If I was the NSA, I would find groups creating jail breaks and make them “an offer they can’t refuse”. This might end up quite hilarious if the Chinese or the Russians were quicker
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.
Unauthorized App Store Cydia Sues Apple for Anticompetitive Behavior
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And it gets especially tricky when Apple’s increasingly competing against those same developers. Apple’s both the referee and a player in the “game” of the App Store. How the hell is that fair?Apple’s not potentially being punished for there not being a third option. It would be for using their market position to act in an anti-competitive manner. If Apple wasn’t being anti-competitive there wouldn’t be anything to punish. It doesn’t matter that Android is an alternative. The problem for Apple is that they have to capability of single-handedly blocking developer access to over half of US smartphone consumers if developers don’t bend to their every whim.
Apple made ProtonMail add in-app purchases, even though it had been free for years
Apple strongarmed another independent email appwww.theverge.com
I don't understand the comments that seem to suggest that Apple deserves its monopoly on the app store just because they made the phone. This would be like if your LG TV could only watch LG content or content sold through the LG store giving LG a cut $$ of everything. Its literally no different. Apple is doing you no favors by stifling completion and demanding pay for other peoples work. Should Samsung get money every time you want to stream a movie? I look at how much cheaper games are on PC when compared to Xbox and PS. That's because there are a number of digital stores for PC but only one on PS & Xbox. At least with the latter two you can still buy physical media but I doubt for much longer. The real money is having the only store and no competition. With so many people who seem to be happy with Apple locking out competition it probably won't be long before TV manufactures start controlling their content. I mean if the people are happy paying them more then why not?
"Hold My Beer" - Tim Cook.
MacOS is increasingly becoming locked to the app store. For example - finder extensions can only be released through the Mac App Store.
It is by no means locked like iOS, but it is slowly going in that direction.
That works for user-choice, but it doesn't work for people delivering services through apps.
If I'm a pizza delivery firm, or a taxi company, or an e-scooter rental, or a bank, or a shop; I have to release an Apple version of my app.
This means I can't avoid Apple's rules and regulations.
For some companies - that's a major problem. For example see how Apple banned vaping apps - throwing companies like Juul under the bus (in terms of their bluetooth controller app)
Because even the op agreed to the terms and conditions of the iPhone OS.
Apple has the right to limit use of their intellectual property as they see fit.
They do a similar thing with macOS actually, limiting it being used on VMs at AWS.
Also, iOS is not a monopoly. You can switch to Android, which has a much broader user base.
People ultimately want a safe, secure and convenient means of purchasing and downloading apps. I fail to see how third-party app stores are going to ensure that. Apps like Facebook are obviously not going to play by Apple's rules the instance they are allowed to circumvent them. I could write an entire essay about how I feel that Apple isn't clamping down on companies like Facebook hard enough, and how I wish Apple would just acquire an app like Lockdown (an on-device tracking blocker) and preinstall it on all Apple devices and bring their tracking to a grinding halt.
In the end, it's a means to an end. I like the apple ecosystem not so much because it is locked down, but because of the benefits that its locked-down nature brings. This to me is worth far more than whatever benefits an open ecosystem brings, and I dare say that the drawbacks are definitely not worth it.
Look at the state of the google play store and it's not hard to see what Apple has gotten right with their own approach. Apple has aggregated the best spenders on their platform. This means more developers on board, creating iOS-only apps like Apollo, Fantastical, Overcast, Notability, Lumafusiom, you name it. I couldn't side load these apps onto an android device even if I wanted to simply because they aren't available.
The inability to side load apps means a lower incidence of piracy. Developers earn more on iOS as a result, which means they support the iOS App Store more. It's a virtuous cycle.
At the same time, being able to side load apps hasn't stopped Epic from trying to play punk with the Google Play Store either. They just want to earn more money and they will burn the App Store model to the ground to achieve their aims. These companies are not your friend.
I can understand Apple being cautious with novel concepts like game streaming apps, because these have the potential to upend the entire App Store model and threaten the viability and vitality of the App Store. I don't pretend to know what the right middle ground ultimately is; I will leave it to Apple to figure it out.
Some have argued that Apple should allow developers to use their own payment systems as well, so they don't have to pay Apple that 30% cut. Again, think about what this means for the consumer. Prices are not going to drop. Apple lowering the commission rate to 15% for developers earning under $1 million has shown that. Apple earns less, which means that they have less incentive to continue investing as much as they have in maintaining the App Store. The Google Play Store is proof of that. It's a step back for the end user.
I can get wanting to access certain apps that are otherwise not allowed in the App Store, like google stadia. My concern is that while the initial thrill of finally getting that one app may taste like honey on your lips, the long-term repercussions of such a move will leave a bitter, lingering aftertaste in your mouth for the rest of your (and our) life.
Take your time, read (again) the article, please. That was not the message it was conveying.
We are talking software, not hardware. Legally there is a very big difference.
The iOS and it's frameworks are still owned by Apple, even if the physical device is owned by you. You can add physical stuff to your phone as you see fit, but Apple as the owner of the OS (they granted you a license under specific terms) can and will control how it's used.
As mentioned earlier, if you don't like the terms, don't buy the device.
You comments here make it clear that you don’t understand the purpose of anti-trust laws. The take it or leave it policies and attitudes of players with concentrated market power you described here is is one of the things that anti-trust laws are designed to prevent.
Last edited:
Then this is where anti-trust goes too far. Apple is not doing what Microsoft did years ago. I do not see Apple approaching developers to try to convince them to not develop their software. Or actively go out of their way to block them for their own competing products like what Microsoft did with Netscape.
