11 ms·

Pavel Durov wants a law to make Apple allow iPhone users install other app store

124 points by vvpvijay 6y ago

elcomet 6y ago
Yes. Apple should not be in position to destroy a business, by removing their app from the app store whenever they want.
- ryanlol 6y ago
  Should [insert retail business here] be in a position to destroy a business by removing a product from their shelves whenever they want? Why is software special?
  - harrisonjackson 6y ago
    The difference here is that you can buy [insert product here] from a different retailer or directly from the business.
    - ryanlol 6y ago
      That’s only the case if the business chooses to only make [insert product here] available on iOS.
  - GlitchMr 6y ago
    If a retail store removes a product from their shelves, you still have alternatives - selling your product in other stores, providing mail order, and so on. With Apple App Store, there is no alternative. Your iOS application cannot be distributed without Apple's approval.
    - pwinnski 6y ago
      That will be the legal argument in court: is Apple's iOS like a specifically grocery chain that controls 20% of stores, and customers can easily go to another? That will be Apple's position. It seems clear that it's not, since I can easily bounce from store to store, and it's much more complicated (though by no means impossible) to switch mobile platforms. The other position also seems extreme: defining the scope of the market as "iOS users" would result in forcing Apple to make room in their store for everyone and everything, as if it weren't possible to seek alternatives at all. It's not an easy issue, but both starting positions seem extreme.
    - ryanlol 6y ago
      > With Apple App Store, there is no alternative There is google play store, huawei app gallery, amazon app store and so on.
      - elcomet 6y ago
        These are not alternatives.
        ryanlol 6y ago
        Why not?
        elcomet 6y ago
        I was talking about iPhone users. They have no alternative to the apple app store.
        ryanlol 6y ago
        But there are alternatives to iPhones.
    - ajharrison 6y ago
      Considering the fact that, you know, they built the damn thing, it's entirely up to them to decide what goes in and out.
      - elcomet 6y ago
        Not if you care about fair competition, which is essential for free markets.
    - elcomet 6y ago
      One retail stores doesn't have about 50% of market (I don't know the real numbers) like Apple does. Also, the app you built was specifically for apple. You cannot sell it anywhere else.
      - ryanlol 6y ago
        > One retail stores doesn't have about 50% of market (I don't know the real numbers) like Apple does iOS market share is less than 15% > Also, the app you built was specifically for apple. You cannot sell it anywhere else. Sounds like the app developer is taking a deliberate risk while doing so. Why do they need to be protected?
        elcomet 6y ago
        > iOS market share is less than 15% iOS has 25% share worldwide. And in the USA, where most customers will be for most startups, it has 58% market share.
  - bradknowles 6y ago
    Walmart controls what goes on the shelves at Walmart. If they take your product off the shelf, that’s entirely up to them. If Walmart was your only market where you bothered to put your product on their shelves, then that’s your fault.
Mindwipe 6y ago
Durov is correct, but this is a terribly written article.
skrowl 6y ago
They have anti-trust lawsuits pending in multiple countries that will also force this once they resolve. It's obviously monopoly bundling. Literally every other modern OS allows you to install apps from multiple sources, including Android.
- gameswithgo 6y ago
  android allows is but its hidden away behind a setting and discouraged. in practice it is almost the same system, very few people have a big enough product that they can make money sideloading it. fortnite may be the only example
  - cookieswumchorr 6y ago
    as an expat you need this all the time, to have specific apps for two locations, including government apps, commute apps, even retail bonus apps, they all have those idiotic geographical limitations, and are often not to be found on common APK sites. So you need a friend with the "right" location setting to extract and send you the APK. Troublesome, but at least with Android its possible to do so.
    - commoner 6y ago
      Aurora Store is a FOSS Google Play app store client that can spoof the device model, language, and location. It does not a require Google Play Services or a Google account, and it might work for your use case. https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.aurora.store/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.aurora.store/
      - cookieswumchorr 6y ago
        great tool, thank you!
  - realusername 6y ago
    Even Fortnite gave up on distributing it independently and came back to the Play Store. That shows you how unfair those practices are, even the most well-known game in the world could not make it. I'm sure the failure of distributing Fortnite independently will be a strong example against Google when the anti-trust lawsuit will inevitably come.
dane-pgp 6y ago
I wonder how quickly Apple would start to restrict APIs so that certain apps can't even be written, making it moot whether the app is available from other app stores or not. Presumably there are APIs that Safari has access to that other browsers written as apps wouldn't be able to access. This approach could be extended so that streaming audio APIs could only access certain approved domains (which doesn't include any of Spotify's).
- ClikeX 6y ago
