4 ms·

> Was waiting for app stores to be tried on anti competition law. The Apple App Store is clearly a lot different from the Play Store; since almost all Android

> Was waiting for app stores to be tried on anti competition law. The Apple App Store is clearly a lot different from the Play Store; since almost all Android devices (and all Play-capable devices controlled by Google) support sideloading and alternate app stores.

cattlemansgold 6y ago
Agreed. I see no issue in in google’s situation for 2 reasons: 1) I am able to, by default, download apps from other app stores and marketplaces (albeit at my own risk) 2) The Play Store is valuable to me because I know that the apps I download there have been verified and are safe to use (at least in theory). In Apple’s case, I think the argument is that their operating system is not open to other hardware vendors, so they don’t need to allow alternative app stores. I don’t think it’s anti-competitive that Mazda doesn’t allow me to choose the navigation software in my car’s HUD. If I wanted different navigation software, I should have considered that before purchasing a Mazda.
- cageface 6y ago
  Cars and phones play very different roles in our lives. Phones have become the way we access the internet and the internet is increasingly at the center of everything so the considerations for regulation are different.
  - microcolonel 6y ago
    The idea that regulations and laws may need to change is separate entirely from whether the App Store is considered anti-competitive under current legislation. Though I guess in the EU this amounts to “basically anything the court wants”. Much as I don't feel much for these companies, I also feel like these suits are often just shakedowns.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Sure but Android phones are just as good and do everything iPhones do and more. Anyone who thinks an open store is important can simply buy an android phone.
- DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
  > I don’t think it’s anti-competitive that Mazda doesn’t allow me to choose the navigation software in my car’s HUD. I'm going to side with Richard Stallman on this one: I own the car - it's my property - why can't I install my own firmware onto the stock Qualcomm ARM computer powering the the car's infotainment system? My dad's books on car maintenance from the1960s-1970s have guides on installing your own tachometer as cars back then were often sold without them - why should I be forbidden from installing a custom widget to an LCD dashboard today?
  - q3k 6y ago
    From a legal perspective: You're not forbidden - jailbreaking your own hardware is perfectly legal. It's unsupported by Apple, however. From an ethical perspective: I fully agree this should be easier.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
    I tend to side with RMS as well here, but I see things a bit differently: You're free to install an alternative infotainment system that allows customization. Mandating that manufacturers develop a way for you to safely/securely flash their devices to run your own software just doesn't seem like a good idea. The small percentage of people who want this force everyone else to pay for it due to the increased operational costs to develop it. And it's not trivial. I've shipped consumer electronics. We thought long and hard about how to make it possible for users to run their own software. It's hard enough to figure out a method that doesn't sacrifice user safety somehow (can you RMA the device after? Can we validate you voided the warranty? Can you resell your device and tarnish the brand? Can you resell devices with malware? Can you exceed regulatory limits (e.g. radio broadcasting power)?) Not to mention the effort to actually develop and maintain this method of updating, exposing it (adding a USB port?), testing it, etc. It's a huge cost. Now, companies like Apple are interesting because they're actively spending to prevent that from happening -- it might be operationally cheaper for them to leave the flood gates open.
- izacus 6y ago
  Except that the equivalent isn't Mazda disallowing you to change your OS, but it's Mazda vetting every single destination you're allowed to drive to, getting a cut of every fuel purchase, getting a cut of every Walmart purchase you do while grocery shopping and preventing you from driving into areas that Mazda corporate doesn't like. (Also, ironically, Mazda's firmware is rather easy to hack :) ) Remember that Apple restricts the content you're allowed to see on the device via many channels.
tonyedgecombe 6y ago
On the other hand Apple doesn't have the marketshare of Google.
- wayneftw 6y ago
  In the US, the iPhone has very close to a 50% market share. A majority market share is not strictly required to be considered a monopoly. Power over an entire market is the quality that is under consideration. Can you have a successful app business in the US without being in Apple’s app store? I doubt it. The rules are different in the EU and so is Apple’s market share over there, but since I live in the US I’m hoping that the Apple monopoly will be broken up over here as well.

