Leaked EU Document Could Spell Major Changes for App Store, Messages, FaceTime, Browsers, and Siri

[Nuno Lopes]

If the document doesn't apply to Apple and/or Google, then it makes my (and many others') opinion moot. If it does, then I don't agree.

I respect the fact that you are truthful. For you the issue is not the contents of the regulation but specifically if it applies to Apple or not. That is the core of your argumentation. That is not much to talk about really ... its a valid way to observe regulation.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Chuckle. Nice reply that says nada and doesn't answer the question.
Thanks anyway

I’m sorry I provided the answer I wanted to give and not the answer you were looking for. ?

 

[jakey rolling]

These regulations are in the same ballpark as telling restaurants what meals to service and the recipes to use.

WTF you on about? They aren't even in the same continent as telling restaurants what kind of food to serve.

Luckily, the restaurant industry is not the kind of natural monopoly that the mobile OS industry is, so there isn't any example that actually fits that wouldn't be completely ridiculous. But I'll try anyway: this is more akin to telling McDonald's that they can't hire mob strongmen to physically prevent their customers from entering a Burger King.

 

[jlc1978]

For certain it does not seam to be designed for that matter. So it looks odd to think that such thing is the inevitable result as a counter. But if it is, Apple is for certain well positioned to take it.

Actually, there was a very good article about it by a guy named Stigler at a small school in Chicago. Of course, there had been much discussion about the concept since he wrote about it.

 

[jlc1978]

Assuming McDonald's and Burger King are the only two restaurants left in the world, and they controlled all the real estate in which you could sell food, and in order to sell food you had to submit your recipes to McDonald's before you could sell it and they could refuse it, and you had to give them 30% of your revenue to compensate them for using the infrastructure they are forcing you to use and on top of that they have access to secret ingredients and equipment only they were able and allowed to use and if you happened to come up with a really really special dish they could integrate it into their table setting and remove your dish from your menu...

And Mcd's and BK saying, btw, beyond a minor fee and the cost of your time, you can advertise your food, we'll store it, take care of all the tax stuff, handle returns, and only charge you for what you actually sell. As a bonus, instead of trying to find outlets, we'll give you access to a huge global market place, don't worry about currency conversion, local tax laws, we handle that as well. BTW, if it doesn't sell you're only out your time and $99.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Massive government overreach. Play hardball Apple and threaten to pull out of the EU. They need you more than you need them.

Apple should just pull out of all markets where there is threat of government action. Apple's customers need Apple more than Apple needs customers. Oh wait.

 

[Gelam]

I understand that this DMA is still awaiting passage by the European Parliament?
How likely do you think it will be voted to pass? How likely will it be voted to not pass?

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Actually, there was a very good article about it by a guy named Stigler at a small school in Chicago. Of course, there had been much discussion about the concept since he wrote about it.

Yes. It’s quite a good one. There are many theories around regulation and economics in general.

And Mcd's and BK saying, btw, beyond a minor fee and the cost of your time, you can advertise your food, we'll store it, take care of all the tax stuff, handle returns, and only charge you for what you actually sell. As a bonus, instead of trying to find outlets, we'll give you access to a huge global market place, don't worry about currency conversion, local tax laws, we handle that as well. BTW, if it doesn't sell you're only out your time and $99.

And most importantly it’s the only way to reach a very large number of your customers in their comm devices with an App.

You could have started with that. Because the rest is kind of moot in the face of this condition.

A simple anecdotal example. Last week I subscribed to HBO Max. It was interesting how that was processed. Basically the Marketing outside the App Store is the thing that mattered. My wife wanted to see some exclusive programs on it. I went to the HBO website had a look at the programming, saw some reviews. I wanted to see Dune and Batman anyway so decided to have a try, renting both movies on Apple TV+ would cost almost as much as subscribing the service for a month, so it’s a no brainer. For some reason only later decided to go to the App Store to download and install the App, always the only way. Put on my credentials … the App asked me to subscribe, a pop up appeared and pling … 30% to the cashier. All for me to be able to install the App and use the service on my phone and other devices of mine.

Now I could have went to the website and subscribe from there, but has I was already on HBO Max (the App) ... what would be the point of leaving it, put an URL on the browser, sign in again so on and so forth?