  Already happening. All the other browsers for iOS are literally just wrappers for Safari.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  > I wonder how quickly Apple would start to restrict APIs so that certain apps can't even be written, making it moot whether the app is available from other app stores or not. There's precedent against this in US v. Microsoft Corp.
- ajconway 6y ago
  Not just presumably, it’s literally written in their documentation. It’s not possible to develop a modern browser for iOS.
HunterWare 6y ago
There are already several different alternatives to iOS that a customer can get if they want a different app store. What he is really saying is that as a vendor he wants to force me as a customer to deal with a looser security model so that he can more easily sell to me. If I wanted that I would have chosen a different phone. But on the flip side, it’s helpful that now I know I never want a product of theirs... choice. =)
- tgv 6y ago
  To me it looks like financial interest packaged in vague claim of freedom, too. Yes, 30% is ridiculous, that's what you could really call an Apple tax, but arguments such as "Russian startups fail to make money by paying 30% to Apple" are equally ridiculous. It's just about his game platform, and the money it would have made.
  - HunterWare 6y ago
    It’s not cheap, but on the other hand you get a lot. They handle the billing, credit card fees, returns, reviews, the site, bandwidth, updates, uptime (reliability ain’t cheap), security, and 10 other things I’m not thinking of. Oh, and the full updated toolchain and dev environments... Let’s also recognize that effectively the devs are paying some for the platform, just like the users are when they buy the phones. We all are paying in because it’s better (for us), otherwise go elsewhere... I would. You as a dev just create a simple parked webpage for your app and you are done. So many barriers to entry are just dissolved. At no upfront cost to the developer. That’s huge. I think the many many business that prefer to be on this environment, and always have, speaks to the value of that 30%. Maybe 30% is a little high, it’s really hard and subjective to say. But it’s not crazy... there is a lot of value provided for that 30%.
    - heavyset_go 6y ago
      > They handle the billing, credit card fees, returns, reviews, the site, bandwidth, updates, uptime (reliability ain’t cheap), security, and 10 other things I’m not thinking of Bandcamp does all of this and more, including selling physical merchandise, and only takes 15% of the sale price for digital goods, and 10% for physical merchandise. > Oh, and the full updated toolchain and dev environments.. Developers have privilege of paying Apple $99 each year to develop and release iOS and macOS software.
a2tech 6y ago
Why would anyone do that? I mean what kind of customers are going to install a 2nd app store then buy apps through it? Those app stores are going to be full of shady marginal apps. Without a leavening of 'good' 'trust worthy' apps, what credit card processor is going to handle their transactions?
- mmastrac 6y ago
  I would consider it. I specifically use Android because I have the freedom to install whatever kind of app I like. In my case I've had to sideload Netflix because it won't run on a device with an unlocked bootloader (annoying). This would actually make me far more interested in running iOS.
- ballenf 6y ago
  I would. I have a couple apps on my phone that are no longer in the app store due to policy changes at Apple. One is an old version of AdGuard which was essentially an on-device pihole. The other was an internet radio tuner which was pulled for reasons unknown. Until recently you couldn't purchase books in the Kindle app. I'd have happily downloaded a non-broken version from Amazon. There are many examples of apps with strong safeguards that aren't allowed in the apple app store.
- ajconway 6y ago
  Could be those unfortunate users who reside in one of the “forbidden” countries or regions. Of course, those countries are unlikely to be able to force Apple into opening up their platform.
- rgovostes 6y ago
  Simple. As soon as a competing store is available that takes a 20% cut (or has less onerous rules about in-app purchases, etc.), developers will move to that store to make more money. Users will follow.
  - jedieaston 6y ago
    I feel like you could just as easily say "Simple. As soon as Google changes their cut to 20% for Android-exclusive apps, developers will move to that store to make more money. Users will follow". They won't. Users won't leave the walled garden, just as people on Android didn't leave it for Fortnite (the most popular game in the world at the time). The App Store comes with the phone and is safe, has customer support and nearly no malware. Any other App Store would require multiple extra steps to install, along with a bunch of "please don't" prompts that Apple would build in to make sure that the user knows what's happening (just like what happens on macOS with unsigned software). It would end up being too confusing for the masses, and they'd just find an alternative that was willing to sit in the App Store (or the nightmare, not use the app at all and go unhappy). Amazon already tried this exact thing on Android, where the barriers are a lot lower. They've never had success with their app store outside of their first-party devices. Why? Because it's too dang hard, and I'm willing to pay an extra buck for Minecraft if I don't have to track it down in another app and worry about malware coming through the wall. I'm all for a switch to install unsigned software, but only for development stuff. The App Store serves as a good barrier for 99% of users who just need to turn on their phone and use the darn app. The other 1% just need Apple to put a hidden switch to disable the protections ala csrutil in macOS and we'll be fine.
bcardarella 6y ago
