Setapp Planning to Launch Alternative App Store for iOS in Europe

[ChrisA]

How will sideloading potentially affect the security of our phones? Does Apple now have to constantly defend against malicious unapproved apps? How much money and effort should they spend to modify software every time a sideloaded app wrecks havoc on iOS?

This will be no worse than what happens on macOS.

iPhones don't run MS Windows and don't have those issues so much. macOS, IOS are both basically BSD UNIX under the hood and has its origin in the early 1970s and has always had a reputation for stability and security,

Why? In the old days computers were shared. Many users would log into the same computer and all run their own software at the same time. The OS was designed so that what one user did could not possibly effect the other users. Macs still allow this, I can have several users runing at once

 

[Shirasaki]

Agreed. Europe is no real loss.

Then I have to wonder why no action is taken and no announcement from Apple yet?

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

This isn't the market speaking. It's the EU government. The actual market and actual consumers said that Apple's approach deserved most of their money.

Consumers won't benefit. The only ones that will are large corporations who have been lobbying for these changes. Billion dollar corporations trying to take a byte out of trillion dollar corporations. They're just using small developers and consumers to create empathy.

Not true. Buying an iPhone is not synonymous with complete approval. Many iPhone owners have been critics for a decade and a half.

Your assertion is wrong.

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

The playing field just got level.

Apple has been the only game in town.

Now they’ll have to be the best game in town.

Or, we will learn that all that they have been preaching for the last 16 years about not being able to download whatever software you want on your hardware was simply not true.

It just might turn out that the alternatives are better for developers and consumers.

Also, we’ll be able to download software on our pocket computer the way that it has worked in every other computing device since the dawn of computing.

 

[MacBH928]

Please clarify me, we will be able to download apps that Apple did not previously allow on the app store? Like emulators and browsers with web engines other than WebKit?

How will Apple restrict this option only European phones?

Yeah, this is a dumb move by the DMA. No iPhone user should be forced to get their apps from Setapp and....

Wait a second. You're not being forced to use Setapp. Or sideload. Or do anything. This is being provided as an option to Apple's App Store.

Option:
1. an act of choosing
2. the power or right to choose : freedom of choice
3. something that may be chosen: such as

a : an alternative course of action​

b : an item that is offered in addition to or in place of standard equipment​

Don't feel comfortable using Setapp? Don't use it, use the Apple App Store instead.

Crazy that consumers would complain about having more options. View attachment 2246109

You are right but there is a counter argument. For the vendor to control the software environment it guarantees a specific quality to the user experience. I assure many people will side download apps that are half working or put malware in there and would complain that "iphones suck" and newspaper will reporting "New Apple iPhone malware auto transfers funds from your bank app to scammers in Africa" and Apple will have to eat up the bad PR.

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

Please clarify me, we will be able to download apps that Apple did not previously allow on the app store? Like emulators and browsers with web engines other than WebKit?

How will Apple restrict this option only European phones?




You are right but there is a counter argument. For the vendor to control the software environment it guarantees a specific quality to the user experience. I assure many people will side download apps that are half working or put malware in there and would complain that "iphones suck" and newspaper will reporting "New Apple iPhone malware auto transfers funds from your bank app to scammers in Africa" and Apple will have to eat up the bad PR.

People can install whatever they want on any other computing device and there aren’t any headlines bashing those devices about software decisions.

The problem with that argument is that it’s acting like iPhone is the only device people do banking on.

People fall prey to texting scams every day on iPhone. That has nothing to do with iPhone.

 

[svish]

Expecting interesting changes for the software

 

[ikjadoon]

Correct.

You keep discussing what anti-trust . What anti-trust in the US has been brought against the App Store?

Ditto.

Sure there is always planning. Smart companies plan.

Since when is anti-trust only the domain of U.S. law? Is that really what you believe?

 

[AdriftAtlas]

Or, we will learn that all that they have been preaching for the last 16 years about not being able to download whatever software you want on your hardware was simply not true.

I can't wait to install Firefox (Gecko, not garbage WebKit) onto iOS with full web extension support along with uBlock Origin. I want to be able to install sysadmin tools that can actually show me both Wi-Fi access point info and cell tower info. I want to be able to install tethering apps that don't snitch on me to my carrier. I want VoIP apps that can actually background without resorting to sending my SIP credentials to a third party push server.

Mr. Cook, tear down this wall!

 

[ikjadoon]

I'm well aware that centuries of antitrust have very little to say about a company with legitimate business practices and 30% market share. Which is why the EU is targeting Apple with new regulations instead of centuries of antitrust law.


A few minor ones. Mostly ones that enable developers to run arbitrary code or ignore native interfaces in favor of awful cross-platform UIs.


Emulators, porn. I saw the list earlier.

FWIW, I'd support browsers having their own browser engines, as long as Apple continues to require that webviews in other apps use the system engine.


Okay? Maybe everything will be free too!


Good for you! You realize that Setapp can review and release apps on the App Store for a single subscription price like they do on the Mac right now.

Oh, gosh: we can claim Apple has legitimate business practices, so the EU's DMA needs to pack up and give up? This ignores the years of painstaking regulatory body research, analysis, and votes.

