3 ms·
We've seen on Android that the practical effects of competing app stores are basically zero. There's too much advantage to controlling the OS and being the def
by treis 6y ago
We've seen on Android that the practical effects of competing app stores are basically zero. There's too much advantage to controlling the OS and being the default. Epic getting a store on iOS is likely to be a moral victory at best.
The effective solution is stopping dominance in one area from spilling over into another. Can't use iOS control to gain control of app sales and you can't use control of app sales to gain control of payments.
- lukeschlather 6y agoThe fact that F-Droid exists is a huge deal. Yeah, not everyone uses it. There isn't an app for everything (by design) but the apps are way more trustworthy than anything you can get out of the iOS or Android stores.
- cycloptic 6y agoThat's not really a good example, Google has been doing a lot of similar things to hamstring anyone who tries to run a competing store.
- dgellow 6y agoLet’s say competing app stores won’t be used. Then why is it an issue for Apple to allow them, given that they know they would still be the default and have the advantage? Apple is in this situation at where control the platform completely, and could have the default store. But somehow that’s not enough for them to consider opening the app market a little bit. Using that reasoning, they are in the best position to actually open to competition.
- pjmlp 6y agoGoogle has been closing down Android with each release exactly because that gets abused. To the point that Linux fans that keep pointing to Android as "Desktop Linux" miss the point that no Linux APIs are part of official Android APIs and depending on the Android version, apps get killed when trying to be smart reaching for private APIs.