With this type of pressure along with the anti-trust pressure I would think Apple would prioritize PWA experiences on iOS as their relief valve on the App Store monopoly.
- dreen 6y ago
  They have recently announced they wouldn't support many of the APIs needed/useful for PWAs edit: I was a wrong in thinking they severely limited PWAs, they still allow Service Workers although with a 7-Day Cap on All Script-Writeable Storage. Not as bad as I thought.
  - dreen 6y ago
    Why downvote? I would be happy to be wrong
    - pwinnski 6y ago
      I didn't downvote, but probably because of "needed/useful for PWAs," which seems to be incorrect.
  - rgovostes 6y ago
    These are the APIs they declined to implement: https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-declined-to-implement-16-web-apis-in-safari-due-to-privacy-concerns/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-declined-to-implement-16... Most of them involve access to peripherals (USB, Serial, HID, NFC, Bluetooth, MIDI), sensors (magnetometer, proximity, ambient light), and device state (battery status, memory pressure, network information). Several of these are not even available to native applications on iOS. Yes there are categories of apps that require a few of these, but certainly the majority do not require any.
- rgovostes 6y ago
  The funny thing is that in iPhone OS 1, Apple only supported web apps, which could be (and still can be) saved to the home screen. The App Store didn't exist. The full desktop class web browser was a major feature of the iPhone. That was clearly the company's vision for the platform. Developers clamored for a native API, which they got the next year.
beamatronic 6y ago
Apple could do the following: When rejecting apps, still put them in the App Store, but with a Rejected label. And under Settings, add a toggle “Allow installation of Rejected apps”. Then make it so you can find them in the App Store only if this toggle is enabled, and you search by the app’s exact name. Finally, force the user to acknowledge “Yes I’m sure.... Yes I’m really REALLY sure”.
- tempodox 6y ago
  > and you search by the app’s exact name. Seeing how catastrophically bad search is on the App Store, this wouldn't work most of the time. Apple would have to make search usable first.
- skinnymuch 6y ago
  It is too frequent that I know an app’s name that is either generic or not popular. Sometimes it takes a while to find the app. Apple hasn’t fixed search in over a decade. I can’t see them fixing it any time soon, unfortunately.
Batman8675309 6y ago
Doesn't exactly come as news that Apple has Ios in an iron grip. They might not have a monopoly, but they certainly have a level of control that Android doesn't.
- coldtea 6y ago
  >Apple has Ios in an iron grip iOS is their own product. Every company has its own products on an "iron grip", as well as controlling who gets to partner with them (and e.g. sell something on their platform).
  - mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
    Windows is Microsoft own product. Anyone can run anything on it without anyone's permission.
    - coldtea 6y ago
      That's because Microsoft allows it, and (b) Microsoft has a monopoly on their market (not on the "Windows market", but like 98% on the whole Home/Enterprise PC space) and abused it so they were forced to open up. If Microsoft had just a small share of the Home/Enterprise market with Windows, they'd could close it in any way they want, same way the game companies do for their consoles or Apple for iOS.
      - mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
        I think the answer is much simpler: at the time Windows was created, no one in their most sadistic totalitarian dream could have imagined such evil as an app store.
hiccuphippo 6y ago
Related, in Europe they are making laws to make app stores give reasonable explication 30 days prior to removing games from the store and to add more transparency to rankings: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2020-07-13-european-union-sets-limits-on-platform-madness https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2020-07-13-european-u...
DeonPenny 6y ago
Even if you could do this I doubt it would change. They could do so many engineering things to prevent it. They could change the CPU architecture and prevent you from uploading to any other services or using dev tools. They could do what google did and make certain apps rely on a services app that is managed by the store as a dependency. Theres to many options when the people building the product are opposed to the idea.
- benologist 6y ago
  There are entities big enough to challenge Apple if they were forced to accommodate alternative app stores but obstructed them in practice, like GOG, Steam, Google, Microsoft etc.
piffey 6y ago
Why couldn't Apple do this but place requirements on the additional app stores. They must conform to Apple mandated code signing, follow APIs it designs for app installation and permissions management, must provide an email obfuscation layer for accounts and payments, and all binaries must run through an approved AV before installation. Would check most of the boxes for remaining Apple-ish. No reason allowing a second App Store means letting all hell break loose on the system. Personally don't see the need for an additional App Store outside of surveillance. Would rather see legislation on protecting developers and consumers instead of thinking letting random, untrusted code be installed by a 3rd party on a device always on your person would be good for anyone.
- pjc50 6y ago
  > Why couldn't Apple do this but place requirements on the additional app stores They wouldn't get the 30% cut.
- guessbest 6y ago
