Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Ah - reasons 1, 3, & 4 make a lot of sense to me!

your last point about what "sideloading" is compared to a computer becomes a little stronger every day as phones replace computers as the main computer for more and more people.
If phones replaced computers, do we need computers? Why should it become what it's replacing?

I need a computer. I don't want my phone acting as one.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: vipergts2207
I need a computer. I don't want my phone acting as one.
Then buy a flip phone. Those still exist. If you've instead decided to buy a smartphone, then either you have some kind of weird hobby where you like to spend extra money on features that you actively hate, or you are lying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vipergts2207
I’m in the uk which is sort of a half way house between the (generally) low taxed USA and the (generally) higher taxed EU countries.

I’m not going to argue for one approach being right of wrong just to explain things a little.

It’s basically a difference in philosophy where for the most part the western EU countries have ‘free’ heath care and generous welfare plus free higher education etc etc.

I say ‘free’ because of course, these are paid for by high taxation !

Whether you agree with this or not, this approach came out of the disaster of WW2 - and to make a switch to communism less tempting.

There was a choice to try and make these societies as stable as possible where capitalism would be balanced by the state and there would be a ‘best of both worlds approach’.

Eastern Europe had of course, the experience of communism and there’s more of an experience of the state playing a big role in your life.

Needless to say, the philosophy in the USA trusts more the market and the individual.

We can all argue the merits of each approach until the cows come home.

I’m just arguing that Europe has had a different experience (ww2, the Cold War & communism in the east) to the USA and that explains the different approach.

Although the end of WW2 is 72 years ago & the collapse of the iron curtain is just over 30 years ago, both still really haunt the EU.
I think you are spot on with this. The government can't give away something from someone that they haven't taken away from someone else. Logically a socialist government would require higher taxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtMann
Then buy a flip phone. Those still exist. If you've instead decided to buy a smartphone, then either you have some kind of weird hobby where you like to spend extra money on features that you actively hate, or you are lying.
Well, yeah. Of course I check mail and stuff. But you could do that on the late flippies as well. Techno marches.

But, phones have replaced computers, not because they are better and more versatile, but because they are limited. The experience for non-techies is better. "Power users" are a minority. Your arguments for an Ipad makes much more sense, that could be a computer. Maybe should.
 
Just like the Mac side, in a world with alt-stores some devs will go it alone, some devs will join larger stores like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Steam, etc. via exclusive distribution deals and and abandon the Apple store completely thereby eliminating my choice to not use alt-stores.
Just use other developers‘ apps then.
Choose apps from developers that distribute through your preferred storefront (the Apple App Store).

Problem solved.
 
and what are they suposed to do? what law do you think they can chalenge it on? there is no constitution to challenge it on. this is the equivalent of chalenging a constitutional amendment. good luck to keep it tied up as it will be enforcable from day one

Acts of the European Council/Commission are not remotely similar to US constitutional amendments. The former can be invalidated by the CJEU (see Article 263 TFEU), while the latter aren't even reviewable by courts.
 
On the other hand I have no doubt that if you’re an educated professional working for a multinational you have a much more lavish lifestyle in the US than your Danish counterparts. However, the guys flipping burgers, delivering for Amazon, construction workers, factory workers and so on… that’s a whole different story, isn’t it. Hence MAGA. MAGA goes away with “free” full healthcare, a retirement plan, unemployment protection and “free” education.There is no MDGA in Denmark.
I had a guy I hired right out of college as an engineer. He constantly cried about his $50,000 in student loans. One time while in Nevers France with our sister company, I asked my counterpart how much they paid a recent grad in his engineering department. Turns out my guy was getting paid $40,000 per year more! Sure the guy in France didn't have the student loans, but he was also paying higher taxes, so basically after 1 year, the difference in pay would offset the college expense. After that, my guy way way ahead financially.

Now I do know that the wine in France is excellent and much less expensive than French wine here, as the the beer in Germany. But that $40,000 difference can support a good drinking habit.

I think this is a pretty fair comparison as we both worked for the same company, producing the same product. Nevers France is not Paris, and our company was in rural central PA, so not NYC or LA.

As far as our factory workers at our site, the guys doing welding were making as much as young engineers. So I would guess they too were making a good amount more than their French counter parts, plus paying much less in taxes.
 
Really? Your life is so empty that attempting to catch anonymous message board members using an alt-store, because they have been FORCED to via legislation, completes you? That is pathetic. The day may come where we have no choice, at least today there is a choice, stick with the iOS store or jailbreak and sideload.... or buy an Android.

