Paddle Postpones Launch of In-App Purchase Alternative After Apple Wins Reprieve

[DFZD]

I don't want side loading. I don't want an open market place. Contrary to your assertion above, nobody has forced me into the Apple EcoSystem; I freely chose it. I choose it again every time I upgrade my phone or buy another apple device. I find incredible value in the curated system that Apple provides.

There are several of you making this assertion, that Apple is forcing me to do something, and it simply isn't true by basic standards of logic. What you're really saying is that you want to force Apple to stop providing a service that I want and have freely chosen.

If you want side loading and an open marketplace, then you have the CHOICE to have them by going with GOOGLE and Android.

A lot of iPhone users also use Macbooks. So don't generalise by referring to the Apple Ecosystem. Mac OS also has security checks and it protects users pretty well compared to windows. But it doesn't force users or developers to use Mac App Store for app downloads or publishing.

So stop trying to pitch in on a subject you hardly have a grasp on. In fact you are repeating the same language that Tim Cook used. Some people love an authoritarian government doesn't mean that those criticising it are wrong.

 

[WiseAJ]

The difference is that you aren't forced to shop at Walmart or any particular store, you're free to shop at any other store.

Apple on the other hand explicitly prohibits other app stores and forces theirs on you as the only option.

Most of these complaints would go away overnight if sideloading was allowed.

You aren't forced to use an iPhone. You can get an Android and shop at Google Play or any other third party store on that platform.

 

[trusso]

1. Judging by your last line aren't you the sort of person who doesn't believe "the news" anyway?

2. Didn't happen - was in house, so that's 1 lie you've told.

3. There are none, countless reports of this, another lie you've told.

4. As so you want you approve of the sharing of known child pornography, good to know.

5. I mean....what?

6. Now this really is clutching. Of course it helped profit margins, it also DID do all the things they said to - I mean if you want to go through a list of capitalist companies and point out where they tried to make more money we'd be here all night.

Yes, my favourite tech company is a profit first trillion corporation (it's not a conglomerate) - and? Your point is what? I mean i'm left wing but you appear to be advocating for - anti capitalism here? (though i'm guess in reality you just love a different massive profit first trillion dollar company instead)

Please cite your sources and stop making strawman arguments.

Thanks.

 

[Krizoitz]

Yeah, but your analogy falls short quickly. There are many places in almost all areas to buy a load of bread or some meat. There’s no choice for the consumer if you have an iOS device that you paid a significant amount of money for besides going to a different platform and necessitating a new device, of which there is practically only one alternative - the android ecosystem.

Yup there is an alternative, as you say, Android. Meaning Apple doesn’t have a monopoly. Meaning users have choice. If you don’t like Apples approach buy Android, you have always been free to do so, you still are.

 

[Krizoitz]

A lot of iPhone users also use Macbooks. So don't generalise by referring to the Apple Ecosystem. Mac OS also has security checks and it protects users pretty well compared to windows. But it doesn't force users or developers to use Mac App Store for app downloads or publishing.

So stop trying to pitch in on a subject you hardly have a grasp on. In fact you are repeating the same language that Tim Cook used. Some people love an authoritarian government doesn't mean that those criticising it are wrong.

And iOS is more secure than MacOS. And there are other tradeoffs. Apple has never said they can’t make iOS more like MacOS, they don’t WANT to.
If you don’t like how iOS works, fine, don’t use it. Or complain, that’s fine too, I guess. The problem is people who think Apple should be forced to change iOS or that all consumers are oppressed because they freely choose iOS. There is no legal reason Apple should be forced to change and plenty of us users PREFER Apples approach and are glad they do it. If you aren’t, fine, but an Android, or hope Apple changes. Just don’t expect a judge to make things different.

 

[Abazigal]

A lot of iPhone users also use Macbooks. So don't generalise by referring to the Apple Ecosystem. Mac OS also has security checks and it protects users pretty well compared to windows. But it doesn't force users or developers to use Mac App Store for app downloads or publishing.

Perhaps the follow up question then ought to be - should the macOS App Store be closed in the same way that iOS is?