  I think Apple loses money on the app store policing app privacy and content even with a 30% cut. If they had to do it for 3rd parties app stores without the financial benefit, I wonder what impact that would have to app turnaround time (back up to 2 weeks+). Eventually, a third party app store may end up with iOS anti-virus and malware software like on Android as well as much of the malware just getting through. I suspect counterfeiting will go up as well like on Android.
  - rgovostes 6y ago
    The App Store generated $15bn in profit last year for Apple. Fortnite alone made them more than $300k per day. They definitely aren't losing money on it.
    - guessbest 6y ago
      I haven't kept track of the profits of the Apple App Store, but I was remembering when it made them $3bn in one year and with the overhead after keeping 1/3 of that on their %30, they called the App Store a loss center that helped them sell iPhones and iPads. I think this reluctance to run the App Store carries over to macOS, which is why I assume they are merging it. The macOS App Store doesn't sell macs so they are likely going to remove it like they did with Ping and iTunes. If the app store generated $54.2bn in revenue in 2019, then Apple only keeps about $16.25bn assuming a 30% cut. I can see why they would want to expand that in to the macOS now, but I don't think they are willing to part with that to a third party like Google or Amazon, as they could dominate them on their own platform.
harrisonjackson 6y ago
With enterprise ios app development, there is already a mechanism built into the apple dev ecosystem to develop and distribute apps that can be installed from any website on any number of devices after the device owner grants permission. Currently the TOS to join the enterprise development program are extremely restrictive but these could be updated to allow a better (IMO) distribution model. I don't want to see a 3rd party app store gain popularity on iOS but would love for the current TOS for enterprise program to be expanded. This should also open in-app purchases to happen without Apple being involved. I'd love to drop support for apple/google in-app purchases and just use stripe for our website and inside our apps. One set of billing models and webhooks to worry about.
ajharrison 6y ago
No thank you.
bryanmgreen 6y ago
Not a fan of this idea, but I would support “marketplaces” which could be like public playlists on Spotify for companies or influencers who want to share what apps they use. Could bake in referral code tracking to apps so developers know who is sending them business.
awinter-py 6y ago
yes and more generally, we should tightly regulate when hardware vendors are allowed to exclusively bundle their own software permitting hardware sellers to control what you install on it isn't just an apple issue -- see also john deere, nest, sonos. The right to repair movement includes a surprising number of farmers.
pankajdoharey 6y ago
I personally think this would lead to piracy of App Store apps. Restrictive App ecosystem protects consumers from installing apps that maybe steal their financial information but also protect developers from getting their apps pirated like the Android ecosystem. There is a reason why the app payouts on iOS are so high even though android has a much larger market share of mobile devices. I dont want to see sites like apk4free on iOS ecosystem.
- solarkraft 6y ago
  I personally think that this is mostly unrelated, since very few people sideload on Android (also due to a less restrictive Play Store policy) and Apples curated store would remain a trusted source.
  - pankajdoharey 6y ago
    If side loading isn't the issue here then what is? Also why are there more than 300 Android App stores worldwide just for side loading apps https://www.wandera.com/third-party-app-stores/ https://www.wandera.com/third-party-app-stores/ There must be a significant market. It seems Android App side loading is a $17.5 Billion Leak which means a number of people do download apps from these apps stores. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2018/02/02/app-publishers-lost-17-5b-to-piracy-in-the-last-5-years-says-tapcore/#426e83c67413 https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2018/02/02/app-pub...
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - adminu 6y ago
      From the Forbes article you cited: "While most people get apps from official sources such as Google Play or the App Store, there are hundreds of third-party app stores around the planet, especially in China, where Google Play cannot operate. As a result, Android, in particular, has many third-party app stores." I think, your argument does not hold when put in the correct context. Also, it is 17.5$ Billion within 5 years, to put a time frame on it.
anaxag0ras 6y ago
> Speaking at the panel discussion with Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and representatives of the IT industry in Innopolis Wait, wasn't Durov in bad terms with the Russian government and exiled?
- mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
  Apparently they made a truce, Russia stopped blocking Telegram recently.
gumby 6y ago
But the majority mobile OS, Android, allows this already, and always has. There is only one player that controls its own app store, Apple, with about 20% of the market (Less in 20q1 but that’s a special case). Seems like phone buyers are voting with their feet so why would such a law be required? Mkt share numbers from https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share... or https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-share-of-apple-iphone/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-sha...
mtunad 6y ago
The success of Progressive Web Apps is what we need rather than a new application store. App stores will eventually try to monopolize and kill the business when they want.

