3 ms·

>Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. today dominate the web and exercise at least the same level of gatekeeping over your visibility to customers as Apple does with

>Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. today dominate the web and exercise at least the same level of gatekeeping over your visibility to customers as Apple does with their app store. That's clearly an exaggeration. Apple's control over the app store is absolute and in combination with the side-loading ban so is their control over the apps users can install on their devices. These restrictions go far beyond protecting users against security or privacy threats if you think of porn for instance. Google/Facebook/Twitter's dominance over the Web is not absolute. You can still publish anything that is legal in your jurisiction. It may not be easy to get found, but that's still a _lot_ more freedom than asking a gatekeeper for permission to publish in the first place. Google/Facebook/Twitter is not the only way to find things on the Web either, and they are not one single company. The Chinese regime cannot simply tell Google or anyone else to take Wikipedia off the Web for showing Taiwan on a map or something. But they can order Apple to take down all secure VPN apps that users could use to read Wikipedia or hand over the iCloud keys of Chinese users, and that's what Apple will do.

snowwrestler 7y ago
Google Search is not operating in China at all, and when they did, they censored search results at the request of the Chinese government. And here in the U.S. the Google story today includes not just the services they provide for free, both also the personal data they collect and correlate. My point here is not whether Google or Apple is better, my point is that since 2010, we have collectively learned that the web is not as open or resistant to surveillance and censorship as it once seemed it would be. Again: there are trade-offs, and some folks look at those trade-offs differently a decade later.
- fauigerzigerk 7y ago
  >my point is that since 2010, we have collectively learned that the web is not as open or resistant to surveillance and censorship as it once seemed it would be. That's undeniably true, but it doesn't mean that anyone exercises "at least the same level of gatekeeping" on the Web as Apple does on Apple devices. And Google operating or not operating in China is beside the point. I'm talking about the structure of the Web, not about Google specifically. That's why I said "or anyone else". No private company owns the Web like Apple owns the only iOS distribution channel.
scarface74 7y ago
And you can publish the same content to the web and it’s viewable on an iOS device...
- fauigerzigerk 7y ago
  If that was true, no one would pay Apple its 30% oligopoly rent. It‘s also not necessarily safe if you consider my Wikipedia example. Apple devices are the perfect censorship vector. And finally it‘s a pointlessly circular argument if we‘re talking about whether or not gatekeeping on the Web is stronger than on iOS.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    Despite all of the whining about the 30%, most money from the App Store is made from pay to win games with in app consumables. You’ll have to hold my beer while I wipe away my tears about all of the money that they have to pay Apple. Surprisingly enough, the whining only happens from geeks who probably don’t even have skin in the game. If developers are so interested in getting from under the 30% tax, where are all of the indy developers who are making money on Android outside of the Google Play store outside of China?
    - fauigerzigerk 7y ago
      The point is that developers would never have started to pay such a large share of revenue to Apple or Google if Web apps were a complete replacement for native apps. Google doesn't make side-loading easy either. It comes with a ton of warnings, but some high profile apps and games have started using it anyway. I didn't mean to start another debate about the obviously dysfunctional market that is mobile app stores though. My point was about the loss of freedom and privacy that results from the side-loading ban.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Like Fortnite? That didn’t work out too well for consumers. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/08/fortnites-android-vulnerability-leads-to-googleepic-games-spat/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/08/fortnites-android-vu...

snowwrestler 7y ago

Google Search is not operating in China at all, and when they did, they censored search results at the request of the Chinese government. And here in the U.S. the Google story today includes not just the services they provide for free, both also the personal data they collect and correlate. My point here is not whether Google or Apple is better, my point is that since 2010, we have collectively learned that the web is not as open or resistant to surveillance and censorship as it once seemed it would be. Again: there are trade-offs, and some folks look at those trade-offs differently a decade later.

fauigerzigerk 7y ago
>my point is that since 2010, we have collectively learned that the web is not as open or resistant to surveillance and censorship as it once seemed it would be. That's undeniably true, but it doesn't mean that anyone exercises "at least the same level of gatekeeping" on the Web as Apple does on Apple devices. And Google operating or not operating in China is beside the point. I'm talking about the structure of the Web, not about Google specifically. That's why I said "or anyone else". No private company owns the Web like Apple owns the only iOS distribution channel.

scarface74 7y ago

And you can publish the same content to the web and it’s viewable on an iOS device...

fauigerzigerk 7y ago
If that was true, no one would pay Apple its 30% oligopoly rent. It‘s also not necessarily safe if you consider my Wikipedia example. Apple devices are the perfect censorship vector. And finally it‘s a pointlessly circular argument if we‘re talking about whether or not gatekeeping on the Web is stronger than on iOS.
- scarface74 7y ago
  Despite all of the whining about the 30%, most money from the App Store is made from pay to win games with in app consumables. You’ll have to hold my beer while I wipe away my tears about all of the money that they have to pay Apple. Surprisingly enough, the whining only happens from geeks who probably don’t even have skin in the game. If developers are so interested in getting from under the 30% tax, where are all of the indy developers who are making money on Android outside of the Google Play store outside of China?
  - fauigerzigerk 7y ago
    The point is that developers would never have started to pay such a large share of revenue to Apple or Google if Web apps were a complete replacement for native apps. Google doesn't make side-loading easy either. It comes with a ton of warnings, but some high profile apps and games have started using it anyway. I didn't mean to start another debate about the obviously dysfunctional market that is mobile app stores though. My point was about the loss of freedom and privacy that results from the side-loading ban.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      Like Fortnite? That didn’t work out too well for consumers. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/08/fortnites-android-vulnerability-leads-to-googleepic-games-spat/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/08/fortnites-android-vu...