Man, I don't think anyone could possibly have illustrated HobeSoundDarryl's point better than you just did, i7guy.
Bravo.
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.
Why does anyone oppose third-party app stores?
- Thread starter SegNerd
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Bravo.
Moving the goalpost?
So now the measure of consumer experience impact is based on how "major" an app is? To continue with my Plants vs Zombies 2 example: I already own this app and have in-app purchases. If EA chooses to move exclusively to the Epic store how does my purchase transfer, how does my IAP transfer? Why should I now be forced to open an account with Epic, a brand I despise and have no use for today, to continue using an app I already own? That is not a good a customer experience. I will not have "choices" they will be made for me.
No, it is not. Perhaps you don't care, I do.
LOL, so who becomes the arbiter of what apps are "better off" in alt-stores?
Your license for PvZ2 doesn't change - you would be as entitled to continue using it and your in-app purchases if EA moved to the Epic store as you are today.
Your whole example is predicated on the mistaken idea that Apple gives you some guarantee that you will continue to be able to download and re-install your app and get continuous updates forever at no cost because you "own" your app. You don't "own" your app, you have a limited license to use your app, and either Apple or EA can change your ownership status at their leisure. The app store that happens to host whatever the current version is does not affect this.
As TikTok users found out this week (and no, they weren't the first nor will they be the last), Apple providing some kind of "ownership protection" of your app is a foolish assumption to make.
There are a number of reasons why the Apple/Google app store might not be the best place to host certain apps. One example in particular that has always been troublesome is mobile clients to certain warehouse management systems that I implement and support. The app version has to stay aligned with the server version of the WMS. There have been numerous instances where I have had a client complain that their mobile scanner stopped working because the app was auto-updated and was thrown out of alignment with the server. The only real reliable solution to this is to side-load the client app (which means iOS is generally never used for this anymore) and disable the store altogether.
As is already the case in the PC and Mac world, it is likely that exactly two kinds of apps will be "forced" onto alternate app stores - content/streaming services and games.
It’s true. As a paying customer and shareholder I have my viewpoints. But it becomes a matter of trolling the forums to focus on the posters themselves rather than the forum topic.
What @HobeSoundDarryl conveniently left out were the critics where nothing too small is up for a good dose of hyperbole.
Now in a user created thread in the tech forum, this type of thinking : “apple fan and shareholder”=bootlicking is entirely too pervasive.
Now if apple did 3rd party app stores, not the enterprise ones, I wonder if they would look different than what has been implemented in the EU.
Incorrect, I would need to have an account on the Epic store in order to continue using it or to re-install it. You are making some assumptions here that I am not sure will play out.
That was not my point. Certainly apps can be abandoned, discontinued or banned, etc.
My point was that I should not be forced to sign up, and thereby give my personal and payment information to another company to continue to use something I already own. At the very least I should be able to maintain my previous purchases from the same store I bought them from originally.
Fair enough, but that seems a very specialized case. I am not a fan of employers wanting folks to have work apps installed on their personal devices. Wouldn't a company issued device, with updates centrally controlled, fix this? I am a bit out of the loop with how iOS devices can or cannot be controlled centrally by an employer.
I see a lot of folks that have had things like Whatsapp "forced" upon them by an employer. In the alt-store world that person now needs to have a Meta Store account, even if they don't want or use any other Meta services. Granted, no one should fall for this or be coerced in this manner but it happens every day. Teams is another great example.
Agreed, games and content/streaming services will almost certainly leave the app store. Games will leave for the likes of Steam, Epic, Nintendo or perhaps new players. Content/Streaming services will leave for their own sites.
I think you might be underestimating the rest however. The likes of Meta services will likely bail as well as they will no longer be held to the privacy scorecard requirements. Actually I see almost every major brand, from Starbucks to your health insurance app leaving for their own sites for just that reason, privacy, or the lack thereof as well as driving traffic to their own web site versus the app store.