124 points by vvpvijay 6y ago

Yes. Apple should not be in position to destroy a business, by removing their app from the app store whenever they want.

ryanlol 6y ago
Should [insert retail business here] be in a position to destroy a business by removing a product from their shelves whenever they want? Why is software special?
- harrisonjackson 6y ago
  The difference here is that you can buy [insert product here] from a different retailer or directly from the business.
  - ryanlol 6y ago
    That’s only the case if the business chooses to only make [insert product here] available on iOS.
- GlitchMr 6y ago
  If a retail store removes a product from their shelves, you still have alternatives - selling your product in other stores, providing mail order, and so on. With Apple App Store, there is no alternative. Your iOS application cannot be distributed without Apple's approval.
  - pwinnski 6y ago
    That will be the legal argument in court: is Apple's iOS like a specifically grocery chain that controls 20% of stores, and customers can easily go to another? That will be Apple's position. It seems clear that it's not, since I can easily bounce from store to store, and it's much more complicated (though by no means impossible) to switch mobile platforms. The other position also seems extreme: defining the scope of the market as "iOS users" would result in forcing Apple to make room in their store for everyone and everything, as if it weren't possible to seek alternatives at all. It's not an easy issue, but both starting positions seem extreme.
  - ryanlol 6y ago
    > With Apple App Store, there is no alternative There is google play store, huawei app gallery, amazon app store and so on.
    - elcomet 6y ago
      These are not alternatives.
      - ryanlol 6y ago
        Why not?
        elcomet 6y ago
        I was talking about iPhone users. They have no alternative to the apple app store.
        ryanlol 6y ago
        But there are alternatives to iPhones.
  - ajharrison 6y ago
    Considering the fact that, you know, they built the damn thing, it's entirely up to them to decide what goes in and out.
    - elcomet 6y ago
      Not if you care about fair competition, which is essential for free markets.
  - elcomet 6y ago
    One retail stores doesn't have about 50% of market (I don't know the real numbers) like Apple does. Also, the app you built was specifically for apple. You cannot sell it anywhere else.
    - ryanlol 6y ago
      > One retail stores doesn't have about 50% of market (I don't know the real numbers) like Apple does iOS market share is less than 15% > Also, the app you built was specifically for apple. You cannot sell it anywhere else. Sounds like the app developer is taking a deliberate risk while doing so. Why do they need to be protected?
      - elcomet 6y ago
        > iOS market share is less than 15% iOS has 25% share worldwide. And in the USA, where most customers will be for most startups, it has 58% market share.
- bradknowles 6y ago
  Walmart controls what goes on the shelves at Walmart. If they take your product off the shelf, that’s entirely up to them. If Walmart was your only market where you bothered to put your product on their shelves, then that’s your fault.

Mindwipe 6y ago

Durov is correct, but this is a terribly written article.

skrowl 6y ago

They have anti-trust lawsuits pending in multiple countries that will also force this once they resolve. It's obviously monopoly bundling. Literally every other modern OS allows you to install apps from multiple sources, including Android.

gameswithgo 6y ago
android allows is but its hidden away behind a setting and discouraged. in practice it is almost the same system, very few people have a big enough product that they can make money sideloading it. fortnite may be the only example
- cookieswumchorr 6y ago
  as an expat you need this all the time, to have specific apps for two locations, including government apps, commute apps, even retail bonus apps, they all have those idiotic geographical limitations, and are often not to be found on common APK sites. So you need a friend with the "right" location setting to extract and send you the APK. Troublesome, but at least with Android its possible to do so.
  - commoner 6y ago
    Aurora Store is a FOSS Google Play app store client that can spoof the device model, language, and location. It does not a require Google Play Services or a Google account, and it might work for your use case. https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.aurora.store/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.aurora.store/
    - cookieswumchorr 6y ago
      great tool, thank you!
- realusername 6y ago
  Even Fortnite gave up on distributing it independently and came back to the Play Store. That shows you how unfair those practices are, even the most well-known game in the world could not make it. I'm sure the failure of distributing Fortnite independently will be a strong example against Google when the anti-trust lawsuit will inevitably come.

dane-pgp 6y ago

I wonder how quickly Apple would start to restrict APIs so that certain apps can't even be written, making it moot whether the app is available from other app stores or not. Presumably there are APIs that Safari has access to that other browsers written as apps wouldn't be able to access. This approach could be extended so that streaming audio APIs could only access certain approved domains (which doesn't include any of Spotify's).