I can think of a number of ways I find the iOS app Store model better (for me at least). It’s easier to keep all my apps updated, for one. On my Mac, some updates go through the App Store, some go through the app itself (which doesn’t initiate until I launch the app itself), and some require me to visit an external website to download the latest installer, so it’s a more fragmented experience overall.

I don’t have to mess with serial numbers or activation keys, or worry about not being able to locate them should I need to subsequently reinstall the app (has already happened to me once or twice), making for a more coherent shopping experience overall. It’s also easier to track all my app installs and subscriptions in one place, especially when I upgrade to a new Mac and want to download app my apps again.

I see more Mac app developers releasing electron-based applications these days instead of using appkit (such as 1password, especially now that they are supporting the windows platform as well), because it’s more convenient for them, but it represents a regression for a Mac user. So if there is more innovation to be had on the Mac where it’s supposedly more open, then sad to say, it seems the “innovation” is there more for the developer’s convenience than it is to enable a better experience for the end user.

Apple can do all this with the iOS App Store because that’s how it started, so developers had to play ball and release apps on Apple’s terms, with the end user (ie: me) arguably being the biggest beneficiary in terms of ease of use and convenience.

That rubicon has probably already long been closed with the Mac App Store. I was a windows user for 20 years before I got a Mac and then an iphone. I know how things “used to work” on desktops, and I feel that just because it “ain’t broke” doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have its share of drawbacks compared to iOS.

 

[DFZD]

And iOS is more secure than MacOS. And there are other tradeoffs. Apple has never said they can’t make iOS more like MacOS, they don’t WANT to.
If you don’t like how iOS works, fine, don’t use it. Or complain, that’s fine too, I guess. The problem is people who think Apple should be forced to change iOS or that all consumers are oppressed because they freely choose iOS. There is no legal reason Apple should be forced to change and plenty of us users PREFER Apples approach and are glad they do it. If you aren’t, fine, but an Android, or hope Apple changes. Just don’t expect a judge to make things different.

This argument is as absurd as saying if you don't like your country, you can leave.

Let me try to explain it in simpler terms.

What if Apple updated their devices to ensure only Apple Earphones worked with them? Sure one could then argue that they offer the best performance, and third party ones are not compatible with the OS and some features can only work with Apple branded accessories. So it's good that Apple made this move.

What if I prefer Sony or Sennheiser earphones?

Now again you may not care about earphones or in general about how iOS is still the most restrictive OS out there and still one of the most frequently compromised, but a lot of people do and we deserve to make a case of our cause.

Asking us to stop using iOS is against our rights, because we are not forcing Apple to do anything illegal, just nudging them to the right direction through democratic and completely legal means.

 

[DFZD]

Perhaps the follow up question then ought to be - should the macOS App Store be closed in the same way that iOS is?

I can think of a number of ways I find the iOS app Store model better (for me at least). It’s easier to keep all my apps updated, for one. On my Mac, some updates go through the App Store, some go through the app itself (which doesn’t initiate until I launch the app itself), and some require me to visit an external website to download the latest installer, so it’s a more fragmented experience overall.

I don’t have to mess with serial numbers or activation keys, or worry about not being able to locate them should I need to subsequently reinstall the app (has already happened to me once or twice), making for a more coherent shopping experience overall. It’s also easier to track all my app installs and subscriptions in one place, especially when I upgrade to a new Mac and want to download app my apps again.

I see more Mac app developers releasing electron-based applications these days instead of using appkit (such as 1password, especially now that they are supporting the windows platform as well), because it’s more convenient for them, but it represents a regression for a Mac user. So if there is more innovation to be had on the Mac where it’s supposedly more open, then sad to say, it seems the “innovation” is there more for the developer’s convenience than it is to enable a better experience for the end user.

Apple can do all this with the iOS App Store because that’s how it started, so developers had to play ball and release apps on Apple’s terms, with the end user (ie: me) arguably being the biggest beneficiary in terms of ease of use and convenience.

That rubicon has probably already long been closed with the Mac App Store. I was a windows user for 20 years before I got a Mac and then an iphone. I know how things “used to work” on desktops, and I feel that just because it “ain’t broke” doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have its share of drawbacks compared to iOS.

I totally understand your perspective on this, and it's not wrong but you have to admit that not all users have the same usage for iOS devices like you do.

