3 ms·

Yes, if their convenience comes at a cost to my convenience. I pay a premium for my iPhone and various other Apple devices. The fact that there is only one App

Yes, if their convenience comes at a cost to my convenience. I pay a premium for my iPhone and various other Apple devices. The fact that there is only one AppStore, controlled by a single party is a feature for me that I am happy to pay for. If there's is more than one party which can install apps on my device, I have to worry about which party to trust etc. The same applies to payments.

robert_foss 6y ago
If you trust the AppStore, just use that. If other people want to use other sources, that shouldn't affect you.
- Steko 6y ago
  It certainly affects you if: (1) Apple, seeing drastically reduced app revenue, stops investing as much in the app store, dev tools, etc. Or increases their hardware prices; (2) third party stores pay for exclusive apps; (3) malware is installed by people with your contact info and communications; (4) even if no intent to use, the malware risk is there and you're a few drunk clicks from losing your bank account.
  - robert_foss 6y ago
    #1 Apple makes enough money. If they don't want to support their app store, than that is choice they're making. #2 Frankly this is much like the situation we're in now. Only that we there are no other options. This eventuality is surely less bad than the current actuality. #3 Malware is already installed by people you are in contact with. And nothing prevents a 3rd party store from having equally rigorous testing as Apple. #4 You're a few drunk swipes away from emptying your credit card today.
    - Nebasuke 6y ago
      Sure, I can understand those arguments in favour of having a 3rd party store, but that's not what the parent is arguing, nor what you said in your original post. All of these do affect the user. You think it would be a better ecosystem, but some users would not agree it's a strictly better approach. I for one don't.
- Nebasuke 6y ago
  I'm not saying I agree with Apple's approach, but it does affect you. Just by having alternative sources, developers might choose to only be available on those sources, whether it's for a better revenue cut or because of their principles. See for example what's going on with exclusives for Epic store and Steam. Whether that's a good or bad thing is a different question.
GVIrish 6y ago
The issue at hand here is even for a company that has an app in the App Store that exposes no way to buy a subscription in the app at all, Apple will force you to put in the Apple IAP option, of which they will take a 30% cut. And yet, they make exceptions for big and powerful companies like Netflix or Google.
- ryanwaggoner 6y ago
  Source? I’ve been an iOS dev since 2010 and I haven’t seen this happen. I’m not saying it hasn’t, especially in isolated incidents, but I’d like to see some examples.
  - GVIrish 6y ago
    That is literally the issue that Hey is having right now. They have provided no means of subscribing inside the app, but now Apple is telling them that they'll remove the app from the App Store if they don't add Apple IAP. Meanwhile, Basecamp has operated the same way for years. The rationale Apple gave was that Basecamp is primarily a business app, but if that is the case, how does Gmail get away with the same thing? Meanwhile Netflix, Gmail, Uber, and a couple of other big apps don't use the Apple IAP system.
    - ryanwaggoner 6y ago
      This sounds exactly like the isolated example i was talking about. Apple is clearly in the wrong here, and this will get resolved. There are tens of thousands of apps out there that don’t offer IAP that you need a subscription purchased elsewhere to use. Again, Apple is in the wrong here, but this is not a good example of a widespread pattern imo. Not something worth an antitrust case over.

robert_foss 6y ago

If you trust the AppStore, just use that. If other people want to use other sources, that shouldn't affect you.

Steko 6y ago
It certainly affects you if: (1) Apple, seeing drastically reduced app revenue, stops investing as much in the app store, dev tools, etc. Or increases their hardware prices; (2) third party stores pay for exclusive apps; (3) malware is installed by people with your contact info and communications; (4) even if no intent to use, the malware risk is there and you're a few drunk clicks from losing your bank account.
- robert_foss 6y ago
  #1 Apple makes enough money. If they don't want to support their app store, than that is choice they're making. #2 Frankly this is much like the situation we're in now. Only that we there are no other options. This eventuality is surely less bad than the current actuality. #3 Malware is already installed by people you are in contact with. And nothing prevents a 3rd party store from having equally rigorous testing as Apple. #4 You're a few drunk swipes away from emptying your credit card today.
  - Nebasuke 6y ago
    Sure, I can understand those arguments in favour of having a 3rd party store, but that's not what the parent is arguing, nor what you said in your original post. All of these do affect the user. You think it would be a better ecosystem, but some users would not agree it's a strictly better approach. I for one don't.
Nebasuke 6y ago
I'm not saying I agree with Apple's approach, but it does affect you. Just by having alternative sources, developers might choose to only be available on those sources, whether it's for a better revenue cut or because of their principles. See for example what's going on with exclusives for Epic store and Steam. Whether that's a good or bad thing is a different question.

GVIrish 6y ago

The issue at hand here is even for a company that has an app in the App Store that exposes no way to buy a subscription in the app at all, Apple will force you to put in the Apple IAP option, of which they will take a 30% cut. And yet, they make exceptions for big and powerful companies like Netflix or Google.

ryanwaggoner 6y ago
Source? I’ve been an iOS dev since 2010 and I haven’t seen this happen. I’m not saying it hasn’t, especially in isolated incidents, but I’d like to see some examples.
- GVIrish 6y ago
  That is literally the issue that Hey is having right now. They have provided no means of subscribing inside the app, but now Apple is telling them that they'll remove the app from the App Store if they don't add Apple IAP. Meanwhile, Basecamp has operated the same way for years. The rationale Apple gave was that Basecamp is primarily a business app, but if that is the case, how does Gmail get away with the same thing? Meanwhile Netflix, Gmail, Uber, and a couple of other big apps don't use the Apple IAP system.
  - ryanwaggoner 6y ago
    This sounds exactly like the isolated example i was talking about. Apple is clearly in the wrong here, and this will get resolved. There are tens of thousands of apps out there that don’t offer IAP that you need a subscription purchased elsewhere to use. Again, Apple is in the wrong here, but this is not a good example of a widespread pattern imo. Not something worth an antitrust case over.