cattlemansgold 6y ago

Agreed. I see no issue in in google’s situation for 2 reasons: 1) I am able to, by default, download apps from other app stores and marketplaces (albeit at my own risk) 2) The Play Store is valuable to me because I know that the apps I download there have been verified and are safe to use (at least in theory). In Apple’s case, I think the argument is that their operating system is not open to other hardware vendors, so they don’t need to allow alternative app stores. I don’t think it’s anti-competitive that Mazda doesn’t allow me to choose the navigation software in my car’s HUD. If I wanted different navigation software, I should have considered that before purchasing a Mazda.

cageface 6y ago
Cars and phones play very different roles in our lives. Phones have become the way we access the internet and the internet is increasingly at the center of everything so the considerations for regulation are different.
- microcolonel 6y ago
  The idea that regulations and laws may need to change is separate entirely from whether the App Store is considered anti-competitive under current legislation. Though I guess in the EU this amounts to “basically anything the court wants”. Much as I don't feel much for these companies, I also feel like these suits are often just shakedowns.
- zepto 6y ago
  Sure but Android phones are just as good and do everything iPhones do and more. Anyone who thinks an open store is important can simply buy an android phone.
DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
> I don’t think it’s anti-competitive that Mazda doesn’t allow me to choose the navigation software in my car’s HUD. I'm going to side with Richard Stallman on this one: I own the car - it's my property - why can't I install my own firmware onto the stock Qualcomm ARM computer powering the the car's infotainment system? My dad's books on car maintenance from the1960s-1970s have guides on installing your own tachometer as cars back then were often sold without them - why should I be forbidden from installing a custom widget to an LCD dashboard today?
- q3k 6y ago
  From a legal perspective: You're not forbidden - jailbreaking your own hardware is perfectly legal. It's unsupported by Apple, however. From an ethical perspective: I fully agree this should be easier.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
  I tend to side with RMS as well here, but I see things a bit differently: You're free to install an alternative infotainment system that allows customization. Mandating that manufacturers develop a way for you to safely/securely flash their devices to run your own software just doesn't seem like a good idea. The small percentage of people who want this force everyone else to pay for it due to the increased operational costs to develop it. And it's not trivial. I've shipped consumer electronics. We thought long and hard about how to make it possible for users to run their own software. It's hard enough to figure out a method that doesn't sacrifice user safety somehow (can you RMA the device after? Can we validate you voided the warranty? Can you resell your device and tarnish the brand? Can you resell devices with malware? Can you exceed regulatory limits (e.g. radio broadcasting power)?) Not to mention the effort to actually develop and maintain this method of updating, exposing it (adding a USB port?), testing it, etc. It's a huge cost. Now, companies like Apple are interesting because they're actively spending to prevent that from happening -- it might be operationally cheaper for them to leave the flood gates open.
izacus 6y ago
Except that the equivalent isn't Mazda disallowing you to change your OS, but it's Mazda vetting every single destination you're allowed to drive to, getting a cut of every fuel purchase, getting a cut of every Walmart purchase you do while grocery shopping and preventing you from driving into areas that Mazda corporate doesn't like. (Also, ironically, Mazda's firmware is rather easy to hack :) ) Remember that Apple restricts the content you're allowed to see on the device via many channels.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago

On the other hand Apple doesn't have the marketshare of Google.

wayneftw 6y ago
In the US, the iPhone has very close to a 50% market share. A majority market share is not strictly required to be considered a monopoly. Power over an entire market is the quality that is under consideration. Can you have a successful app business in the US without being in Apple’s app store? I doubt it. The rules are different in the EU and so is Apple’s market share over there, but since I live in the US I’m hoping that the Apple monopoly will be broken up over here as well.