Um what? Epic put it back on the google play store due to low downloads as a side loading only game.
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
Right. So the fear of side loading was unfounded. There aren't enough people that side load for a company to justify pulling their app.
I am confused. This proves my point that I was making but you are saying it didn't? Epic pulled Fortnite from the Google Play Store a couple of years ago to bypass the 30% fees. They later brought it back to the Google Play Store due to not getting enough downloads with side loading. My point was people prefer convenience, and will only use the built in stores. And this proves my point. So why are you stating it doesn't help my point when it in fact does?
The damage was already done, because the few months that fortnite wasn't available on the google play store was that many months of users being inconvenienced and a number of them potentially compromising the security of their android devices figuring out how to side load said app.
Meanwhile, apple users never had to contend with such a problem, because Epic simply couldn't pull off this stunt in the iOS App Store to begin with.
In summary, the walled garden ended up offering a better user experience for the end user than the ability to side load.
A popular app being completely unavailable on iOS offers a better user experience?
It’s not available on android either.
My point was that because there was no way to side load apps on iOS, epic wasn’t able to try anything funny back then. People who wanted to play fortnite could access it from day 1 without having to jump through hoops or be inconvenienced in any way.
So I look at these companies and I wonder why anyone would ever want to give them any more power when it’s clear they would only use it to benefit themselves, sometimes at the expense of the end user.
You say that like Apple is some benevolent entity, rather than a giant corporation whose primary objective is to make money for their shareholders. Yeah, they make some great products along the way, but at the end of they day their goal is power and money, just like every other company.
For sure.
Which is why I go back to my earlier post likening Apple to a union which uses us as leverage to extract more favourable terms from the developers.
Unauthorized App Store Cydia Sues Apple for Anticompetitive Behavior
I see buying an iphone as akin to joining a union. Yes, there are some annoying limitations and idiosyncrasies with living in the Apple ecosystem, but as a whole, it gives us customers a collective voice to force app makers to behave. This is the one key reason why I view certain constraints...
forums.macrumors.com
There is benefit to be had for me from Apple having more leverage over developers. In this regard, our interests are aligned at least.
Yeah just like every other company like you said. But companies can have different secondary goals. Apple seems to want to help protect privacy. Think about hospitals. They are actually businesses too. But can't they also have a secondary goal to make people's lives better and help them through health issues?
Google and Facebook seem all about tracking you and getting as much information from you as possible. Apple is doing the opposite. There is no way around preventing a company from knowing ANYTHING about you. But the secure enclave, Log in with Apple, the new privacy "nutritional" style information, and more are all evidence that Apple is trying to help us with privacy. Sure they can't get it right all the time, but it seems that have privacy very high on their secondary goals as a company.
Watch this. Apple has always been focused on quality products. Yes, every company in the world exists to make money. But companies can have other goals too.
How timely, looks like the EU is setting some new boundaries for big tech companies.
EU Introduces Strict Rules on Big Tech Companies to Promote Competition and Protect Users | MacRumors Forums
EU Introduces Strict Rules on Big Tech Companies to Promote Competition and Protect Users | MacRumors Forums
Correct....I’m not sure anybody understands your point because it isn’t a managed device.
The device is yours, free to do as you wish with. The software you licence from Apple and agree to use it as they describe the second you turn it on, or you can return it.
You are free to install whatever you want on there, but Apple isn’t obligated to make it easy for you. I’m not sure why this is so hard to understand.
Same as why we don’t see a Sony OS on an LG TV. It’s your TV, microwave, washing machine. You can do what you want with it but the manufacturer is under no obligation to assist you do so.
What is hard to understand is that Apple prevents you from installing apps that are not in the App Store.
No one has ever inquired about releasing an app on just Android.... if they ask about Android at all.
Truthfully I think Apple’s case is very weak here, if their primary claim is to avoid viruses and protect users. Primarily because they already offer an operating system that lets people choose how they receive software. It’s called MacOS. MacOS also allows this alongside an official App Store. MacOS also has not had security issues and breaches the way its competitors have, to the point where Apple proudly touted that fact in advertisements. I think it’s reasonable to ask why one standard for phones and one standard for computers especially as they are converging both hardware and software wise.
Apple has not touted their freedom from viruses in many years - I don't believe they have done so since before the Mac App Store existed.
Today, Apple ships multiple levels of defense against malware - gatekeeper, app notarization, XProtect and also the Mac App Store.
There have also been defenses which have not been successful on the Mac, such as sandboxing and entitlements. One of the reasons the Mac App Store has not been more successful is that it mandates proper sandboxing and restricts entitlements.
Getting rid of iOS App Store as the primary channel also removes review, which effectively removes restrictions on sandboxing and entitlements. It could mean that that free game you downloaded can read the files from your banking app or history from your chat app. Mechanisms like XProtect will only serve to block such abuses after damage has been done - and in this age of nation states using software like Pegasus for targeted attacks, such abuses are effectively impossible to detect and stop before significant (in some cases life-threatening) damage has been done.
At this point in time more sensitive personal information is stored on the average persons phone than their computer.
Of people I know, I'd say 1 in 10 don't use their computer for anything outside of work/school requirements (gaming being the exception).
100% of their personal day to day transactions, communication, emails, shopping, bookings, photography, banking etc is all exclusively on phone.
.
.
.
.
.
And the majority have no backups.
One of Apple’s competitors that has seen far fewer breaches and malicious trojan apps… is iOS.