14 ms·

The real problem here is that companies are forced to accept apples terms. Because apple controls every level of the stack, to opt out of the App store ToS you

The real problem here is that companies are forced to accept apples terms. Because apple controls every level of the stack, to opt out of the App store ToS you have to opt out of the store, the OS, and the hardware. If there was a way to install apps outside of the store this would not be an issue. Most users and developers would still use the app store since it provides value but devs who feel that they can supply their own marketing and payment processing can do it themselves.

applecrazy 6y ago
> devs who feel that they can supply their own marketing and payment processing can do it themselves. The issue I have with that is that then a ton of companies think it's a good idea to ship a crappy "launcher" that needs to run on startup, taking up resources in the background while providing little to no added functionality. We can see that with PC games; it used to be just Steam, but now there's the Epic Games Launcher, Origin, GoG, and a bunch of more obscure launchers that need to be installed to play particular games.
- vbezhenar 6y ago
  If you don't like their launchers, don't use their apps, it's simple as that. They're free to create a software in a way they feel appropriate. You're free to use or not to use that software.
  - DonaldPShimoda 6y ago
    If you don't like the App Store, don't use an iPhone, it's simple as that. They're free to manage their platform in a way they feel appropriate. You're free to use or not use that platform. --- I'm not necessarily saying I think Apple is in the right, but your argument doesn't hold because it works equally well when applied at a higher level, which runs counter to your point.
    - canofbars 6y ago
      >If you don't like the App Store, don't use an iPhone This is not the main issue, its on the other end. If you are a developer, and you don't like the App Store, you have no options. You can't publish on an alt store because those are not allowed. So your only option is to not provide services to 50% of your customers and thats assuming the google play store doesn't have the same issue you are avoiding. A real world example of this is vape companies provide an app which lets you do things like lock your vape so kids can't use it. Apple said those apps are not allowed on the app store. The vape company has no options, they just can't sell products to apple users now. The problem is these tech companies hold way to much power. It would be like if 2 landlords owned literally every single block of land in the entire country. Now normally it would be fair for the landlord to pick which types of businesses to rent out to but when both options say your business isn't accepted and the only alternative is to build your own island in the ocean and create a civilisation on it so you can open your store then something is seriously wrong.
      - jbverschoor 6y ago
        Same for Nintendo, PS, Xbox, Android. And the other 'appstores' - steam, epic, etc Quite frankly, the lockdown of the OS and rejection of this is one of the primary reasons I'm on iPhone.
        tasssko 6y ago
        I couldn't agree more. It will only get worse if companies are allowed to create their own Appstores. Using these devices is already a difficult user experience we should be doing more to protect consumers who have already invested in the ecosystem. Apple is indirectly doing this.
        vbezhenar 6y ago
        So you're happy as a consumer that developer's freedom is taken away from them, but you have more freedom. That's understandable, but you should realize that some developers value their freedom and will just avoid such a locked-down platform. There are plenty of apps missing in iPhone because of that.
  - Lev1a 6y ago
    That's not so simple with the hypocrite named Epic who preach about competition being better for all while buying exclusive distribution rights from devs/publishers on PC, sometimes even for games that had been long announced to be coming out on Steam and/or were crowdfunded on that and other premises. Case in point: "Satisfactory". I was pretty excited about the game when it was first shown, then found later * it would be removed from Steam, * I'd have to get an account for another store, * use a store made by some incompetents who couldn't implement basic functionality like a "shopping cart" even months after release (does it have one by now?) * give part of my money through Epic to fucking Tencent and install a piece of Chinese spyware on my PC in order to run it. Also no implicit Linux support because no Proton and because Sweeney loves to bend over for Microsoft exclusively.
    - jfim 6y ago
      You can buy it on Steam now: https://store.steampowered.com/app/526870/Satisfactory/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/526870/Satisfactory/
      - Fnoord 6y ago
        Sure, years later. Compare to Iron Harvest, for example. You could invest in the development via Kickstarter. Which boils down to making the project happen (due to lack of otherwise investors aka due to crowdfunding). Now, basically right after release, you can buy the game from Steam, too, but you pay full price for it (in contrast to the crowdfunders). Contrast this to EGS. Stuff gets released on Steam many months later, say 6 months or a year, due to EGS getting the sack of money for being the sole distributor. Then, they release for full price on Steam. Why would I pay full price for a 6-12 month old game? I won't.
        colejohnson66 6y ago
        A recent example of Epic exclusives was Borderlands 3. It was highly anticipated, and then it came out that it would be exclusive to EGS for 6 months. I refuse to use EGS (for my own reasons), so when the hype died down after a few months and it arrived on Steam, I forgot to buy it. In fact, I still keep forgetting.