That are all public. Just disagreeing with DMA isn't a real response to the DMA.

The DMA in fact simply puts in law much of what Apple already does, but goes further and mandates it across all gatekeeper businesses. Apple wasn't specifically targeted: it's just large enough to be a gatekeeper. Apple could protest against its gatekeeper classification (without much success, I imagine), but not heard it yet.

The Digital Markets Act: ensuring fair and open digital markets

Discover how the Digital Markets Act ensures large online platforms in the EU behave fairly, and allows new players to enter the market, thus developing a fast evolving digital sector.

commission.europa.eu

Example of the “don'ts” - Gatekeeper platforms may no longer:

treat services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself more favourably in ranking than similar services or products offered by third parties on the gatekeeper's platform

prevent consumers from linking up to businesses outside their platforms

prevent users from un-installing any pre-installed software or app if they wish so

track end users outside of the gatekeepers' core platform service for the purpose of targeted advertising, without effective consent having been granted

If Apple had written that text above, people would be falling over backwards to say "This is why I trust Apple."

//

Plenty of iOS apps already ignore native interfaces for very different reasons than "Apple stops all that!" Few people use those non-native apps. This is even true on Android that already allows third-party app stores.

But, uh, arbitrary code? What on Earth? That's not how third-party app stores work in any dimension. The OS still can restrict apps from arbitrary code...

I feel like listening to this debate, it's just the same as Windows users lambasting the Apple M1 isn't even that efficient. These people didn't read the context.

And seems like Mac users didn't read the context around the DMA.

//

Why would Setapp choose that route, if it believes it offer a superior curation, security, and ease of use versus Apple? We can see third-party app stores on Android already: some succeed and most don't. Only the ones superior to the Play Store gain any traction.

//

I could also agree with that: WebView's are tightly-integrated with an OS and apps that care can always launch a third-party browser first.

 

[4389842]

The UK is still part of Europe and will always be part of Europe. Can’t take the country out of the continent, can we now? LMAO.

The people voting clearly saw it differently… as silly as that might have been.

 

[Eldaerenth Faexidor]

The people voting clearly saw it differently… as silly as that might have been.

No, they didn’t.

Please educate yourself before leaving ignorant comments.

 

[strongy]

The people voting clearly saw it differently… as silly as that might have been.

you seem to constantly be confused about Europe and EU they are not the same thing, disagree all you want but you still fail at geography.

 

[I7guy]

People can install whatever they want on any other computing device and there aren’t any headlines bashing those devices about software decisions.

The problem with that argument is that it’s acting like iPhone is the only device people do banking on.

People fall prey to texting scams every day on iPhone. That has nothing to do with iPhone.

The way the market works is consumers buy products that are right for them, that do what they want and don’t buy products that don’t do what they want.

Yes, I understand gatekeeper, nanny state etc.

 

[H2SO4]

Thanks for that. I agree. You forgot the "forcing USB-C will save the planet" myth. I want USB-C everywhere (for conveniency) but it's a lie to say it's going to save the planet by having less adapters in the dump. Short term, we'll buy even more USB-C to Lightning adapters. And one day, not too far away, there'll be another and better technology that will force us to buy even more adapters. Unless everything becomes wireless... which won't happen soon.

The EU is focusing too much on Apple but look at all the other proprietary technologies across the globe... there are thousands and thousands other companies that we should be focusing on. I'm all for less adapters... but please they should stop lying about their motivations. IT'S ALL POLITICS. They know **** about tech and they lack vision. The 1st thing to acknowledge is that they, legislators, don't know sh*t about almost anything. At least I can admit that I know sh*t about it. It's just my opinion and wouldn't want to be in their pants because it became too complicated.

Have a nice everybody 😃

Pls provide a citation for your claim;
"IT'S ALL POLITICS. They know **** about tech and they lack vision. The 1st thing to acknowledge is that they, legislators, don't know sh*t about almost anything"

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

The way the market works is consumers buy products that are right for them, that do what they want and don’t buy products that don’t do what they want.

Yes, I understand gatekeeper, nanny state etc.

That’s not true because it assumes that the product people buy is perfect. You can buy a car but there still be a missing feature or a design decision that you don’t like. Same with a house. Same with iPhone. This area has been heavily criticized since the dawn of the App Store by many apple users.

 

[H2SO4]

The way the market works is consumers buy products that are right for them, that do what they want and don’t buy products that don’t do what they want.

Yes, I understand gatekeeper, nanny state etc.

The way the market also works, is that consumers cannot buy products that don't exist.
They often buy at worst products that they don't want or at best, products they'll just 'make do' with.

 

[mrochester]

The way the market also works, is that consumers cannot buy products that don't exist.
They often buy at worst products that they don't want or at best, products they'll just 'make do' with.

Wouldn’t that be because the market doesn’t demand those products, or consumers rejected them when they were available?

