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.
Report: Sideloading in Europe Will Still Involve App Review and Fees
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Again. Your whole premise that not watching the sponsorship inside of the video itself is stealing, is just plainly wrong. You can steal something of some value. No sponsorship will create a value from myself. Never I've bought anything sponsored. So no point in watching, no stealing there. I did not steal anything from anyone. If anything sponsorships stealing time from the viewers! They are the thieves. And no, I did not agreed on that before watching the video. I've already paid for my premium subscription and I was not warned how many sponsorships will be in the video prior watching it.
Really? You're really asking why? Because I don't want to waste my time watching something I'm not interesting in? I'm doing exactly that on my iPhone. Why would I watch 30 seconds or more of filler content be it sponsorship, end credits or intro? Do you know what's more precious asset than money? Your time. You can't buy more time with your money.
Im okay with apple reviewing my software. They are doing that today. It’s better than the free for all I was expecting.
Clearly not, when the DMA addresses specific metrics to be considered a gatekeeper.
MS isn't a monopoly or duopoly within gaming, so I doubt it.
It is. And you can sideload there... And it's totally natural. No one would buy MacBook which can get apps only from the Mac App Store and nowhere else. Just does not make sense.
Do you see the similarities?
And again someone is using the policy itself to prove the paradigm defined in policy.
MS is a "dominant player" in digital market of xbox games
Sony is a "dominant player" in digital market of PS games
Nintendo is a "dominant player" in digital market of switch games
It's not related to "gaming" or some actual market, they are targeting Apple specifically for being a "dominant player" in digital market of iphone app sales.
So I think question "do consoles get sideloading too" or it only works for someone who was pointed at is still valid.
Desktop/laptop software distribution existed prior to digital downloads and internet access. It's a legacy expectation.
Yes but there is a difference
The App Store is the only gig in town unlike the real world where you can shop about.
Yes and the streaming app itself would have been native, hence why it's relevant. Requiring native iOS versions of those games only seeks to hinder consumer choice and put up artificial roadblocks to competitors for the benefit of Apple. If Netflix can stream a movie to my phone without Apple getting a cut, why can't a game company stream a game to my phone without Apple getting a cut? Does Apple require movies, shows, or songs to be available for purchase on Apple Music or Apple TV for them to be able to be streamed from an app of another company?
Nope. It's pretty essential for the usability of such hardware.
It's the other way around. It's perverse experience differs on the phones - yet they are just computers in our pockets. No reason to differentiate in this matter.
People thought side load meant like the Mac, where it really means like a game console. Users can buy games on the console online store or side load games they buy at a brick and mortar. In both cases the console maker controls and gets paid.
What is the competition to which you refer? How does Meta requiring you to download Facebook and Instagram from their own website or “Meta Marketplace” app change the competitive landscape for iOS.
Now that both major mobile platforms allow side loading, large companies will be incentivize to remove their apps from the App Store (and Google play store) and require users to download and purchase directly from them. Large companies may also offer deals to smaller developers for exclusive distribution of their apps. Perhaps that’s the completion you’re referring to(?) Developers may have the ability to sign exclusive deals with large companies. However, I’m not sure this ultimately advantages end users. It just changes the market dynamics for developers… which was the point!!!
Indie developers are better off to stay with the Apple App Store.
Free hosting, free reviews, free dev tools. Just share a little portion of your profits, and focus on developing your app.
You're stretching meanings to absurdity and invalidity in your effort to make a point. Desktop and laptop are a duopoly? Ok what company owns desktop? Who owns laptop?
Most would probably switch to android because that’s the next available best thing. Just like when huawei got banned most went to an alternative product.
Apple is evidently hampering compeition in the following spaces:
- Favoring it's own music subscription
- Favoring it's own ebook app
- Payment apps (by forcing everybody to sign up to Apple Pay)
- Wireless headphones, by not giving access to certain APIs
- Browsers
I'm sure there are more expamples.
Even before the DMA there wasn't a truly free market. Players in a market have pretty much always been subjected to rules.
There's no need to artificially limit Apple's market to "iPhone app sales" to consider them a dominant player. They're a dominant player in general of mobile app sales. And if they EU wants to regulate the players of console games sales as well, have at it I say. I see no sacred cows, unlike some folks view of Apple.
Because games are apps. Movies and music are files.
If Microsoft wanted to sell a remote use app that allowed iPhone users to access their Windows computer with Windows games they had already purchased on that platform then it would have been fine. Like I said, that isn't what Microsoft was selling. They were selling Windows/Xbox games. Games are apps. Selling apps through the App Store requires them to be native to iOS.
Did you know that up front and agree to it? I knew up front App Store is it. I still signed on the dotted line. My choice.
Comparing an iPhone you bought to a physical store is beyond idiotic. The far more accurate analogy is buying a house manufactured by a company and then not being allowed to have anything delivered to you unless the business's products are on the approved company list and the maker of your home gets a cut of every delivery, in addition not being allowed to go out of the gate to grab the package.
Google tells me about 62%. If you're expecting me to say, "whoa whoa whoa, hang on actually, let's not regulate Apple after all" rather than "well I guess the EU should regulate MS too when it comes to games" you're sorely mistaken. Whack MS with the hammer too.