U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Another Antitrust Bill That Would Allow Sideloading on iPhone

[vipergts2207]

I want all my apps vetted by Apple. Offer side loading all you want but every app avail in another store must also be avail in the App Store, I’m ok with that compromise.

That’s fine. I don’t know if that would pass muster with regulators, but I’d be fine with that outcome as long they could be priced differently.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Apple's on your side because they are selling you something you want. A device that works, that is secure and looks after your privacy.
The others, Google, Facebook etc don't sell you anything. You are the product.

I'm not quite following why Apple "selling me something I want" = "they are on my side"

Also, it should be noted, plenty of people pay Google for apps and devices and "want them".
Shouldn't Google be "on their side" in that case (using your logic)

Lots of people (not me) love Facebook, irrespective of their business model

 

[Aoligei]

That’s fine. I don’t know if that would pass muster with regulators, but I’d be fine with that outcome as long the could be priced differently.

How exactly will you ver all the app while offering sideloading?

 

[Seoras]

Why, if it’s about my choice, why can’t I choose where to buy my app. Why does the developer get to limit my choice of where to get the app. Why does the developer get more rights than I do.

Developer here. Sorry to burst your little bubble but the App is MY SOFTWARE not yours. Read the user agreement.
You get to use it under license under my terms.
"limiting my choice of where to get the app" limits piracy.
Are you suggesting that all software is fair game and free for anyone to take/copy and use?

 

[koruki]

Apple's privacy and security arguments are valid; but the motivation for making the argument is profit. They want to control the experience to keep extracting their fees.

Apple's publisher fees are a fraction of what fees were for traditional software publishing back in the day. When a publisher would take 50-60%, or even more, for software that was sold in boxes and distributed through retailers. And the retailer still got their cut! Selling a piece of software for $30 and making a couple of bucks for each copy wasn't uncommon. When the App store was first released, that 30% cut was celebrated. And that's what happens. People get used to it, and then want more.

I find myself fairly torn. This is Apple's platform that they've built. Is it a monopoly? Kind of? Except that there really is healthy competition. Consumers can choose excellent Android devices that allow sideloading. Even jailbreaking has significantly lost interest to consumers. Consumers don't appear to be foaming at the mouth to sideload apps; though many would if given the opportunity.

My biggest concern from a consumer standpoint is that all of the businesses demanding "choice" now won't offer it to consumers once one of these goes through. Once Apple can no longer force companies to use the App store for purchases, we may be back to the way things used to be. You had to go to a specific website to buy a specific app and download it. Apps in the app store may actually STOP allowing IAP, and force consumers to another site when you click the button to buy through a third party processor that charges less. Not all apps will do this; plenty will recognize that the convenience of the app store drives up sales. But big apps like Netflix and others will; because there's enough consumer demand that consumers will be willing to go through that extra step. Consumers won't even be given the choice of using the App stores own payment processing.

back in the day it was a very different landscape in terms of updates, pushing version, delivery, hard copies and physical media too though. Times change and the market decides if the price is worth it.

 

[Aoligei]

You can choose not to buy an Apple device.
Plenty of other choices.

It is not like sideloading isn't available? AltStore, 3U Tools, using xCode... All the noise of sideloading makes no sense. I have plenty of Android devices, from Galaxy Nexus to OG Pixel, Pixel 2XL to Pixel 5, from OG Moto X to every generation of Moto G, from Huawei P20 to P40. None of them have malware.

 

[ender78]

A 30% cut of digital goods is ENORMOUS.
There literally are apps and businesses not currently viable or even being created at all due to onerous costs.

Viabilty - they(devs) knew the rules , why start an unprofitable business

Most small devs pay 15% not 30%.

Retail markup is often 50%

 

[Aoligei]

Developer here. Sorry to burst your little bubble but the App is MY SOFTWARE not yours. Read the user agreement.
You get to use it under license under my terms.
"limiting my choice of where to get the app" limits piracy.
Are you suggesting that all software is fair game and free for anyone to take/copy and use?

I don't care about your attitude. No one is focucing you to distribute your software into alternative app store. You are more than welcome not distribute your software in other way.

But what do you make you think that I should not sideload app that not available on app store?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Viabilty - they(devs) knew the rules , why start an unprofitable business

You misread what I meant

I was talking about the opportunity cost of the onerous fees creating an environment where great things aren't even getting off the drawing board as a result.

This becomes hard to measure as it's talking about things that "aren't happening", but it's a very well known concept that onerous fees, high barriers to entry, and the like, tend to stifle innovation and creativity.

 

[ender78]

Well, it’s my choice as a consumer to use the platform of my liking. iOS is a good platform but it could be so much better and tbh opening up iOS would be the best development for the platform in the past 5 years. Talking about innovation…

Name 5 apps with mass market adoption that exist on Android where innovation is as you imply limitless and don’t exist on iOS

 

[vipergts2207]

How exactly will you ver all the app while offering sideloading?

That’s Apple’s problem lol. They’d be the ones insisting on having every app available on their platform.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Most small devs pay 15% not 30%.

They have to do silly stuff to get there (keeping customers hooked for a year, etc) -- total BS from Apple

Retail markup is often 50%

Old school retail markup is irrelevant to this type of situation

 

[ender78]

if any of you guys in this forum are defending apple in this case, can you at least do a solid and admit whether or not you are financially invested in apple? thank you.

no vested interest in Apple. If this argument is about choice, then I want to buy all my iOS apps through Apple. If the software dev wants to sell them on their own store I’m ok with that as long as the don’t limit any functionality that is permissible in the Apple ecosystem.