As a customer I don’t see at which point the service, the App Store, made an effort to sell me the service if not for the fact that it is the only way to install Apps on my device. Even the App itself made a better effort by asking me for payment at the right time. Don’t see much of a Marketplace on this workflow do you?

On top it needs to compete with Apple TV+ which basically is free of the 30% cut I guess.

This is the thing of vertical integration of totally disparate businesses. It’s really powerful to the point of passive income.

This is what happens most of the time in my case. Not to say that there aren’t cases were the App Store generates the lead, mostly games. but even than … well you have Apple Arcade undercut. Certain business and services might take advantage of the typical marketplace browsing workflow this will never leave the App Store even if given the option. Say like when you go to Amazon looking for an USB hub, see what is there with similar function, check reviews .... Or when I know that I want a specific brand and go there to check if there is a cheaper promo or something. Yet the typical consumer relationship with a Marketplace ... is simply none existent with App Stores of the kind. The prices are mostly berried in the page, sometimes don't event map to the actual prices in-app behind a button called in-app purchase ...

Not to say that what you mentioned aren’t interesting potentially benefits for businesses in general … but a benefit is only a benefit when optional. Otherwise is waste of resources.

This is one situation were regulation kicks in.

 

[RadioHedgeFund]

Difference is that Apple hosts, markets and processes payments for the iOS store, it is a service that comes at a cost. Why should Apple do all of this and make nothing?

In a perfect world the MacOS store would operate the same way.

But with the Mac, the developer also has the option of just doing all of those things by themselves. Apple's cut from the App Store for the return a developer gets is a fair compromise, but they also have no other choice. Apple has a monopoly on app access to the iOS platform.

Allowing developers the option of doing things themselves and increasing customer options at the same time would be better for everyone. Many developers would probably still use the app store anyway but Apple would no longer have that monopoly on access.

Android is an open platform and devs can offer apps via their own portal. Very few actually bother but just because many don't doesn't mean Google should lock it down.

 

[RadioHedgeFund]

And what's the issue? This is apple's app store. Apple's intellectual property. There is competition in the app store space across vendors.

Just like the editorial page is the Wall Street Journal. A single individual is not guaranteed to get their viewpoint on the editorial page.

If you only had the option of one store for your groceries in the whole country the government would step in and break up that monopoly to increase consumer choice.

 

[jlc1978]

A simple anecdotal example. Last week I subscribed to HBO Max.
[
<SNIP>

… the App asked me to subscribe, a pop up appeared and pling … 30% to the cashier. All for me to be able to install the App and use the service on my phone and other devices of mine!

Which is what any store does - markup teh price for their profit. That's what Apple does - developer sets a price and they add their 30%.

Now I could have went to the website and subscribe from there, but has I was already on HBO Max (the App) ... what would be the point of leaving it, put an URL on the browser, sign in again so on and so forth?

As a customer I don’t see at which point the service, the App Store, made an effort to sell me the service if not for the fact that it is the only way to install Apps on my device. Even the App itself made a better effort by asking me for payment at the right time. Don’t see much of a Marketplace on this workflow do you?

Apple enabled ou to do everything within the app; and when you do that they get their cut. Is HBO Max cheaper on the website? If not, Apple's cut is irrelevant to the consumer because they pay no penalty for using the store.

One benefit is developers know when they roll out a new feature or fix bugs, the users gets notified and often they just get automatically updated.

On top it needs to compete with Apple TV+ which basically is free of the 30% cut I guess.

It all depends on how they allocate costs and revenue.

This is the thing of vertical integration of totally disparate businesses. It’s really powerful to the point of passive income.

This is what happens most of the time in my case. Not to say that there aren’t cases were the App Store generates the lead, mostly games. but even than … well you have Apple Arcade undercut. Certain business and services might take advantage of the typical marketplace browsing workflow this will never leave the App Store even if given the option.

Not to say that what you mentioned aren’t interesting benefits for businesses in general … but a benefit is only a benefit when optional. Otherwise is waste of resources.

This is one situation were regulation kicks in.

To me, the question is "What value is there in being able to reach Apple' user base for essentially no cost until you sell your app or subscription?" I suspect a 30% cut is not an unreasonable answer; given what the historic return was to developers before app stores.

