology forever.
What part of Tile not being given Apple's whole feature set in their key fobs is reducing the security of either Apple or Tile
These politicians are dumb. Every time I hear any politician talk about tech they sound so ignorant. Apple having a closed environment isn’t anticompetitiv. The competition is Android. If users want a More open architecture they have the freedom to buy something else.
Netflix already has control over payments. You cannot subscribe to Netflix through their app; You have to do so through their website.
Amazon already gathers a lot of data about you (more than you're aware of apparently) when you browse and shop with their app or website.
Except for the fact that every app will jump ship and list their app separately. Outside of the App Store. Purely from a price point perspective. Why wouldn’t they, do avoid the 15% (30%) commission?
Which, if every app does that will leave the iOS App Store as barren as the Mac App Store is. Which also opens up for malware (even unintentionally bundled with apps) to be installed. Malware exists on the Mac. It doesn’t on the App Store. This is a huge privacy/security issue because of how much personal/financial/health data is on our phones. Not to mention our literal location as we move around in our day.
You honestly believe an app developer will abandon the Apple app store and miss out on the opportunity to reach the over 1.65 billion devices in use if people are given the chance to sideload?
Delusional 🤣
Why do they need to sell an open version of the iPhone when people who want open software can just buy an Android phone. There are literally countless options that they can buy if someone doesn't want a walled garden but only 1 option if they do. It's madness that the government and idiots are trying to eliminate that choice because they don't like how popular and profitable it has proven to be.
Then come back when you’ve found the solution. Seems like she’s trying to dismantle the ecosystem without a) understanding it, and b) having found the solution yet. In doing so she’ll cause vastly greater damage than the “problem” she’s trying to fix.
To get these idiot politicians off their back. Apple simply disclaims all software responsibility for anyone stupid enough to want the open version. Apple warranties the hardware but software support is now the customer's problem.
Total control over their locked ecosystem is what leads to Apple making profits.
She will not accept and she has made some valid points.