 

[ender78]

just because YOU'RE happy with it, does not mean that others are as well. macrumors is a pretty biased forum. many of the people here are "apple fanboys" and many are also financially invested into this company. however, when you ask the majority of apple users about their opinion, many of them will be pro-sideloading. because sideloading is optional from the user's perspective, i don't see why it shouldn't be allowed.

The majority of users wouldn‘t have the slightest clue as to what sideloading is or understand the implications.

 

[Aoligei]

no vested interest in Apple. If this argument is about choice, then I want to buy all my iOS apps through Apple. If the software dev wants to sell them on their own store I’m ok with that as long as the don’t limit any functionality that is permissible in the Apple ecosystem.

If the argument is about choice, then I should able to get app from anywhere I want. You don't have to enable sideloading, you can knlu boy all your iOS app through Apple. So what are you aruging?

 

[gsurf123]

The people who want side-loading after they bought an iPhone knowing it did not, are no different from the person who moves into a neighborhood and then wants to change everything about it to suit their needs.

 

[Orange Bat]

I’m a small independent app developer. I like the App Store for a number of reasons. 1. Free access to Apple’s APIs. If I had to pay for API calls, I’d be done as a developer. 2. The App Store takes care of all the overhead For me. I only need to worry about the basics, such as graphics and descriptions for marketing, and Apple takes care of the rest. And 3. I don’t have to do crazy marketing to get apps discovered. The App Store provides a one-stop shop for ALL apps on iPhone. I have as much chance to be successful as a huge company as long as my product is good.

Is the App Store perfect? No. 15% is still a bit much to take from a little guy like myself. After all, I have to do ALL the work on the apps themselves, plus all of the updates. Once I upload an app and get it on the App Store, Apple does very little from that point on. Also, I still have to pay $99 a year to be a developer. The Android Store charges me a $25 fee to upload the app once, then I never have to pay again. Like others have mentioned, having to compete with scam apps really sucks, and Apple can be slow to approve updates. Still, I like the App Store as is. I won’t be leaving any time soon no matter what.

 

[ender78]

You are still free to keep buying from the App Store, the Government is not forcing you to side load. And if you say that developers will not sell anymore thru the App Store, then that would be only proof that alternative app stores and payment systems in mobile devices is really a priority to the consumer. If you have so much faith in what the Apple user wants, then surely side loading won't even be used and the App Store would remain the same... right?

No it only proves that the other App store is a better deal for the developer. At no point is there any evidence that side loading will be a cheaper or more secure environment for the consumer. If side loading is permitted I only support it if I have the option of also buying it on the App Store.

 

[turbineseaplane]

At no point is there any evidence that side loading will be a cheaper or more secure environment for the consumer.

There’s no evidence that it won’t be either…

 

[turbineseaplane]

Still, I like the App Store as is. I won’t be leaving any time soon no matter what.

That’s great!

This is all about enabling more choice for how and where you distribute

You might grow a lot and change your mind and expand out to self distribution in addition to the App Store…nice to have choices for how to run your business!

 

[turbineseaplane]

The people who want side-loading after they bought an iPhone knowing it did not, are no different from the person who moves into a neighborhood and then wants to change everything about it to suit their needs.

No. We are simply advocating for change to open up choice and flexibility.

Is it ok to have desires change and express those changes and hope to shape the narrative for what could be?

How else can change happen?

 

[CthuluLemon]

This is going to force Apple to stop investing heavily into the App Store. They should tell these congressmen the unvarnished truth. If they decrease profitability of their platform they will stop investing in it or start charging all developers for access whether their app is free or not based on the number of Apple API calls per month. Many of the small developers will close and the Epics and Microsofts of the world will be able to charge what they want because they won’t have to compete with the little guys anymore. It’ll be like the old days for them. Just what they want.

What’s Apple going to do, go back to hardware being their primary moneymaker? It’s been clear since they stopped announcing iPhone hardware sales that they aren’t making as much money on hardware as they used to. If they stop investing in the App Store, even with regulations, they have little else to fall back on for the short term.

A big chunk of Apple’s 80% profit margin on services are likely coming from the App Store; Tim Cook’s shortsighted leadership, favoring massive short term profits over mitigating long term risk, has left Apple with few options but to fight these regulations tooth and nail and hope that a big enough country or regional block doesn’t succeed. If Tim Cook can’t thread the needle and protect Apple’s bottom line, shareholders will be looking for a new CEO. It’s precarious being the CEO of the world’s most valuable company, you need to keep it at the top or you’re gone.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

I’m a small independent app developer. I like the App Store for a number of reasons. 1. Free access to Apple’s APIs. If I had to pay for API calls, I’d be done as a developer. 2. The App Store takes care of all the overhead For me. I only need to worry about the basics, such as graphics and descriptions for marketing, and Apple takes care of the rest. And 3. I don’t have to do crazy marketing to get apps discovered. The App Store provides a one-stop shop for ALL apps on iPhone. I have as much chance to be successful as a huge company as long as my product is good.

Is the App Store perfect? No. 15% is still a bit much to take from a little guy like myself. After all, I have to do ALL the work on the apps themselves, plus all of the updates. Once I upload an app and get it on the App Store, Apple does very little from that point on. Also, I still have to pay $99 a year to be a developer. The Android Store charges me a $25 fee to upload the app once, then I never have to pay again. Like others have mentioned, having to compete with scam apps really sucks, and Apple can be slow to approve updates. Still, I like the App Store as is. I won’t be leaving any time soon no matter what.

But why should apple get 30% of an netflix sub when they don't host any content?
30% of an in game cash when they don't host the game?

 

[TheMacDaddy1]

When not if. It will happen.

 

[Zaft]

Also wrong, I use that same Logitech MX Keys for my MBP, iPad Pro and PC, no messages or warnings.

Software keyboards… swiftkey, gboard and so forth.