 

[VulchR]

Because there won't. What benefit would developers have to bum-rush out of the App Store? They already have established customers on the App Store. If they suddenly pulled out, then they lose their established customers, established customers who most of which only use App Stores. It's the same case on Android. Fortnite tried to bum-rush out of the Google Play Store, and the result was hardly anyone used the .apk version of Fortnite over the Google Play Store version.

So no, they ain't gonna leave. They'd have too much to lose to just up and leave the app store.

First to go will be Adobe, then Microsoft. As for the rest, see how many developers there are for the macOS App Store. Neither of us has precognition, but I think you are being naive. Currently nothing prevents developers in the iOS App Store simply passing Apple's fee on to their customers, so I think all of this hype about Apple's fees is just smoke and mirrors Quite apart from anything, the Apple App Store format presents information in a standardised way so that consumers can compare competing apps. Good luck doing that with apps scattered across multiple stores. And, once I have to purchase an app from outside the app store, perhaps because it is needed for work, security is compromised. All of this by government intervention in a market that already has competition (it's called Android).

 

[VulchR]

Yeah that's gonna be a problem just like it's been on Google Play Store. Oh wait, that never happened, silly me.
...

And yet this change has been pushed largely by developers, not users. I wonder why.

 

[koil]

And yet this change has been pushed largely by developers, not users. I wonder why.

Because users don't understand anything about it. Developers think they are going to make more money, and they may (I don't think they will), time will tell on that front, but for me it's all about enabling users to install apps Apple don't want us to install because it undermines our reliance on them, e.g. my list earlier in this thread, primarily things like emulators, actual browsers, and niche power user tools. Things Apple can never allow because such apps would require access to APIs that Apple want to keep to themselves.

 

[BaldiMac]

which would mean developers wouldn't need to pay Apple's 15 to 30 percent fees.

Source? Could Apple continue to charge a "platform fee" like they did in the Danish dating app case?

It’s a paywall because Apple already allows sideloading for $100/year — part of the Dev program. It’s not like an impossible feat that nobody’s tried before. Apple allows easy-ish sideloading to an extent. You just need to pay for it.

Are you referring to test flight as a "paywall"?

How many? I dunno man.

That's my point.

Not true. Buying an iPhone is not synonymous with complete approval. Many iPhone owners have been critics for a decade and a half.

Your assertion is wrong.

I did not say anything about "complete approval." I said "Apple's approach" by which I meant the complete widget with all it's features and flaws. You know, how markets are supposed to work.

Oh, gosh: we can claim Apple has legitimate business practices, so the EU's DMA needs to pack up and give up? This ignores the years of painstaking regulatory body research, analysis, and votes.

That are all public. Just disagreeing with DMA isn't a real response to the DMA.

The DMA in fact simply puts in law much of what Apple already does, but goes further and mandates it across all gatekeeper businesses. Apple wasn't specifically targeted: it's just large enough to be a gatekeeper. Apple could protest against its gatekeeper classification (without much success, I imagine), but not heard it yet.

The Digital Markets Act: ensuring fair and open digital markets

Discover how the Digital Markets Act ensures large online platforms in the EU behave fairly, and allows new players to enter the market, thus developing a fast evolving digital sector.

commission.europa.eu

If Apple had written that text above, people would be falling over backwards to say "This is why I trust Apple."

//

Plenty of iOS apps already ignore native interfaces for very different reasons than "Apple stops all that!" Few people use those non-native apps. This is even true on Android that already allows third-party app stores.

But, uh, arbitrary code? What on Earth? That's not how third-party app stores work in any dimension. The OS still can restrict apps from arbitrary code...

I feel like listening to this debate, it's just the same as Windows users lambasting the Apple M1 isn't even that efficient. These people didn't read the context.

And seems like Mac users didn't read the context around the DMA.

Hmm. Looks like you are responding to strawman arguments that I never made here.

Why would Setapp choose that route, if it believes it offer a superior curation, security, and ease of use versus Apple? We can see third-party app stores on Android already: some succeed and most don't. Only the ones superior to the Play Store gain any traction.

To make money? The same business model works on the App Store. Subscribe to SetApp, download any apps they offer. login with SetApp credentials, and access the full version of the app. SetApp doesn't have to pay Apple a dime.

 

[mrat93]

Are you referring to test flight as a "paywall"?

No, I am referring to the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of people who use Apple Dev memberships for sideloading purposes — many of which are paid subscriptions to make it easier. This is what I do to sideload apps.

That's my point.

And you don’t know either, so… I guess you’ve checkmated me on not being able to predict the future.

 

[H2SO4]

Wouldn’t that be because the market doesn’t demand those products, or consumers rejected them when they were available?

Could be either. Could even be as Jobs, (I think), said. People didn't know what they wanted until it was given to them.

 

[spercharged69]

Because users don't understand anything about it. Developers think they are going to make more money, and they may (I don't think they will), time will tell on that front, but for me it's all about enabling users to install apps Apple don't want us to install because it undermines our reliance on them, e.g. my list earlier in this thread, primarily things like emulators, actual browsers, and niche power user tools. Things Apple can never allow because such apps would require access to APIs that Apple want to keep to themselves.

I make more money by also having my apps on the alternative non-Google Play Android stores.