That's why there has to be found a middle ground, one that is fair for both developers and users.

You do realise that the 30% Apple commission comes out of consumer's pocket right? And when Apple has a competing service of their own, it becomes anti competitive as per Law.

You can read more about it from here - https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/e...st-breach-citing-spotify-app-store-complaint/

As for me I personally believe Apple needs to allow developers to authenticate and digitally sign their App with Apple and still choose to not publish through App Store, just like on a Mac. It prevents both users (from unsafe apps) and developers (from unfair and steep Apple commission). If they don't do it on their own, a future legislation is going to
make it happen. There are plenty of app providers as well as users who are really irked about it.

 

[coolfactor]

Apple is the rich kid in the park with all the expensive toys. It doesn't let other kids play with these toys.

Sounds so simple on the surface.

The twist in the plot is that the Toys are made in China.

Its astonishing how all the Apple die hard fans defend it while completely ignoring all the shady stuff Apple has been doing over the years. They are actually a far worse corporation than Netflix, Epic and Spotify.

Once you shake hands with the devil, there's no turning back.

I find it absolutely fascinating how the same reality can look so different to different people!

@DFZD, the other possibility is that Apple really does understand that the best way to provide the *best user experience* is to control the end-to-end experience. Baddabingbaddaboom!

That said, I do welcome pressure where there's comfort. Let's keep Apple on their toes, but portraying them as evil and anti-consumer, anti-competitor is a non-starter. There's plenty of competition outside their platform.

 

[DFZD]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Rejects Anti-Trust Case Against Apple

Anyone who really wants to have this discussion, perhaps you could start here and tell me where you disagree with the ruling.

American judicial system isn't really the best in the world to take a fair and just call on a corrupt business practice. I mean it failed to impeach a president that lead an attack on their own parliament.

Here's what the Europe Union thinks -

EU accuses Apple of App Store antitrust violations after Spotify complaint

Spotify’s complaint against the “Apple tax” moves forward

www.theverge.com

 

[Abazigal]

That's why there has to be found a middle ground, one that is fair for both developers and users.

You do realise that the 30% Apple commission comes out of consumer's pocket right? And when Apple has a competing service of their own, it becomes anti competitive as per Law.

You can read more about it from here - https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/30/e...st-breach-citing-spotify-app-store-complaint/

I am well aware of that article involving Spotify, which has since become part of a bigger war against Apple by the EU.

EXCLUSIVE EU's Vestager warns Apple against using privacy, security to limit competition

Europe's tech chief Margrethe Vestager on Friday warned iPhone maker Apple (AAPL.O) against using privacy and security concerns to fend off competition on its App Store, reasons CEO Tim Cook gave for not allowing users to install software from outside the Store.

www.reuters.com

And the details of the promised Digital Markets act (you don't need to read the entire bit, which is very tedious, just the part I have quoted below).

EUR-Lex - 52020PC0842 - EN - EUR-Lex

eur-lex.europa.eu

Suffice to say, I do not agree with a number of Vestager's points, especially this one.

allow the installation and effective use of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow these software applications or software application stores to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper

On one hand, Vestager seems to think that opening up the App Store will not result in too many ramifications for end users, yet on the other hand, she expects Apple to deal with any consequences on their own.

It seems ridiculous to expect Apple to only allow smaller competitors to leverage the iOS platform as the competition sees fit (without having to pay Apple a single cent apparently), while also having to go out of their way to somehow ensure these competitors don’t act in bad faith to harm Apple users.

And while it may well be possible for Apple to do so, I would prefer to see Apple spend their resources on more constructive and productive ways of improving their ecosystem than playing this endless mouse and cat game with errant developers.

Suffice to say, I disagree with a number of points raised by Spotify, and feel the EU is going too far in trying to crack open Apple to benefit their local businesses.

As for me I personally believe Apple needs to allow developers to authenticate and digitally sign their App with Apple and still choose to not publish through App Store, just like on a Mac. It prevents both users (from unsafe apps) and developers (from unfair and steep Apple commission). If they don't do it on their own, a future legislation is going to
make it happen. There are plenty of app providers as well as users who are really irked about it.

