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.
Some Developers Say Apple Letting Apps Like Netflix and Spotify Share a Link to Web for Account Sign-Up Isn't Enough
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In my view Apple is still totally controlling the narrative. Devs are all tangled up in a narrative of App Stores, app sales and commissions. The real problem is not there.
The actual problem is that these companies, both Apple and Google, through their OSs, are effectively controlling network endpoints right from the ability to install one on users devices regardless of users wishes, security or privacy issues. An end-point is an network lingo for what is essentially a service, more commonly known as an App. Its the bare fabric of the Internet, a global network regulated on the principles of Net Neutrality.
If you don’t know what I’m talking about, is what allows you to say, google for a digital service or app, click link, you are directed to the App Store, pay and download. This without the App Store or the user to pay a dime to any entity. Without no price free roam between endpoints there would be no iPhone, no Android Phone.
So what happens when one or two companies controls the installation of endpoints on devices used by 48% of the planets population? Well, all the web will eventually lead to them, because with no apps, aka clients, aka end-points … there is no Internet.
So I digress from all the current narrative around the current App Store approach. Its not about devs, its is not about commissions, its not about nothing of such things. It’s about keeping the Internet net neutral. What is Net Neutral and Why? Well Network neutrality, most commonly called net neutrality, is the principle that major providers must treat all Internet communications equally, and not discriminate or charge differently based on user, content, website, platform, application, type of equipment, source address, destination address, or method of communication. Net Neutrality has been proven to be a great formula for innovation and provider of great wealth for nations in particular the USA.
Now this does not mean that the use SDKs, hosting and app distribution, or whatever other services … so on and so forth shouldn’t be able to be marketed, transacted, case in case Apple technology and servives. But the ability to install or an update an endpoint/app on a user device should be only restricted by user command, not availability dictated solely by Apple or Google in their respective Tier 1 OSs and Devices. If users only accept endpoints provided by say the App Store, ok, its their wish. If not, its also their wish … regardless of the device. That is the way of the Internet empowering the success of many many things and services including such as the iPhone and many Android Smarphones. It is crucial for it to remain Net Neutral.
Cheers.
The actual problem is that these companies, both Apple and Google, through their OSs, are effectively controlling network endpoints right from the ability to install one on users devices regardless of users wishes, security or privacy issues. An end-point is an network lingo for what is essentially a service, more commonly known as an App. Its the bare fabric of the Internet, a global network regulated on the principles of Net Neutrality.
If you don’t know what I’m talking about, is what allows you to say, google for a digital service or app, click link, you are directed to the App Store, pay and download. This without the App Store or the user to pay a dime to any entity. Without no price free roam between endpoints there would be no iPhone, no Android Phone.
So what happens when one or two companies controls the installation of endpoints on devices used by 48% of the planets population? Well, all the web will eventually lead to them, because with no apps, aka clients, aka end-points … there is no Internet.
So I digress from all the current narrative around the current App Store approach. Its not about devs, its is not about commissions, its not about nothing of such things. It’s about keeping the Internet net neutral. What is Net Neutral and Why? Well Network neutrality, most commonly called net neutrality, is the principle that major providers must treat all Internet communications equally, and not discriminate or charge differently based on user, content, website, platform, application, type of equipment, source address, destination address, or method of communication. Net Neutrality has been proven to be a great formula for innovation and provider of great wealth for nations in particular the USA.
Now this does not mean that the use SDKs, hosting and app distribution, or whatever other services … so on and so forth shouldn’t be able to be marketed, transacted, case in case Apple technology and servives. But the ability to install or an update an endpoint/app on a user device should be only restricted by user command, not availability dictated solely by Apple or Google in their respective Tier 1 OSs and Devices. If users only accept endpoints provided by say the App Store, ok, its their wish. If not, its also their wish … regardless of the device. That is the way of the Internet empowering the success of many many things and services including such as the iPhone and many Android Smarphones. It is crucial for it to remain Net Neutral.
Cheers.
Last edited:
Maybe developers should just build webapps instead. 🤷♂️
They can host the apps themselves... choose their own payment solutions... basically control the entire experience. It's literally everything they want. And it puts THEM in control... not these giant corporations.
Why should developers put up with all these crazy rules from the App Store and Google Play Store?
Freedom!
They can host the apps themselves... choose their own payment solutions... basically control the entire experience. It's literally everything they want. And it puts THEM in control... not these giant corporations.