Personally, I would love it if the Mac world was just like the iOS world in terms of the app store. Everything in one place = #chefskiss
I see want to buy all my apps through Apple. I don’t want to set up accounts in countless different places, and I don’t what exclusivity agreements etc that will force me to use them.
If as part of the developer agreement Apple could require any app on a third party store also be listed on the App Store (even if at a reasonably higher price) then I wouldn’t mind as much. But I suspect that would be strengstens verboten by the EU.
But at the very minimum, insisting that Apple allow third party stores and then not allowing Apple to charge something like the CTF to be compensated for their development and maintenance of iOS and the APIs that allow developers’ apps to function is, in my opinion, nationalizing Apple’s intellectual property and should be vehemently opposed.
If as part of the developer agreement Apple could require any app on a third party store also be listed on the App Store (even if at a reasonably higher price) then I wouldn’t mind as much. But I suspect that would be strengstens verboten by the EU.
But at the very minimum, insisting that Apple allow third party stores and then not allowing Apple to charge something like the CTF to be compensated for their development and maintenance of iOS and the APIs that allow developers’ apps to function is, in my opinion, nationalizing Apple’s intellectual property and should be vehemently opposed.
This is such a lazy argument. I for one, own zero individual stocks of any company - I’m opposed to the DMA because I don’t think a government that tried to mandate micro-usb as the charging port for all smartphones should be designing tech companies’ products, software, and business models for them.
I'm personally fine with a CTF of some form for the reason you stated
But I don't think it should scale with sales or revenue numbers of a given company/App
It should either be a flat fee or have some scaled up tiers if it makes sense to compensate Apple if additional costs are incurred due to the scale of a given App (I honestly can't think of such a situation, but it's reasonable to consider it)
I’m open to putting some sort guardrails around a CTF. To be clear, my preference is Apple chooses how to get compensated, the free market reacts, and the government doesn’t stick its nose in at all. I don’t want third party stores. They’re not going to lower prices, they’re going to give more money to big developers by treating iOS like a public utility.
Despite the eye-rolling above about “Apple fans want whatever Apple wants”, that’s truly how I think it should work - iOS is Apple’s property and no one is forced to buy an iPhone or develop for it. Same thing for any company - unless you’re a monopoly, the government shouldn’t be designing your products for you or telling you how your business models should work without a very good reason (which in my opinion, the EU hasn’t come close to meeting). If Apple wants third party app stores and sideloading, that’s great. If they don’t, that’s great too - their property, their choice.
But if government is going to get involved, then they should get involved to least extent possible - not go hog wild. The reason you don’t see me railing about Japan’s 3rd Party App Store law is it limits itself to that topic and doesn’t say things “Apple can’t charge developers separately for iOS’ development and maintenance” or “Apple has also had to let AirDrop work with Android for free” or “Apple has to give Samsung smartwatches access to features Apple give Apple Watch for free”.
No, but that doesn’t matter. Or am I not allowed to have opinions on other countries’ laws?
If it makes you feel better my brother is an EU citizen and feels the same way I do.
Your brother should do a better job when voting and convincing others to vote how he feels.
Very simple: Because Apple opposes them.
Actually, I don’t care about third-party app stores. Apple should simply allow side-loading without an app store. And if their app sandboxing isn’t secure, then, well, please fix that.
Last edited:
Honestly, with all the ads presented to me when I open App Store, and with the bad UI for things I actually want to do in the app store, I don’t really feel it has my best interests at heart.
“On android…,” “With Android…,” “Android,” “Android,” “Android!"
Yes, Android offers more customization, multiple app stores, yada, yada, yada. There’s your choice. There’s your competition. iOS doesn’t need to be Android because there already is an Android. Those of us choosing Apple want to because we want/like what they’re offering/providing. Maybe we like both and have devices involving both. This attitude of forcing everything to be the one thing we err I like is selfish at best.