And I go back to my original argument (and bear with me) - that people like myself pay Apple to make the best decisions for me, the end user, not developers.

What exactly is the benefit to me from having Apple do precisely as you proposed, aside from settling lawsuits? Yeah, app developers are unhappy, and so what? A rule may be bad for them precisely because it's meant to benefit another party (the end user here), and something that is good for them could also come at the expense of consumers.

if it's to protect me from unsafe apps, the App Store already does that. If it's to get developers out of paying "unfair" commissions to Apple, who decides what is fair or unfair?

It may well be that Apple ends up having to open up their App Store by countries like the EU. Either way, I expect Apple fight this all the way to the end.

The world does not need another Android platform. I bought an iPhone specifically to avoid that.

 

[DFZD]

The world does not need another Android platform. I bought an iPhone specifically to avoid that.

The end note is a bit bizarre. Why would you keep comparing it to Android and not their own Mac OS?

Smartphones are handheld computing devices for a lot of users, and we deserve the right to ask for opening it up.

As for your comment on not caring for developer voices. Well that's how we ended up with Windows Phones. Every single app you use from the App Store exists because developers made it happen. That's why Apple and Google tried to pacify small developers in the recently.

Anyway about the core demands, the process flow I ask for already exists on the Mac. So can we assume you don't use Mac OS and stick to iOS & iPadOS for all your computing needs?

 

[Abazigal]

Anyway about the core demands, the process flow I ask for already exists on the Mac. So can we assume you don't use Mac OS and stick to iOS & iPadOS for all your computing needs?

I do use a Mac, though I have expressed that I use my ipad for a fair amount of my work as a teacher. While I acknowledge that there are still many tasks that I still need a Mac to complete, I do genuinely enjoy working and using my ipad whenever I can. iOS is just so much more feature-rich and “fun” to use in that regard,

I have also listed a number of my pain points in an earlier post which you acknowledged. So far, it seems the only argument against the App Store is the 15/30% cut that Apple takes for every transaction. Barring that, the App Store model seems to simply offers a better experience in terms of tracking and facilitating purchases and downloads.

And I guess that’s where we are at an impasse. As much as possible, I am happy with the existing App Store model and would like to see it preserved as much as possible, developers don’t want to pay Apple any more money than they have to (and some like Epic clearly have their own other agenda), and Apple won’t capitulate.

And so here we are.

 

[DFZD]

So far, it seems the only argument against the App Store is the 15/30% cut that Apple takes for every transaction. Barring that, the App Store model seems to simply offers a better experience in terms of tracking and facilitating purchases and downloads.

It really is a major point, but I think that commission is fair if one needs the discovery feature from the App Store, but App Store is mandatory for developers, there's no other way to serve a large section of smartphone users except listing on App Store and paying the cut. Apple then makes it really hard for users to pay for these subscriptions and goes out as far as to stop them from linking to their website to make the payment.

So I think Apple should either allow developers to deliver apps directly. Or if that really is going to make iOS so unsecure. They should allow App developers to only host their apps on App Store and turn off the discovery features, and pay a substantially lower fee (Let's say 10%). So the App never gets suggested or recommended by App Store, or comes in search results, unless you type the exact name of the app. Like if you type video streaming, Netflix won't come up.

This is the middle ground I was talking about. But do you think Apple would allow that? No, right? That is why we need a fair court to intervene.

 

[DFZD]

If Apple chose to restrict headphones, I'd expect they had some compelling reason to do so; for example, they had some incredible new tech for headphones.

Wow.. I am actually stunned someone could say that and not be worried about being called an iSheep.

Anyway your bias towards Apple is pretty evident. I on the other hand don't have such strong feelings for companies or products that I use.

 

[DFZD]

On being called iSheep: If you calling me a name makes you feel better, have at it.

On being biased toward Apple: Duh. I've chosen to spend a significant amount of money on Apple products. I've committed to the ecosystem. I made a choice, and that choice was biased by my needs and desires.

No I'm not calling you any names, my sincere apologies if it came out that way.

Anyway I am not saying you are biased towards their products, but biased towards Apple as a company. Their products are great of course, and well all love them.