Why should developers put up with all these crazy rules from the App Store and Google Play Store?
Freedom!
Because neither iOS or Android properly support web apps? Why would they when they have a cashcow of passive income on top of their devices and OS bought and licensed by you and me? All the web of end-points (Internet) leading one way or the other to their App Stores, a consequence of gate keeping network end-points, case in case, clients, best known as apps?
Heck why would even need to do so? License the SDKs as it used to be, and pay for app hosting, distribution and updates if you ever so wish.
The thing is, if you are an unknown dev, there is great advantage to be in the App Store or Google Play. Its a way to certify that your app is safe to use … you should pay for that if necessary. Not only that, you get simplified billing.
Now, once your business grows, you became established and your customers trust you, you have money to have your own international bIllini system, you may not need it anymore. In other words, pay for what you actually need to use to provide your customers the best experience possible. Not by mandate of a company(ies) that wings its end-point gate keeping power over internet enabled devices used 48% of the population on the planet. That for me is an abuse of power, its an abusive use of the Internet.
People buy these devices, fundamentally because of the Internet in your pocket … The Internet we know now and we will in the future. Now people may like one device or OS better than others. Totally natural.
"All these amazing things -- this is a breakthrough internet communicator built right into iPhone." Reviewing the features... "Incredible new technology for entering text, a real browser on the phone, we can zoom in, Google maps, Widgets... it's the internet in your pocket for the first time ever. You can't really think about the internet without thinking about google. From google what we have on the phone is google search built right into the browser and google maps. We've been working closely with them.. it's my pleaseure now to introduce Dr. Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO" - Steve Jobs.
Last edited:
My point is if Apple deserves a cut because all this wouldn’t exist without them then where does it end? An iPhone would be pretty worthless without Wifi or 5G.
The internet didn’t build the iPhone but the iPhone would be pretty worthless if it didn’t have internet.
I'm a customer, not a developer, but it is really hard for me to understand why Apple should have to change anything. It is their products and their software. Yes, the user that buys them should expect to have a certain level of control over it, but if you buy it, knowing the rules, why complain about it after the fact. If you want a device that doesn't have Apple's rules, buy that device. If one doesn't exist, build one. If this is such a big issue that you need to legislature for, surely there is demand enough for a competing product to warrant its creation. I just don't understand it and I really want to.
Unbelievable. No matter what Apple does, there will be vocal minority that lives to complain about it.
Aren’t the majority of apps free — either by serving ads or offering in-app purchases? Who is subsidizing who?
There will be further changes — but I don’t think it will be what some developers suspect. In the end, just as in the old days of boxed software, the barrier for entry may be higher, and there will be fewer independent developers — all because the goose was squeezed by frivolous lawsuits and constant complaints.
I still don’t think most small independent developer are unhappy with the original arrangement. They will be collateral damage in all of this.
Aren’t the majority of apps free — either by serving ads or offering in-app purchases? Who is subsidizing who?
There will be further changes — but I don’t think it will be what some developers suspect. In the end, just as in the old days of boxed software, the barrier for entry may be higher, and there will be fewer independent developers — all because the goose was squeezed by frivolous lawsuits and constant complaints.
I still don’t think most small independent developer are unhappy with the original arrangement. They will be collateral damage in all of this.
It's not supposed to. Some Apple will just win on their own merits. This was simply to address the finding of one specific investigation and allowed just the activity that many "reader" apps were already employing or on the cusp of employing and Apple was already looking the other way on enforcing.
The market decided that these were the predominate network endpoints. As a consumer you are free to take back control by using any network device you can install a web browser on and accessing almost all of the same commercial and public services without any undue restriction from Google or Apple. Don't like the open web? Like the native app experience better? Then what you are saying is that Apple and Google have earned their place by developing superior IP that appeals to both consumers and developers. That is kind of how the free market works.
Last edited:
To paraphrase “Sam Axe”, “You know developers, a bunch of bitchy title girls!”
as someone else noted on a similar thread, just wait to see how they react when the new rules end up being a bonanza…for pirates and hackers. And Apple will be the one taking the heat again, particularly for hacked systems.
as someone else noted on a similar thread, just wait to see how they react when the new rules end up being a bonanza…for pirates and hackers. And Apple will be the one taking the heat again, particularly for hacked systems.