There is a huge difference between someone coming out against alt-stores and alt-payment processors because they prefer the privacy and convenience of a one-stop-shop versus those that become forced to do so because legislation fragmented the marketplace.

Many folks on the pro alt-stores side of this debate tell the rest of us "just don't load apps from other stores if you don't want too" but you all fail to address the eventual fragmentation of the current single marketplace. Just like the Mac side, in a world with alt-stores some devs will go it alone, some devs will join larger stores like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Steam, etc. via exclusive distribution deals and and abandon the Apple store completely thereby eliminating my choice to not use alt-stores.

I prefer the iOS platform the way it is because of privacy and convenience. Unfortunately I am not afforded the same marketplace on my Mac so I am forced to use alt-stores and alt-payments if I want or need an app, this does not in any way challenge my convictions on iOS as I have no choice. I find the iOS marketplace far superior to the Mac and would vote for the Mac store to operate the exact same way.

At the very least I would want devs, as part of the dev agreement, to be forced to offer apps and payments via the iOS store as well as alt-stores, guarantee me that and maybe we can talk.

I think we can all have a reasonable debate about the merits of this proposal, but I do think there's a peculiar tendency throughout this thread where those who prefer the status quo will quite readily deploy the "just buy something else then" defence, but as soon as they contemplate being on the other side of this advice it's the end of the world.

Right now those who prefer Apple for whatever reason but would want more freedom are told to use Android or get over it. In the future some may have to stick with what is available in the App Store and, as unlikely as I think that is, it may not include every single app it does today.

This is not really against you, just a general observation after 41 pages of this.
 
Just use other developers‘ apps then.
Choose apps from developers that distribute through your preferred storefront (the Apple App Store).

Problem solved.

That is not the point and I am fairly sure you know it. As I have said many times, one of the claims from the pro-alt-stores folks is "nothing will change, you can keep getting your apps through the iOS store" yet no one acknowledges that the marketplace is very likely to fracture because of exclusive distribution deals or devs going independent.

What am I to do when an app I already own, bought from the iOS store, moves to the Google app store exclusively? I already paid for this app but now I need an account with Google to get updates?

Personally I could care less about alt-stores or alt-payments IF all apps must have a presence in the iOS store via Apple payment processing and I don't care if that comes at a small premium. What I don't want is to be legislated into having to have 10+ app store accounts (Amazon, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Epic, Steam, plus all the independents like we do in the MacOS world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtMann
That is not the point and I am fairly sure you know it. As I have said many times, one of the claims from the pro-alt-stores folks is "nothing will change, you can keep getting your apps through the iOS store" yet no one acknowledges that the marketplace is very likely to fracture because of exclusive distribution deals or devs going independent.

What am I to do when an app I already own, bought from the iOS store, moves to the Google app store exclusively? I already paid for this app but now I need an account with Google to get updates?

Personally I could care less about alt-stores or alt-payments IF all apps must have a presence in the iOS store via Apple payment processing and I don't care if that comes at a small premium. What I don't want is to be legislated into having to have 10+ app store accounts (Amazon, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Epic, Steam, plus all the independents like we do in the MacOS world.
App stores might not even be needed, if it works like PC/Mac. I'm not registered with any stores for either. (I don't buy games- I see why games advertise on stores, though). An app could contain code to update itself periodically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppliedMicro
I think we can all have a reasonable debate about the merits of this proposal, but I do think there's a peculiar tendency throughout this thread where those who prefer the status quo will quite readily deploy the "just buy something else then" defence, but as soon as they contemplate being on the other side of this advice it's the end of the world.

Right now those who prefer Apple for whatever reason but would want more freedom are told to use Android or get over it. In the future some may have to stick with what is available in the App Store and, as unlikely as I think that is, it may not include every single app it does today.

This is not really against you, just a general observation after 41 pages of this.

WOW! A reasonable response, many thanks!

I agree with your comment implying hypocrisy in principle but I would offer this...

Many of the folks who want the iOS store to remain untouched tell those who want alt-stores and alt-payments to "get and Android" is because if the current Apple ecosystem is legislated into extinction there is no place for us to go for the experience we currently enjoy. The current iOS ecosystem is one of a kind.

Does that make sense?

Today those in favor of the "alts" have somewhere to go for more freedom with their devices, it called Android. I concede that the cost of that freedom is you don't get Apple hardware but we all need to make choices right? You may love the look of a Ford Mustang but want a Chevy engine in it, well guess what, you can't without "jailbreaking" your car. Those in favor of the current Apple "walled garden" have no other ecosystem to go to that offers a one stop shop for apps and payments with a focus on privacy.