 

[DFZD]

And finally, it's not only we Sheeple that like the way the app store operates, it seems to objectively make way more money for developers as well. Though IOS is only about 25% of market share, they generate about 80% of revenue in the App market.

Well Tesla is valued more than all other automobile manufactures put together. I don't know what being at the top has to do with being right or fair.
Also the revenue share is skewed because Apple is a worldwide leader in the premium smartphone market. Premium phone buyers spending more on apps is not really a notable revelation. If we really could tell how much each Android OEM's users were spending on Apps, I'm sure Samsung Galaxy devices would be at the top of the Android side.

 

[hans1972]

Now again you may not care about earphones or in general about how iOS is still the most restrictive OS out there and still one of the most frequently compromised, but a lot of people do and we deserve to make a case of our cause.

Asking us to stop using iOS is against our rights, because we are not forcing Apple to do anything illegal, just nudging them to the right direction through democratic and completely legal means.

You don't have a right to use iOS. Its Apple's property and they should be in 100% control of it with a narrow exception with regards to safety and health.

You can complain all you want, but governments shouldn't be allowed to force Apple to operate iOS in a different way especially when there are good substitutes.

 

[Abazigal]

Now again you may not care about earphones or in general about how iOS is still the most restrictive OS out there and still one of the most frequently compromised, but a lot of people do and we deserve to make a case of our cause.

Asking us to stop using iOS is against our rights, because we are not forcing Apple to do anything illegal, just nudging them to the right direction through democratic and completely legal means.

I see it more as walking into a Japanese restaurant and complaining that it doesn’t serve Italian cuisine. You want what Apple won’t give. Maybe you are the problem, not them.

And while you are most certainly welcome to do that, do also recognise that we are also free to make our case as to why we feel iOS should stay the way it is. Or to put it another way, you are trying to take away my choice to not have a choice. Which is what I pay Apple to do. Make the right decisions for me with regards to security, privacy and ease of use.

So far, we have only been hearing the grouses of larger app companies like Epic, Tile and Spotify. Entities who have vested interests in seeing the App Store opened up. And so far, Epic has lost horribly, while Tile is selling themselves to a company know for horrible privacy practices. Spotify has both iOS, android and desktop subscribers, and if they still can’t make a profit or pay musicians a decent rate despite having to pay Apple commissions on just a small percentage of their subscriptions, I think the problem is more their business model and less Apple’s predatory App Store commissions. Apple could waive all commissions for Spotify and they would still have problems making a profit.

What is also starkly missing are the POVs of end users like myself who are legitimately happy with the current walled garden approach that iOS offers.

And I believe that if we were to take a vote, you will find that the overwhelming majority of ios users don’t hate this App Store paradigm and have little desire to see it opened up. The people who want sideloading are likely the overwhelming minority. This is probably why you don’t see Epic try to drum up consumer sentiment about this. They know the response will not be to their advantage.

So if 95% of users are happy with the way things are and only 5% (and I am already being very generous here) wish to see it opened up, why should the majority cave in to the minority, when there is already a ready choice in the form of Android that already offers the sideloading that you want? You get the benefits of a more open ecosystem, and you can deal with the drawbacks of a more open ecosystem without the rest of the iOS user base having to suffer along with you.

 

[DanTheMan827]

...and there's another reason this is NOT TRUE. You can use your web browser on the iPhone and shop online anywhere you'd like on the web. There's very little you can't buy, from other vendors, using your iPhone.

Web browsers load websites, they do not load apps

A PWA does not have the same functionality or performance of a native app, and there is no way to get a native app other than the App Store.

 

[DFZD]

So if 95% of users are happy with the way things are and only 5% (and I am already being very generous here) wish to see it opened up, why should the majority cave in to the minority, when there is already a ready choice in the form of Android that already offers the sideloading that you want? You get the benefits of a more open ecosystem, and you can deal with the drawbacks of a more open ecosystem without the rest of the iOS user base having to suffer along with you.

I am not sure how you are coming to a figure of 95% in your favour? Shows how clouded your judgement is, no offense. In all honesty I'm certain that a majority vote can't happen for opening up iOS, it is also true for keeping it closed.

Why you may ask?

Because the actual majority of users are either not concerned with such trivial things, or will go with the popular public voice, which is right now to open up iOS.