Businesses will have to decide if the Apple App Store is worth it once their are alternate stores. Apple will have to decide how to generate revenue from apps to make up for any lost revenue. I suspect, given Apple's App Store user base, developers will stick with it in most cases or face a significant loss in revenue. I also doubt alternative stores will be cheaper in the long run, and may be more trouble than they are worth.

Some developers, if sideloading becomes available, may leave the App Store. I suspect leaving would cost them more than they would gain from getting a smaller cut from an alternative or being solely on their own website.

At any rate, by the time the law actually goes into effect, who knows what Apple will do? Apple has a lot of options, from unbundling fees to building in security features that allow users to know when a 3rd party app is accessing an API and asking the user to allow it, much like they do with tracking currently.

It would be interesting if Apple decided to end all user tracking if tehy felt the benefits to them are less than the PR of being a non-tracking phone. Developers would have to find alternate ways to track, and I doubt the argument "Apple is unfair they won't let us track users" would fly if Apple did no tracking whatsoever. I doubt it, because there is some value to it, such as weather apps, calendars, etc. but they could cut out a lot o specific data to make it harder to build user profiles.

Apple could build encryption into the hardware so while a third party software program could access it, it would only work with phones that choose to license the chip. They could go completely open, but that's not their style.

 

[ric22]

Which is what any store does - markup teh price for their profit. That's what Apple does - developer sets a price and they add their 30%.



Apple enabled ou to do everything within the app; and when you do that they get their cut. Is HBO Max cheaper on the website? If not, Apple's cut is irrelevant to the consumer because they pay no penalty for using the store.

One benefit is developers know when they roll out a new feature or fix bugs, the users gets notified and often they just get automatically updated.



It all depends on how they allocate costs and revenue.



To me, the question is "What value is there in being able to reach Apple' user base for essentially no cost until you sell your app or subscription?" I suspect a 30% cut is not an unreasonable answer; given what the historic return was to developers before app stores.

Businesses will have to decide if the Apple App Store is worth it once their are alternate stores. Apple will have to decide how to generate revenue from apps to make up for any lost revenue. I suspect, given Apple's App Store user base, developers will stick with it in most cases or face a significant loss in revenue. I also doubt alternative stores will be cheaper in the long run, and may be more trouble than they are worth.

Some developers, if sideloading becomes available, may leave the App Store. I suspect leaving would cost them more than they would gain from getting a smaller cut from an alternative or being solely on their own website.

At any rate, by the time the law actually goes into effect, who knows what Apple will do? Apple has a lot of options, from unbundling fees to building in security features that allow users to know when a 3rd party app is accessing an API and asking the user to allow it, much like they do with tracking currently.

It would be interesting if Apple decided to end all user tracking if tehy felt the benefits to them are less than the PR of being a non-tracking phone. Developers would have to find alternate ways to track, and I doubt the argument "Apple is unfair they won't let us track users" would fly if Apple did no tracking whatsoever. I doubt it, because there is some value to it, such as weather apps, calendars, etc. but they could cut out a lot o specific data to make it harder to build user profiles.

Apple could build encryption into the hardware so while a third party software program could access it, it would only work with phones that choose to license the chip. They could go completely open, but that's not their style.

Good post. ?

The alternate payments situation is a messy one. Once other app stores are allowed and sideloading without even using a store is allowed, I'd be happy for the Apple App Store to retain control of payments from apps that use it. Apple will surely have to reduce the top rate fee from 30 to 15%, though, as that is pretty extortionate.

 

[Ethosik]

You're not, you can just buy it on DVD if Epic Store is such a huge problem.

There is no DVD for it.

 

[jlc1978]

Good post. ?

Thanks.

The alternate payments situation is a messy one. Once other app stores are allowed and sideloading without even using a store is allowed, I'd be happy for the Apple App Store to retain control of payments from apps that use it. Apple will surely have to reduce the top rate fee from 30 to 15%, though, as that is pretty extortionate.

The thing is, people focus on the 30% as if all Apple does is process payments. The App Store does a lot of things for that fee, from storage, delivery, tax compliance, etc. Apple has essentially reduced the financial risk of launching an app to $99 plus the opportunity cost of developing one for small developers. In addition, Apple provides worldwide distribution of their app if they want. Getting that from 3rd parties is likely to be as much, or more than 30% or take up time better spent developing software. How many developers want to deal with tax rates across the 64 jurisdictions Apple does and ensure they have the right tax ID numbers and file properly to avoid fines?