We can ONLY agree to this if people can agree that an Xbox can play PS5 games. After all, that is essentially the same thing. Microsoft has a monopoly on Xbox games.
People are starting to get so whiney lately. Sometimes things are locked down. Why is it SO BAD that Apple has these features that make their platform the preferred choice for many people. If you do not like it, do not buy an iPhone. Why is this so flipping difficult. I really do not like Microsoft's consoles, but they sometimes have nice exclusives that I need to buy their console to play. Is that wrong?
And someone pointed this out earlier, no you do not NEED to release an iPhone app to be successful. I know several businesses that just have Android apps and are very successful. It is not a fundamental right that you need to make an iPhone app.
You don’t see where Apple blocked developers from having their own competing products? Did you miss where Apple wouldn’t allow streaming gaming apps??
The comparison to Xbox and PlayStation isn’t the same on its face. Which company controls over half of the gaming market? Where’s the duopoly? There are multiple healthy platforms/competitors in the gaming market. PlayStation, Xbox, Nintendo, Windows, and macOS at a minimum. You can include Android and iOS for lighter levels of gaming as well. In smartphone OS’s there’s only two choices, iOS or Android.
While it’s not a fundamental right to develop an iOS app, courts and regulators may decide Apple is taking it too far with their current gatekeeping policies or that their terms for participation are unfair or onerous.
I do not see Apple have a competitor to xCloud. Do you? Apple Arcade is not Game Streaming. There is nothing preventing Microsoft brining Halo to the App Store OUTSIDE of their streaming service (obviously not as good quality as Xbox but they can still bring Halo to the App Store).
Apple prevents game streaming because it poses a potential security risk or violates ToS. A game could be released a month from now that bypasses app review and it violates the ToS in some way. Too adult maybe?
Those comments are mainly from people that rush to defend Apple from any / all criticism across most subject matter.
Apple doesn’t have streaming gaming, but the mechanism of delivery is rather beside the point. Gaming is gaming, whether the content is processed locally or processed on a server and streamed. The TOS may be one the very things that gets Apple slapped down.
No the delivery IS the reason why cloud gaming is not allowed on Apple. That is the ONLY reason. There can be a game released a month from now, and the library is increased. But it bypasses App Review DUE to the delivery method. Apple has stated this, xCloud is allowed if they put each game on the App Store. So delivery IS the reason.
The comment was in reference to Apple hindering competitors. You said that because Apple doesn’t stream games they aren’t a competitor. Just because they use a different mechanism of delivery doesn’t mean xCloud and Apple Arcade aren’t competitors.
No, I’m saying if you don’t like what Apple does you shouldn’t be able to force them BY LAW to give you what you want.
And after you buy your phone you are free to do with it as you will. Paint it purple. Jail break it. Throw it in a blender. But Apple shouldn’t be compelled to help you do so, nor should it be required to support you after the fact.
Apple isn’t preventing choice, you have the choice to choose a different phone OR to get an iPhone and deal with its features and limitations YOURSELF. Neither Cydia nor any other App Store has a right to be on the iPhone. Choice doesn’t mean “give me whatever I want!”
No, you don’t understand anti-trust laws. It’s to prevent a lack of competition through monopoly power, not compell companies to do whatever a subset of vocal customers demand.
But go ahead, find legal precedent for forcing a company with, checks the numbers, 39% market share (🤣) that has fallen under anti-trust punishment. I dare you.
And LG could 100% do that. It’s a perfectly legal business model. If LG chose to do that consumers would have a choice, but a TV from literally any other TV maker who wasn’t following that model.
Restaurants do it all the time, prohibiting you from bringing in outside food for example. Wal*Mart doesn’t allow Safeway or Target to sell their products in Wal*Mart stores and requires you to pay using Wal*Marts checkout system. If you don’t like it you eat somewhere else or shop somewhere else. Console makers have, for decades, allowed their devices to play only approved content. On the digital only versions of next gen PlayStations the only source of games is the PlayStation store. It only becomes illegal if LG has a monopoly or near monopoly. Feature phones and pre-iPhone smartphones often sold limited apps and content through device specific stores. If I wanted a game on my SonyEriccson flip phone it was buy from their (limited) selection or nothing.
Heck Apple could axe the App Store entirely. They could stop allowing ANY 3rd party apps. It would probably be a bad idea business wise but they could do it.
Choice doesn’t mean a company has to give you whatever you demand. It means you have to have options. And you do. Tons of Android phones at a huge array of price points. And even a handful of other phones. Choose the phone whose features you like best. But that might mean not getting something an other phone offers. Such is life.
15 U.S. Code § 45 - Unfair methods of competition unlawful; prevention by Commission | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)
Show me where the word monopoly is used once. However, you will find the phrase "unfair methods of competition" used throughout. Also, your market share figure must have come from an outdated source. Apple controls over 50% of the US smartphone market.
• Smartphone OS U.S. market share 2020 | Statista
First, I don’t think they should have to allow third party stores, but I do see the merits of the argument. And the argument that it’s our phone is valid. My biggest issue with these lawsuits is the hypocrisy of it all. For decades Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo have all enacted similar practices. They made a platform and then had their own virtual stores to buy games. None of these companies allowed third party stores to distribute software on their platforms, yet for some reason apple is the goose that everyone wants to cook. it’s not really that much different from brick and mortar stores. I can’t buy Greenwise products at Whole Foods, or get that Mainstays plunger from target. This will be interesting to follow, but I don’t think the outcome will really satisfy anyone.