Either way we both represent a very small group of users, but your group is still a bit smaller. Because it's not as vocal, and even when it is vocal, it appears more like parroting Apple or Tim Cook's views more than their own.

Remember how a few vocal voices managed to get Apple to remove touch bar? But it took a lot of Pro users to actually get Apple to bring back ports. Similarly a few small developers managed to get Apple to reduce small dev commissions.

Anyway I am not disagreeing to what you're saying I'm just asking for a way out to protect both parties, you clearly don't care about other parties, but I hope you respect their rights. That's all.

 

[DFZD]

I'm fascinated by the respondents here couching their personal desire for how Apple runs it's business as "rights."

Contrary to what your beliefs are, modern democracies are built on the foundation of rights and equality. Since iOS & Android are not just Operating Systems but also platforms where a lot of other companies and individuals do their business, it is within their right to ask for a more fair system. This is exactly how Microsoft was forced to open up Windows in the late 90s and early 2000s. Read more about Microsoft Antitrust Probes to get a hang of the broader issue.
And all this is not just going on against Apple, Google is very much also taking fire.

Even Microsoft responded with this - https://9to5mac.com/2020/10/08/microsoft-calls-out-apple-over-app-store/

 

[I7guy]

Contrary to what your beliefs are, modern democracies are built on the foundation of rights and equality. Since iOS & Android are not just Operating Systems but also platforms where a lot of other companies and individuals do their business, it is within their right to ask for a more fair system. This is exactly how Microsoft was forced to open up Windows in the late 90s and early 2000s. Read more about Microsoft Antitrust Probes to get a hang of the broader issue.
And all this is not just going on against Apple, Google is very much also taking fire.

Even Microsoft responded with this - https://9to5mac.com/2020/10/08/microsoft-calls-out-apple-over-app-store/

The epic vs apple case, along with the stay Apple received for abridging the steering rules, should give you a lot of information about the legality of the app store. The Microsoft case was entirely different in nature and you can read more about why. That doesn't mean that the customers of the app store, which include devs as well as end users can't ask for changes. However, as customers, we all can take our shopping somewhere else if we don't like the store policies.

As far as Paddle...it may be a venture that will remain in the shadows if Apple wins these appeals.

 

[Abazigal]

The epic vs apple case, along with the stay Apple received for abridging the steering rules, should give you a lot of information about the legality of the app store. The Microsoft case was entirely different in nature and you can read more about why. That doesn't mean that the customers of the app store, which include devs as well as end users can't ask for changes. However, as customers, we all can take our shopping somewhere else if we don't like the store policies.

As far as Paddle...it may be a venture that will remain in the shadows if Apple wins these appeals.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1470917527228149761

Things are not looking good for the coalition of app fairness.

 

[DFZD]

The epic vs apple case, along with the stay Apple received for abridging the steering rules, should give you a lot of information about the legality of the app store. The Microsoft case was entirely different in nature and you can read more about why. That doesn't mean that the customers of the app store, which include devs as well as end users can't ask for changes. However, as customers, we all can take our shopping somewhere else if we don't like the store policies.

As far as Paddle...it may be a venture that will remain in the shadows if Apple wins these appeals.

My particular issues are more with how Apple controls the iOS and restricts even basic features. Also I think you may be assuming that I'm siding with Epic here, no, not at all, I hate loot chests and in app lotteries as much. But I think there should be a way to deliver iOS Apps if someone doesn't really have a need for the huge market possibilities that App Store provides for the steep commission that it charges.

For example to install a font on iPad OS, you have to download a 3rd party. But that's fine, what's ridiculous is that
Apple itself issues that as the official approach to do that. This is just one of the several issues, including the App Store bits.

And this attitude that if you don't like it you should use something else harms Apple more than anyone else. People love the products and want them to improve. Obviously if they could use an alternative they would have. iOS devices are now really powerful in terms of the hardware capabilities, but it's the OS that is really holding the whole thing back. So all these people defending Apple here are just causing delay to the inevitable evolution of iOS into a powerful and customisable system. After all why else would you need a 16gb 1TB Desktop Class SoC on a mobile device if it can't do anything fruitful?