As an anecdote, I had a fraternity brother develop a Forth compiler way back when. Before he made a penny, he had to pay for advertising, printing instructions, duplicating disks, getting packaging, etc. with no assurance he would make enough to cover the costs. Getting a distributer to stock it, if he even could, would cut his margin to where he would be lucky to make a 30% profit margin. He eventually stopped development and moved on to other ventures where he could make enough to live.

 

[bluecoast]

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.

In Europe there’s more a concept of ‘social democracy’ (I think in the USA, it would commonly call this ‘socialism’).

This is the concept of capitalism and government working together for the common good & trying to balance the negative tendencies of both:

ie to stop either the gvt getting all the power and the money vs corporations & individuals getting all the power and the money.

(Obviously the jury is out whether that is achieved in practice!).

This is pretty much the ethos that drives the EU.

So we see way more of a willingness to control business and not see it as a (near) unquestioned force for good, as is often seen in the USA (to my understanding).

P.S. I put an exclamation mark up there with ‘socialism’, as what would be considered pretty mainstream in many of the scandi countries (by both centre left and tight political parties) would be seen as very left wing in the USA.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Which is what any store does - markup teh price for their profit. That's what Apple does - developer sets a price and they add their 30%.

Oh. the gaslight now is on hehehe.

Any store does not have all links in the net pointing to it because it holds ransom the users devices. That is what happened in th HBO Max example and any other example.

I know of no Store that demands the things it is suppose to sell to embedd their POS and force any and all sales to ping back to it … things that it does not distribute or sell!!!!. Imagine Best Buy demanding the iPhone to ping back to their POS to sell Apps. That would be awesome. Do you know how the amount of infrastructure and cost required by Best Buy to store and deliver iPhones? Wanna compare the cost of storage and sale with a few hundred of megabytes?

If the App Store is policies are just like any other stores for sure regulation demands would not change a thing and we would not be having this discussion.

Either you did not understood the example or something is going on here to grant such reply for witch I have little time to spend having a discussion about. But the fact that some seam to be so against it is just the proof it does not work like that at all.

Is over and over the same kind of stuff. Look, that Apple sorts things out EU regulators … There is nothing that you and I can do about it.

It’s not our problem is it?

 

[jlc1978]

In Europe there’s more a concept of ‘social democracy’ (I think in the USA, it would commonly call this ‘socialism’).

I think a lot of the differences are a result of history and culture, which results in a certain collective psyche.

Europe, for a long time, was a collection of kingdoms and fiefdoms; where a (hopefully) benevolent ruler provided for his or her subjects in exchange for their efforts. This would tend to embed a felling that government can and should provide for the collective good.

The US, however, as it expanded was a very much individualistic effort where you had to depend upon yourself and neighbors because there was no cavalry coming to save you. As a result, government intervention is something that is not trusted to provide things.

Neither is inherently good or bad, just different; in the end I'd a matter of degree. Even the US has actions that would be considered socialist - government provided healthcare, ownership of major utilities, railroads, etc. The real problem is people apply labels to generate a negative reaction, not to understand.

 

[frifra]

When you say “companies” are you including the cartels? Even companies that most people would consider unsavory like Facebook aren’t taking people out… At least not that anyone is aware of ?

Have you heard about Nestlé?

And cartels are not legal, but Nestle is for example.

 

[jlc1978]

Oh. the gaslight now is on hehehe.

Gaslighting? You complained that Apple got a cut, which is what any store does, as I pointed out.

Any store does not have all links in the net pointing to it because it holds ransom the users devices. That is what happened in th HBO Max example and any other example.

Now you're gaslighting. Even you pointed out you could have subscribed on the web, avoiding Apple getting a cut but chose not to:

Now I could have went to the website and subscribe from there, but has I was already on HBO Max (the App) ... what would be the point of leaving it, put an URL on the browser, sign in again so on and so forth?

I have HBOMax on my Apple devices and never had to subscribe in App. Same with other services. No one is holding anything hostage.

I know of no Store that demands the things it is suppose to sell to embedd their POS and force any and all sales to ping back to it. Imagine Best Buy demanding the iPhone to ping back to their POS to sell Apps. That would be awesome.

