4 ms·

But why? What is the benefit of giving up that control?

ericmay 6y ago
I lose the App Store, Apple leading the way by enforcing privacy standards, and many other things. Having control isn’t always a good thing. The benefit of having control here “download another App Store” isn’t much of a benefit to me. I love the way things are. That’s why I have an iPhone.
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  You do not lose the App Store, you can still use it and use only that - it is up to you. That is the entire point: you are in control and if what you want is to keep using the App Store and App Store alone then you can do that. Others, in the meanwhile, should be able to install whatever application they want if they want to do that. Just because the current situation aligns with what you want to do doesn't mean that it is the perfect situation for everyone - but as long as your situation isn't affected (assuming what you want is about you and not about forcing everyone else to be like you) then you should be fine.
  - wcarey 6y ago
    It seems like there are two assumptions underlying your argument: 1. Users have perfect choice in which apps they install. 2. Developers will release their apps on all available app stores. But many users are compelled to install apps that they would prefer not to and it's not at all obvious that developers would support two app stores instead of one given the choice. The net result of that combination is that some (many?) people would be compelled to use both app stores against their inclination.
    - badsectoracula 6y ago
      No, i have no such assumptions. Developers can and some may even will (though market forces will push at least one app store to be the dominant - chances are it'll be the one that comes out of the box with the device) focus on a single app store and there is nothing wrong with that. The only wrong part is users not being in control over what they can install on their devices and from where they will install them. Yes, it is possible that people will be forced to install applications they do not want, but this isn't something that is or even should be up to the OS vendor to try and protect against - the person being forced to do that is the one who should and if they cannot, then legal action should be seeked. The entire issue is outside the scope of the OS.
      - wcarey 6y ago
        That seems like a concession that people who currently enjoy the first-party-only app store situation may indeed lose something if third-party-app-stores become a thing. You can argue (as I think you are) that those losses are outweighed by the gains of a more open ecosystem, but to many users they are meaningful losses.
        badsectoracula 6y ago
        No matter what choice you make, something else will be affected, that doesn't mean you should not be able to have any choice in the first place.
wcarey 6y ago
Delegating that control is, in effect, a form of collective bargaining. Whereas Epic could convince individual users to accept whatever terms of use they wanted to impose, effectively Apple collectively bargains for all those users. That means that, if you like the way Apple negotiates and are comfortable with the trade offs they make, you have much more leverage than if you were negotiating as an individual.
MichaelBurge 6y ago
Nintendo is in a stronger negotiating position vs. game companies, if the hardware only accepts signed games. This makes it easier to get exclusive games, prevents piracy(which encourages games to be made in the first place), and allows Nintendo to enforce standards across all games. Console hardware doesn't have much value by itself: Computers are plentiful, so if you just want something to run software pick up a Raspberry Pi or Nvidia Jetson. Their value derives from the games that companies make, so ceding power to the game companies(via Nintendo) makes your console more valuable.
PascLeRasc 6y ago
I don't mean to sound sarcastic or rude - we just don't care. I like messing around with undervolting/fan control scripts on my laptop, but my iPhone is just a tool like a thermostat or toaster oven. There's no benefit to my gaining control.
- 7tsfmCAusrQ 6y ago
  There is a benefit, though. If there was competition between app stores on the iPhone, the quality and quantity of apps available to iPhone users would increase substantially. App stores would compete on fees, attracting developers, protecting consumers, and so on. Fees would drop, developers would face less cost and friction bringing their apps to the market, app stores would have to innovate to keep protecting consumers. Monopolies cause consumer harm. The biggest irony of all this is that consumers don't seem to realize the harm Apple is doing, because Apple is busy pulling the wool over their eyes by telling them they are protecting their security and privacy. iOS is a nanny state. Apple maintains a culture of fear among consumers to achieve its business goal, which is to maintain its monopoly position.
mlindner 6y ago
Because then someone else can handle making sure I'm not getting virus filled software and it also increases the signal to noise ratio, especially on PS4/Switch. I don't want my PS4/Switch to be a general computing platform.