ClikeX 6y ago
Already happening. All the other browsers for iOS are literally just wrappers for Safari.
heavyset_go 6y ago
> I wonder how quickly Apple would start to restrict APIs so that certain apps can't even be written, making it moot whether the app is available from other app stores or not. There's precedent against this in US v. Microsoft Corp.
ajconway 6y ago
Not just presumably, it’s literally written in their documentation. It’s not possible to develop a modern browser for iOS.

HunterWare 6y ago

There are already several different alternatives to iOS that a customer can get if they want a different app store. What he is really saying is that as a vendor he wants to force me as a customer to deal with a looser security model so that he can more easily sell to me. If I wanted that I would have chosen a different phone. But on the flip side, it’s helpful that now I know I never want a product of theirs... choice. =)

tgv 6y ago
To me it looks like financial interest packaged in vague claim of freedom, too. Yes, 30% is ridiculous, that's what you could really call an Apple tax, but arguments such as "Russian startups fail to make money by paying 30% to Apple" are equally ridiculous. It's just about his game platform, and the money it would have made.
- HunterWare 6y ago
  It’s not cheap, but on the other hand you get a lot. They handle the billing, credit card fees, returns, reviews, the site, bandwidth, updates, uptime (reliability ain’t cheap), security, and 10 other things I’m not thinking of. Oh, and the full updated toolchain and dev environments... Let’s also recognize that effectively the devs are paying some for the platform, just like the users are when they buy the phones. We all are paying in because it’s better (for us), otherwise go elsewhere... I would. You as a dev just create a simple parked webpage for your app and you are done. So many barriers to entry are just dissolved. At no upfront cost to the developer. That’s huge. I think the many many business that prefer to be on this environment, and always have, speaks to the value of that 30%. Maybe 30% is a little high, it’s really hard and subjective to say. But it’s not crazy... there is a lot of value provided for that 30%.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    > They handle the billing, credit card fees, returns, reviews, the site, bandwidth, updates, uptime (reliability ain’t cheap), security, and 10 other things I’m not thinking of Bandcamp does all of this and more, including selling physical merchandise, and only takes 15% of the sale price for digital goods, and 10% for physical merchandise. > Oh, and the full updated toolchain and dev environments.. Developers have privilege of paying Apple $99 each year to develop and release iOS and macOS software.

a2tech 6y ago

Why would anyone do that? I mean what kind of customers are going to install a 2nd app store then buy apps through it? Those app stores are going to be full of shady marginal apps. Without a leavening of 'good' 'trust worthy' apps, what credit card processor is going to handle their transactions?

mmastrac 6y ago
I would consider it. I specifically use Android because I have the freedom to install whatever kind of app I like. In my case I've had to sideload Netflix because it won't run on a device with an unlocked bootloader (annoying). This would actually make me far more interested in running iOS.
ballenf 6y ago
I would. I have a couple apps on my phone that are no longer in the app store due to policy changes at Apple. One is an old version of AdGuard which was essentially an on-device pihole. The other was an internet radio tuner which was pulled for reasons unknown. Until recently you couldn't purchase books in the Kindle app. I'd have happily downloaded a non-broken version from Amazon. There are many examples of apps with strong safeguards that aren't allowed in the apple app store.
ajconway 6y ago
Could be those unfortunate users who reside in one of the “forbidden” countries or regions. Of course, those countries are unlikely to be able to force Apple into opening up their platform.
rgovostes 6y ago
Simple. As soon as a competing store is available that takes a 20% cut (or has less onerous rules about in-app purchases, etc.), developers will move to that store to make more money. Users will follow.
- jedieaston 6y ago
  I feel like you could just as easily say "Simple. As soon as Google changes their cut to 20% for Android-exclusive apps, developers will move to that store to make more money. Users will follow". They won't. Users won't leave the walled garden, just as people on Android didn't leave it for Fortnite (the most popular game in the world at the time). The App Store comes with the phone and is safe, has customer support and nearly no malware. Any other App Store would require multiple extra steps to install, along with a bunch of "please don't" prompts that Apple would build in to make sure that the user knows what's happening (just like what happens on macOS with unsigned software). It would end up being too confusing for the masses, and they'd just find an alternative that was willing to sit in the App Store (or the nightmare, not use the app at all and go unhappy). Amazon already tried this exact thing on Android, where the barriers are a lot lower. They've never had success with their app store outside of their first-party devices. Why? Because it's too dang hard, and I'm willing to pay an extra buck for Minecraft if I don't have to track it down in another app and worry about malware coming through the wall. I'm all for a switch to install unsigned software, but only for development stuff. The App Store serves as a good barrier for 99% of users who just need to turn on their phone and use the darn app. The other 1% just need Apple to put a hidden switch to disable the protections ala csrutil in macOS and we'll be fine.