If you buy a Walmart Family Mobile phone, all airtime is sold through them so you have to ping back to their POS to add time.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

Gaslighting? You complained that Apple got a cut, which is what any store does, as I pointed out.

Yes gaslighting. Whoever believes that I complained that a store gets a cut of its sales must be a crazy or is trying pass people as crazy.

Don’t have time for that line of thought.

Has I’ve said, if the App Store modus is the same as any other Store, iOS having the ability to download and install apps outside of it scope offers no change. Don’t even know what people are talking about then.

Don’t even understand why you are against the regulation. Because of that book?

 

[jlc1978]

Yes gaslighting. Whoever believes that I complained that a store gets a cut of its sales must be a crazy or is trying pass people as crazy.

Well, when you complain about "it holds ransom the users devices" it sure seemed like it, so I'll grant I misunderstood you. But still, in the very same post, you point out you could buy the subscription outside of the App Store but didn't; disproving the notion you are held hostage in that scenario.

 

[darngooddesign]

I’m pretty sure preference is not a verb. Perhaps a grammar checker?

Perhaps a grammar checker what?

Did you mean, "Perhaps use a grammar checker."?

FWIW

Language Log » Ask Language Log: preference as a verb

languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Wrong in two ways:

1. It’s morally wrong to violate someone’s agency, to force someone to choose something that they don’t consider best for them (again, assuming their choices are not violating the rights of others)
2. B/c Tesla was forced to use a specific standard, we might never know if they’d have come up with something better than what already existed. What if the option they’d have developed led to better battery health or required less material to be built?

Well point 1 they already broke the law by violating peoples private property.

And part 2: we already know this, Tesla uses their backwards port in USA. And uses a standard port in EU.

The standard port can use level 1-3 charging without anything special with the cable.

I went to floors and weight because it is a direct result why a computer CANNOT be a phone 24/7. I don't take my computer when jogging or working out, but if my buddy faints or I injure myself I have a CELL PHONE with me.

I seriously don’t understand what you believe a phone is but a small computer you chose do things with and carry around.

New app to let you run Windows 10 on your iPhone

Wish you could do more with your iPhone than just run Apple’s app store apps? A group of independent developers is working to sort you out. UTM is a new app that uses QEMU (virtualization software) to run the full version of Windows 10 from Microsoft’s operating system image. iOS devices lack...

www.windowslatest.com

To say a computer is the same as a cell phone and has the same mobility and 24/7 reliability is just ridiculous.

the difrent between a laptop and desktop computer is exactly the same as the difference between laptops and smart phones

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.

If laptops can replace desktop computers, then why do we use desktop computers? And if you don’t want your phone to act like a computer then you should buy a dumb phone instead of a smart phone.

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.

Smart Phones replaced computers because of their mobility. It’s nothing about them being Limited.

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.

Yea I know, it was just an allegory. The thing is I can’t find anything for the EUCJ to even theoretically challenge the DMA through article 263

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.

Yep this will happen if apple can’t compete and stay draconian. Otherwise any app will be available on multiple store fronts. 99% of epic store games exist on steam etc

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?

This is already the case. You can’t install google play store apps. They aren’t compatible. Just as you can’t put a PlayStation game in an Xbox and expect it to work. Developers leave the AppStore all the time and go exclusively android etc.

And as they argue currently vote with your money. If you don’t want to use alternative stores then don’t use it and they will change

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.

Good thing nothing is legislated as you say it. Only the prevention of illegal control of private property and that users will have the ability to install what they want on their phones.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Smart Phones replaced computers because of their mobility. It’s nothing about them being Limited.

lmao!

Some folks are actually arguing that smartphones replaced computers "because they are limited"?

What a crock of nonsense

 

[icanhazmac]

This is already the case. You can’t install google play store apps. They aren’t compatible. Just as you can’t put a PlayStation game in an Xbox and expect it to work.

I am well aware that you cannot install Google apps on an iOS device. My comment was a "what-if scenario" if alt-stores are legislated into existence then nothing is stopping Google from opening an iOS store alongside or within their current store. Does that make sense? I assume that if able the following will open iOS stores: Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Steam, Facebook(Meta), Epic and potentially others. Also assuming they all will via for exclusive distribution rights to popular apps, hence my question/scenario.