Hopefully that helps explain some of the perceived hypocrisy of the "go buy an Android" statement.
 
Last edited:
What am I to do when an app I already own, bought from the iOS store, moves to the Google app store exclusively? I already paid for this app but now I need an account with Google to get updates?
Any app developer can withdraw their apps from the App Store at anytime (or their services).
Or specific functionality from their apps.
Google, of all developers, is probably one of the most infamous for withdrawing their products from sale/availability.

What I don't want is to be legislated into having to have 10+ app store accounts (Amazon, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Epic, Steam
You aren‘t. No one forces you to use apps that are only available on Amazon‘s, Google‘s, Microsoft‘s or Epic‘s stores- or any other App Store you don‘t like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
App stores might not even be needed, if it works like PC/Mac. I'm not registered with any stores for either. (I don't buy games- I see why games advertise on stores, though). An app could contain code to update itself periodically.

If you are not registered with "stores" for centralized purchases and upgrades then you will need to have accounts with each independent app/dev, providing all your personal and payment information to each individual one, that is the way it works for PC/Mac.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KurtMann
They're of the opinion that no American company should ever have a competitive advantage. If Apple were German or French, none of this would ever have come up.
Those American companies have no counterpart in Europe because the market was always over regulated. When the internet took of, in Germany you could only use certified modems which costed about 1000$ and had the technology from 2 years before. When America built the Internet based on TCP/IP Europe tried to standardize OSI.

But, BTW, ARM is a British company and was until recently part of Europe. Apple bets its future on this European technology.
 
If you are not registered with "stores" for centralized purchases and upgrades then you will need to have accounts with each independent app/dev, providing all your personal and payment information to each individual one, that is the way it works for PC/Mac.
I‘ve bought enough software that works without accounts. I just download the new software version (installer or update packages) from the developer’s website and install it „over“ the previous version.

Incidentally, this works much more reliably than the Apple App Store‘s updating method on my Mac for me - cause the App Store „Updates“ tab very often (and stubbornly) refuses to load. It’s an issue that others are having as well - but isolated in that everything else on my Mac is working fine.

Also, on iOS I don‘t have to bother with the signing-out, signing-in, signing-out, signing-in of my two Apple ID - just because I bought two or three apps from another country store.
 
Any app developer can withdraw their apps from the App Store at anytime (or their services).
Or specific functionality from their apps.
Google, of all developers, is one of the most infamous developers for withdrawing products from sales/availability.

Yes, any dev can withdraw their app from the iOS store but there is a difference between "no longer available on iOS" and "no longer available on the iOS store". Those are two totally different things.

I‘ve bought enough software that works without accounts. I just download the new software version (installer or update packages) from the developer’s website and install it „over“ the previous version.

So you use only free apps? If you pay for apps you are setting up an account of sorts in that you are providing each dev and their payment processor with all of your personal information versus the Apple way of only one "account".
 
WOW! A reasonable response, many thanks!

I agree with your comment implying hypocrisy in principle but I would offer this...

Many of the folks who want the iOS store to remain untouched tell those who want alt-stores and alt-payments to "get and Android" is because if the current Apple ecosystem is legislated into extinction there is no place for us to go for the experience we currently enjoy. The current iOS ecosystem is one of a kind.

Does that make sense?

Today those in favor of the "alts" have somewhere to go for more freedom with their devices, it called Android. I concede that the cost of that freedom is you don't get Apple hardware but we all need to make choices right? You may love the look of a Ford Mustang but want a Chevy engine in it, well guess what, you can't without "jailbreaking" your car. Those in favor of the current Apple "walled garden" have no other ecosystem to go to that offers a one stop shop for apps and payments with a focus on privacy.

Hopefully that helps explain some of the perceived hypocrisy of the "go buy an Android" statement.

Thanks for your response!

Yes, I can understand where you're coming from and don't think there's really a win-win solution to be found.

That being said -- and looking at how things are over on Android -- I don't see a lot of apps actually leave the App Store and a lot of concern is unwarranted. What it might do is make commissions in it a bit more equitable, but who knows.

Personally I'm in favour of opening up the iOS ecosystem even though I don't actually see myself installing apps from elsewhere and will keep using Apple Pay whenever I can.

Why? Because I think smartphones and tablets will very quickly become the primary consumer devices and Apple (and Google, but that's a different story) just holds way too much power over what kind of software you can deploy on these devices or what this software is allowed to do. It's just not healthy.