The EU and US politicians getting involved for consumer protection and advocacy. 😆😆😆 Nah! They’re just the ones ham-fisting the d***s during the p**sing contest. For example, remember that Epic Games BS? Epic - Greedy Apple taking 30% is what forces us to have high prices. … Gotcha! Suckers!
When it comes to capitalism/consumerism (and politicians, etc), we’re really just selecting the lesser of the evils.
…I forgot to add a joke. This reminds me of a scene from Deep Blue Sea.
clip.cafe
Yes, Android offers more customization, multiple app stores, yada, yada, yada. There’s your choice. There’s your competition. iOS doesn’t need to be Android because there already is an Android. Those of us choosing Apple want to because we want/like what they’re offering/providing. Maybe we like both and have devices involving both. This attitude of forcing everything to be the one thing we err I like is selfish at best.
The EU and US politicians getting involved for consumer protection and advocacy. 😆😆😆 Nah! They’re just the ones ham-fisting the d***s during the p**sing contest. For example, remember that Epic Games BS? Epic - Greedy Apple taking 30% is what forces us to have high prices. … Gotcha! Suckers!
Of course not.
When it comes to capitalism/consumerism (and politicians, etc), we’re really just selecting the lesser of the evils.…I forgot to add a joke. This reminds me of a scene from Deep Blue Sea.
'There's doctor Jim Whitlock, the most brilliant man ever! He's pissing into the wind! How...' - Deep Blue Sea
Janice Higgins: There's doctor Jim Whitlock, the most brilliant man ever! Russell Franklin: He's pissing into the wind! How brilliant can he be? Janice Higgins: You'll see!
clip.cafe
Fully agreed. And it’s okay to advocate for one’s chosen lesser evil to become even less evil according to one’s preferences. Saying “just switch to Android” isn’t a real choice, it’s just bad in different ways.
I’m fine with that too
On macOS we call that “installing software”
I did it twice this morning. It was a very edgy and “dangerous” morning
😂
Why does anyone oppose third-party app stores?
Sounds like, for some of us at least, OP answered their own question.
I oppose third party app stores (and side loading) because I have been tech support for entirely ignorant people.
Literally people who will believe any YT crap. Next thing you know they have installed something, MITM'ed everything on their phone and their bank accounts are ripped off. This happened to a family member on Android because they were tricked into installing an app which was going to make them magic crypto sky money.
If they introduce an extensive human competence test and issue a license card for "not a complete dummy" and you have to present that before doing it, then I am fine with it.
Literally people who will believe any YT crap. Next thing you know they have installed something, MITM'ed everything on their phone and their bank accounts are ripped off. This happened to a family member on Android because they were tricked into installing an app which was going to make them magic crypto sky money.
If they introduce an extensive human competence test and issue a license card for "not a complete dummy" and you have to present that before doing it, then I am fine with it.
Agreed, and I would further qualify by modifying your statement: "It’s only" large "developers for whom one App Store might not be the best model." The app store as it exists now is a huge boon to small developers. The constraints give them needed guidance and the 30% marketing charge is much less than what it would cost small developers to market themselves.
Yeah I feel that way about USA POTUS, but sometimes voting fails to give us what we prefer.
Voting didn't fail, you just didn't get enough people to vote with you.
While he has an opinion on it, I imagine competition regulation ranks somewhere after “which day of the week garbage is collected” for my brother in terms of importance and impact on his candidate selection (Although he hasn’t even had an election to vote in since he became an EU citizen so not exactly sure what previous poster’s point is other than apparently people shouldn’t have an opinion that a law is bad, even if it impacts them, if they don’t live in the jurisdiction).
In fact, despite my very strong opinions on appropriate tech regulation, in the recent US election I voted for the candidate who was significantly less likely to enact my preferences when it comes to Apple, the EU, competition regulations, etc. because other issues were significantly more important to me. I guess you could say I was faced with a duopoly and determined which candidate better fit my needs because I realized I couldn’t have my cake and eat it too.