bcardarella 6y ago

With this type of pressure along with the anti-trust pressure I would think Apple would prioritize PWA experiences on iOS as their relief valve on the App Store monopoly.

dreen 6y ago
They have recently announced they wouldn't support many of the APIs needed/useful for PWAs edit: I was a wrong in thinking they severely limited PWAs, they still allow Service Workers although with a 7-Day Cap on All Script-Writeable Storage. Not as bad as I thought.
- dreen 6y ago
  Why downvote? I would be happy to be wrong
  - pwinnski 6y ago
    I didn't downvote, but probably because of "needed/useful for PWAs," which seems to be incorrect.
- rgovostes 6y ago
  These are the APIs they declined to implement: https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-declined-to-implement-16-web-apis-in-safari-due-to-privacy-concerns/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-declined-to-implement-16... Most of them involve access to peripherals (USB, Serial, HID, NFC, Bluetooth, MIDI), sensors (magnetometer, proximity, ambient light), and device state (battery status, memory pressure, network information). Several of these are not even available to native applications on iOS. Yes there are categories of apps that require a few of these, but certainly the majority do not require any.
rgovostes 6y ago
The funny thing is that in iPhone OS 1, Apple only supported web apps, which could be (and still can be) saved to the home screen. The App Store didn't exist. The full desktop class web browser was a major feature of the iPhone. That was clearly the company's vision for the platform. Developers clamored for a native API, which they got the next year.

beamatronic 6y ago

Apple could do the following: When rejecting apps, still put them in the App Store, but with a Rejected label. And under Settings, add a toggle “Allow installation of Rejected apps”. Then make it so you can find them in the App Store only if this toggle is enabled, and you search by the app’s exact name. Finally, force the user to acknowledge “Yes I’m sure.... Yes I’m really REALLY sure”.

tempodox 6y ago
> and you search by the app’s exact name. Seeing how catastrophically bad search is on the App Store, this wouldn't work most of the time. Apple would have to make search usable first.
skinnymuch 6y ago
It is too frequent that I know an app’s name that is either generic or not popular. Sometimes it takes a while to find the app. Apple hasn’t fixed search in over a decade. I can’t see them fixing it any time soon, unfortunately.

Batman8675309 6y ago

Doesn't exactly come as news that Apple has Ios in an iron grip. They might not have a monopoly, but they certainly have a level of control that Android doesn't.

coldtea 6y ago
>Apple has Ios in an iron grip iOS is their own product. Every company has its own products on an "iron grip", as well as controlling who gets to partner with them (and e.g. sell something on their platform).
- mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
  Windows is Microsoft own product. Anyone can run anything on it without anyone's permission.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    That's because Microsoft allows it, and (b) Microsoft has a monopoly on their market (not on the "Windows market", but like 98% on the whole Home/Enterprise PC space) and abused it so they were forced to open up. If Microsoft had just a small share of the Home/Enterprise market with Windows, they'd could close it in any way they want, same way the game companies do for their consoles or Apple for iOS.
    - mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
      I think the answer is much simpler: at the time Windows was created, no one in their most sadistic totalitarian dream could have imagined such evil as an app store.

hiccuphippo 6y ago

Related, in Europe they are making laws to make app stores give reasonable explication 30 days prior to removing games from the store and to add more transparency to rankings: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2020-07-13-european-union-sets-limits-on-platform-madness https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2020-07-13-european-u...

DeonPenny 6y ago

Even if you could do this I doubt it would change. They could do so many engineering things to prevent it. They could change the CPU architecture and prevent you from uploading to any other services or using dev tools. They could do what google did and make certain apps rely on a services app that is managed by the store as a dependency. Theres to many options when the people building the product are opposed to the idea.

benologist 6y ago
There are entities big enough to challenge Apple if they were forced to accommodate alternative app stores but obstructed them in practice, like GOG, Steam, Google, Microsoft etc.

piffey 6y ago

Why couldn't Apple do this but place requirements on the additional app stores. They must conform to Apple mandated code signing, follow APIs it designs for app installation and permissions management, must provide an email obfuscation layer for accounts and payments, and all binaries must run through an approved AV before installation. Would check most of the boxes for remaining Apple-ish. No reason allowing a second App Store means letting all hell break loose on the system. Personally don't see the need for an additional App Store outside of surveillance. Would rather see legislation on protecting developers and consumers instead of thinking letting random, untrusted code be installed by a 3rd party on a device always on your person would be good for anyone.

