4 ms·
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 ap
by 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 agoNo, 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 agoThat 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 agoNo 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.