I lose the App Store, Apple leading the way by enforcing privacy standards, and many other things. Having control isn’t always a good thing. The benefit of having control here “download another App Store” isn’t much of a benefit to me. I love the way things are. That’s why I have an iPhone.

badsectoracula 6y ago
You do not lose the App Store, you can still use it and use only that - it is up to you. That is the entire point: you are in control and if what you want is to keep using the App Store and App Store alone then you can do that. Others, in the meanwhile, should be able to install whatever application they want if they want to do that. Just because the current situation aligns with what you want to do doesn't mean that it is the perfect situation for everyone - but as long as your situation isn't affected (assuming what you want is about you and not about forcing everyone else to be like you) then you should be fine.
- wcarey 6y ago
  It seems like there are two assumptions underlying your argument: 1. Users have perfect choice in which apps they install. 2. Developers will release their apps on all available app stores. But many users are compelled to install apps that they would prefer not to and it's not at all obvious that developers would support two app stores instead of one given the choice. The net result of that combination is that some (many?) people would be compelled to use both app stores against their inclination.
  - badsectoracula 6y ago
    No, i have no such assumptions. Developers can and some may even will (though market forces will push at least one app store to be the dominant - chances are it'll be the one that comes out of the box with the device) focus on a single app store and there is nothing wrong with that. The only wrong part is users not being in control over what they can install on their devices and from where they will install them. Yes, it is possible that people will be forced to install applications they do not want, but this isn't something that is or even should be up to the OS vendor to try and protect against - the person being forced to do that is the one who should and if they cannot, then legal action should be seeked. The entire issue is outside the scope of the OS.
    - wcarey 6y ago
      That seems like a concession that people who currently enjoy the first-party-only app store situation may indeed lose something if third-party-app-stores become a thing. You can argue (as I think you are) that those losses are outweighed by the gains of a more open ecosystem, but to many users they are meaningful losses.
      - badsectoracula 6y ago
        No matter what choice you make, something else will be affected, that doesn't mean you should not be able to have any choice in the first place.

wcarey 6y ago

Delegating that control is, in effect, a form of collective bargaining. Whereas Epic could convince individual users to accept whatever terms of use they wanted to impose, effectively Apple collectively bargains for all those users. That means that, if you like the way Apple negotiates and are comfortable with the trade offs they make, you have much more leverage than if you were negotiating as an individual.

MichaelBurge 6y ago

Nintendo is in a stronger negotiating position vs. game companies, if the hardware only accepts signed games. This makes it easier to get exclusive games, prevents piracy(which encourages games to be made in the first place), and allows Nintendo to enforce standards across all games. Console hardware doesn't have much value by itself: Computers are plentiful, so if you just want something to run software pick up a Raspberry Pi or Nvidia Jetson. Their value derives from the games that companies make, so ceding power to the game companies(via Nintendo) makes your console more valuable.

PascLeRasc 6y ago

I don't mean to sound sarcastic or rude - we just don't care. I like messing around with undervolting/fan control scripts on my laptop, but my iPhone is just a tool like a thermostat or toaster oven. There's no benefit to my gaining control.

7tsfmCAusrQ 6y ago
There is a benefit, though. If there was competition between app stores on the iPhone, the quality and quantity of apps available to iPhone users would increase substantially. App stores would compete on fees, attracting developers, protecting consumers, and so on. Fees would drop, developers would face less cost and friction bringing their apps to the market, app stores would have to innovate to keep protecting consumers. Monopolies cause consumer harm. The biggest irony of all this is that consumers don't seem to realize the harm Apple is doing, because Apple is busy pulling the wool over their eyes by telling them they are protecting their security and privacy. iOS is a nanny state. Apple maintains a culture of fear among consumers to achieve its business goal, which is to maintain its monopoly position.

mlindner 6y ago

Because then someone else can handle making sure I'm not getting virus filled software and it also increases the signal to noise ratio, especially on PS4/Switch. I don't want my PS4/Switch to be a general computing platform.