pjc50 6y ago
> Why couldn't Apple do this but place requirements on the additional app stores They wouldn't get the 30% cut.
guessbest 6y ago
I think Apple loses money on the app store policing app privacy and content even with a 30% cut. If they had to do it for 3rd parties app stores without the financial benefit, I wonder what impact that would have to app turnaround time (back up to 2 weeks+). Eventually, a third party app store may end up with iOS anti-virus and malware software like on Android as well as much of the malware just getting through. I suspect counterfeiting will go up as well like on Android.
- rgovostes 6y ago
  The App Store generated $15bn in profit last year for Apple. Fortnite alone made them more than $300k per day. They definitely aren't losing money on it.
  - guessbest 6y ago
    I haven't kept track of the profits of the Apple App Store, but I was remembering when it made them $3bn in one year and with the overhead after keeping 1/3 of that on their %30, they called the App Store a loss center that helped them sell iPhones and iPads. I think this reluctance to run the App Store carries over to macOS, which is why I assume they are merging it. The macOS App Store doesn't sell macs so they are likely going to remove it like they did with Ping and iTunes. If the app store generated $54.2bn in revenue in 2019, then Apple only keeps about $16.25bn assuming a 30% cut. I can see why they would want to expand that in to the macOS now, but I don't think they are willing to part with that to a third party like Google or Amazon, as they could dominate them on their own platform.

harrisonjackson 6y ago

With enterprise ios app development, there is already a mechanism built into the apple dev ecosystem to develop and distribute apps that can be installed from any website on any number of devices after the device owner grants permission. Currently the TOS to join the enterprise development program are extremely restrictive but these could be updated to allow a better (IMO) distribution model. I don't want to see a 3rd party app store gain popularity on iOS but would love for the current TOS for enterprise program to be expanded. This should also open in-app purchases to happen without Apple being involved. I'd love to drop support for apple/google in-app purchases and just use stripe for our website and inside our apps. One set of billing models and webhooks to worry about.

ajharrison 6y ago

No thank you.

bryanmgreen 6y ago

Not a fan of this idea, but I would support “marketplaces” which could be like public playlists on Spotify for companies or influencers who want to share what apps they use. Could bake in referral code tracking to apps so developers know who is sending them business.

awinter-py 6y ago

yes and more generally, we should tightly regulate when hardware vendors are allowed to exclusively bundle their own software permitting hardware sellers to control what you install on it isn't just an apple issue -- see also john deere, nest, sonos. The right to repair movement includes a surprising number of farmers.

pankajdoharey 6y ago

I personally think this would lead to piracy of App Store apps. Restrictive App ecosystem protects consumers from installing apps that maybe steal their financial information but also protect developers from getting their apps pirated like the Android ecosystem. There is a reason why the app payouts on iOS are so high even though android has a much larger market share of mobile devices. I dont want to see sites like apk4free on iOS ecosystem.

solarkraft 6y ago
I personally think that this is mostly unrelated, since very few people sideload on Android (also due to a less restrictive Play Store policy) and Apples curated store would remain a trusted source.
- pankajdoharey 6y ago
  If side loading isn't the issue here then what is? Also why are there more than 300 Android App stores worldwide just for side loading apps https://www.wandera.com/third-party-app-stores/ https://www.wandera.com/third-party-app-stores/ There must be a significant market. It seems Android App side loading is a $17.5 Billion Leak which means a number of people do download apps from these apps stores. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2018/02/02/app-publishers-lost-17-5b-to-piracy-in-the-last-5-years-says-tapcore/#426e83c67413 https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2018/02/02/app-pub...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - adminu 6y ago
    From the Forbes article you cited: "While most people get apps from official sources such as Google Play or the App Store, there are hundreds of third-party app stores around the planet, especially in China, where Google Play cannot operate. As a result, Android, in particular, has many third-party app stores." I think, your argument does not hold when put in the correct context. Also, it is 17.5$ Billion within 5 years, to put a time frame on it.

anaxag0ras 6y ago

> Speaking at the panel discussion with Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and representatives of the IT industry in Innopolis Wait, wasn't Durov in bad terms with the Russian government and exiled?

mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
Apparently they made a truce, Russia stopped blocking Telegram recently.

gumby 6y ago

But the majority mobile OS, Android, allows this already, and always has. There is only one player that controls its own app store, Apple, with about 20% of the market (Less in 20q1 but that’s a special case). Seems like phone buyers are voting with their feet so why would such a law be required? Mkt share numbers from https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share... or https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-share-of-apple-iphone/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-sha...

mtunad 6y ago

The success of Progressive Web Apps is what we need rather than a new application store. App stores will eventually try to monopolize and kill the business when they want.