Billy Connolly summed this up perfectly many years ago.I would imagine many of the same developers thought it was unfair when their parents wanted them to pay a part of the mortgage after they finish college and came back to live at home.
What developers a don’t realise is not everyone is like them and want android.
And that many Apple customers like myself will simply not buy their app/subscription through their external link.
And that many Apple customers like myself will simply not buy their app/subscription through their external link.
Equality of opportunity is not the same as equality of outcomes. I see the day coming where all developers *are* treated equally in outcome which will be a detriment to small developers and customers, but an advantage to larger developers.
If they want access to the Apple platform, developers will be paying for every. little. thing.
And then the complaining will start again.
If they want access to the Apple platform, developers will be paying for every. little. thing.
And then the complaining will start again.
I guess it depends on which app it is.
Do you trust Netflix or Spotify? You could only subscribe on their website. They removed App Store subscriptions years ago. And their apps didn't even have a link... you had to find their website yourself!
Now... they can have a link.
I think this recent announcement will mostly affect big media subscription services. It's not gonna change the way smaller apps charge for upgrades or IAP.
I hear you, though. I wouldn't want people directed to some developer's website to buy gems or jewels for some crappy game. That could be ripe for scams.
But since this only applies to reader apps... I don't foresee many problems.
You are free to not use an app if they want to send you to their website, though.
In other words, use Apple infrastructure to gain a foothold and pay. Then when your app is successful use Apple infrastructure for free? Really?
3.1.3(a) "Reader" Apps: Apps may allow a user to access previously purchased content or content subscriptions (specifically: magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, and video). Reader apps may offer account creation for free tiers, and account management functionality for existing customers.
From: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#reader-apps
Which is essence of antitrust laws….harms to consumer.I see.
So what you're saying is... the old way kept prices low for consumers.
But because Apple is now being forced to change their policies after all these lawsuits and anti-trust investigations... prices will rise.
Well crap... maybe we should have left everything the same!
No links to websites... every subscription should flow through the App Store... every developer must pay their 30% cut...
Keep it the same! Right? We gotta protect the consumers!
Right... but there are a lot of people here saying this link to a developer's website won't help the consumer.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(1) Yes. Apple or any other if the regulation path crosses the option of multiple App Stores. If not, than just the App Store. The only reason why we are here talking about the App Store and Google Play is that for different reasons, these are the only available devices 48% of the planet population have to install Internet Clients. Nothing else.
(2) For free? Of course not. I don’t understand your concern honestely. Businesses aren’t using more Apple infrastructure on iOS than they use say Apples own in macOS. As ones business grows, Considering a digital business success, in normal economy suppliers of certain facilities may be replaced by others or for in house solutions. If the solution of the App Store remains competitive for distributing and billing a business app it will for sure be the solution to be opted for … if not … others exist. Apple does this all the time, any business does this. What is not normal, is one be required to either pay for App Store services leave its customers behind on their device of choice, and all the investment done on the creation of is digital services.
Take for instance Apple using Google Cloud to power their App Store (storage or something). One day, Apple might just decide to have that infrastructure in house instead of contracting it to Google. Why such a shock?
(3) Businesses in either case are simply determined to serve their customers that happen to choose one device or the other, best suited in context as per their decision.
The main difference between iOS and Android when compared to the regular functioning of Tier 1 internet enabled devices is not in the businesses using more or less Apple infrastructure. They use the same as with in macOS. But that Apple and Google created an Internet bottleneck on the installation of internet endpoins / clients in the devices used by 48% of the planet population as estimated, taking out of users hand the option to fully choose which one best serve their needs. End-points, fundamental components of a web that is the Internet that when paired with these kinds of bottlenecks of course traffic is to these directed from everywhere for installing the necessary network Clients (apps).
Last edited:
Apple would likely close all marketplaces first including the App Store.
I could imagine Apple instead having every phone include a set of basic free apps, like is done today. And then having an Apple Arcade-like option that would include all installable Apps for a subscription price. This would move from a consignment store model to a cafeteria model ("you can have as much as you want of what we serve.") Apple would dictate the terms, the prices and the offerings.
Lots of people say lots of things….it doesn’t mean it’s true, especially in this day and age.
Netflix works great as a web app, as does spotify. But, they get increased functionality using Apple’s API’s but they don’t want to pay for those.
It’ll end up with Apple licensing certain API’s on a per app and per user basis. Just how Apple licence IP from Qualcomm, Intel, MPEG etc etc.