Which admittedly leaves Android, but with Apple's role in the market being what it is I don't think that really solves the problem.
 
That said, if Apple is forced to allow sideloading then they should set up a team that checks these Apps. They can look for Apps that have malware or abuse your privacy by sharing data or ignoring rules that prevent tracking (all super easy to do if nobody is vetting your Apps).

And charge developers for the service.

So countries cannot enact laws that give advantages to companies in their own countries? Gosh, you really aught to tell the United States that. (*cough* Boeing *cough*).

Of course they do; and usually result in some sort of tit for tat. Look at the chicken tax for instance.
 
You aren‘t. No one forces you to use apps that are only available on Amazon‘s, Google‘s, Microsoft‘s or Epic‘s stores- or any other App Store you don‘t like.

I see it this way.

On windows, I may not be forced to use the blizzard App Store, but it’s not really a choice if I want to play Diablo 3.

What the iOS App Store model does is make it so that I can both access a game, without having to go through another App Store to do so, because the developer is forced to make their apps available individually.

In short, the App Store model allows me to have my cake and eat it too. That’s really what this is about. We are in a balance of power between developers and consumers, and the App Store takes power from developers and gives it to the end users (and Apple), and this is a paradigm I am happy with.
 
Yes, I can understand where you're coming from and don't think there's really a win-win solution to be found.

Actually there might be, per the dev agreement all apps (that are allowed by Apple) must maintain a presence on the iOS store even if they choose to be available via other stores, eliminating exclusive distribution agreements which are anti-consumer anyway and no one should have a problem with.

Those Apple chooses to not allow in their store are free to do what they want.

If I haven't made it clear already I don't care if people want to throw their data and privacy away as long as I am not forced via legislation into doing the same thing.
 
Last edited:
Actually there might be, per the dev agreement all apps (that are allowed by Apple) must maintain a presence on the iOS store even if they choose to be available via other stores, eliminating exclusive distribution agreements which are anti-consumer anyway and no one should have a problem with.

Those Apple chooses to not allow in their store are free to do what they want.

Developers would probably want to make sure that they wouldn't be forced to match prices to stores with lower commissions (or their websites).

Apple tried (and failed, afaik) to push this through previously, maybe they would again.

I have no idea whether this would be compliant with this legislation, though.
 
I see it this way.

On windows, I may not be forced to use the blizzard App Store, but it’s not really a choice if I want to play Diablo 3.

What the iOS App Store model does is make it so that I can both access a game, without having to go through another App Store to do so, because the developer is forced to make their apps available individually.

In short, the App Store model allows me to have my cake and eat it too. That’s really what this is about. We are in a balance of power between developers and consumers, and the App Store takes power from developers and gives it to the end users (and Apple), and this is a paradigm I am happy with.
Since when does the App Store take power from developers and gives it to the end users? Its simply a troll under a bridge asking consumers for payment to get to the other side. No one that plays Diablo 3 with MacOS uses the Apple App Store, they merely purchase it online thru secure web pages and then access the game through through the cloud. Apple could have worked out more viable deals to direct payments to developers, but since they didn't, most developers sell their MacOS software via their web sites. Yes I know the iOS/IPadOS software via the App Store is the only way you can purchase apps, but is it all the cake you really want?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: M3gatron
Developers would probably want to make sure that they wouldn't be forced to match prices to stores with lower commissions (or their websites).

Apple tried (and failed, afaik) to push this through previously, maybe they would again.

I have no idea whether this would be compliant with this legislation, though.

Personally I don't care if an actual cost premium was enforced on the Apple store but what cannot be permitted is an app being .99 on an indie site and 24.99 on the Apple store, there is no way that is an actual cost difference. If an app were .99 on an indie site and 1.49 on Apple's store I will buy from Apple all day long.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Beautyspin
Personally I don't care if an actual cost premium was enforced on the Apple store but what cannot be permitted is an app being .99 on an indie site and 24.99 on the Apple store. If an app were .99 on an indie site and 1.49 on Apple's store I will buy from Apple all day long.

I'm fairly certain that market forces alone would prevent your worst case scenario (the occasional sale notwithstanding).

Most people, I'm convinced, will continue to use the App Store just as most people use the Play Store on Android. The developer in your 24.99 scenario is probably pricing themselves out of the market.

The real question is probably whether App a Store apps could offer different payment providers price those differently?

Press here for Apple Pay: 1.49
Press here for PayPal: 0.99

That in itself would spell massive trouble for Apple's pricing.
 
  • Sad
  • Like
Reactions: M3gatron and dk001
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.