- simion314 6y ago
  And this is a good thing, competition between this stores is good for the users, some users got free games, some developers got better deals. The "needs to launch on startup" is FALSE , you can have this launchers set no to start at all and you launch the game and the launcher will start if needed (not all Steam games need Steam in background). FYI GOG launcher is optional, you can just download the game from the website with a browser and then install it as in old times. Competition is good and except the Epic drama I did not see anyone complaining the GOG, HumbleBundle, itch.io or downloading from Patreon is a bad thing for PC. I expect though if Apple blocks all launchers on the new OSX for ARM then an army of people will say that downloading a small game directly from Patron is too complicated and insecure for the average Apple user mind.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    If I want a store competition I go to shopping mall. The only store that has a place on my devices is the OS vendor store.
    - harpratap 6y ago
      No one's stopping you from using only Apple store. Why force your choice on other consumers? Let people decide what's best for them
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        They have the choice to buy other brands.
        dr_dshiv 6y ago
        They also have the choice to avoid smartphones altogether. What they want, though, is the ability to use apple hardware and non-apple software. The only reason they can't is because Apple won't let them, unless they pay a 30% commission
        6y ago
- rhn_mk1 6y ago
  The GoG launcher doesn't fit here as an example; it's entirely optional.
  - Crosseye_Jack 6y ago
    Unless you want to play online. Some of the titles on the store allow peer to peer connection multiplayer which doesn’t have any drm checks. But most titles that use servers to simplify matchmaking or connection with other players have a check that validates that gog galaxy is logged into an account that has purchased the game.
  - thaumasiotes 6y ago
    No, GoG Galaxy is not entirely optional. It is required to run many newer games, and can be required even if you're not trying to play multiplayer. I don't understand how this is supposed to be compatible with GoG's marketing as "the DRM-free home for games".
    - speeder 6y ago
      What game requires GoG Galaxy? EDIT: even googled it, found out Darkest Dungeon by default install a version that does need GoG Galaxy, but the DRM-free version is available on GoG site too, just need to choose that downloader instead. But that was it. Didn't found any other obvious complaints of GoG Galaxy being required.
      - thaumasiotes 6y ago
        Northgard requires Galaxy for single-player content. It's not subtle about it. Your response says more about what you can tell with a quick google search than anything else. I'm fascinated that I've been complaining about this here on HN for months, and the only response I ever get -- which comes up every time -- is "what are you talking about, that's not true". This isn't a matter of opinion. It's not even difficult to check. And yet, there are so many people whose worldview apparently rests on the opposite of the facts.
gigatexal 6y ago
I see this argument everywhere and it makes no sense. The ToS is up to the owner of the platform. It's the same reason I don't use Facebook: I think the company and what they do with my data is diametrically opposed to my way of thinking so I voted to leave by deleting my account. Developer's do have a choice: abide by the ToS and enjoy the trappings of a user base that tends to spend more on applications be they subscriptions or one-offs than Android or vote with your wallets and don't abide by it but to cry foul and try to usurp one's will on the company that built the platform makes no sense. Some counter arguments: If the ToS of the app store are likened to the tax laws in the USA then failing to abide the law that requires taxes to be paid is the same thing here as Epic using their own payments system to subvert the iOS tax of 30%. The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit). After years of investment in the iPhone and building the ecosystem around it the AppStore is just one way to monetize that. A 30% cut might sound high but they did spend tens(hundreds?) of billions in R&D and this is just one way, among many, that the iPhone is being monetized, this is just a return on investment on top of the sales price of the phone. All of the arguments I have heard from those in the Epic camp strike me as temper tantrums thrown by children.
- realusername 6y ago
  > The ToS is up to the owner of the platform When there's only two companies fully controlling the next era of computing platforms, there's some argument that they have way too much power in their hand. > The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit). Except the phone isn't owned by Apple, and that's why every analogy similar to this one fails.
  - gigatexal 6y ago
    It is owned by Apple in that they own the OS. If I wanted full autonomy I’d root my phone. The whole appeal of the phone is the secure cohesive experience not the hodge-podge setup of the PC for example. It’s much more of a console in that sense.
tssva 6y ago
Android allows installation of apps outside of the Google Play store but Epic is pursuing the same path against Google.
- Kuinox 6y ago
  Yes, for a different reason. Epics wanted a deal with oneplus for to have epic store preinstalled on their device, and google pressured oneplus to cancel the deal. https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368395/fortnite-epic-games-oneplus-deal-google-play-store-lawsuit-lg https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368395/fortnite-epic-ga...
  - tssva 6y ago
    Although brought up in the lawsuit it is not a basis for any of the counts in the lawsuit. The counts in the lawsuit all go to the same conduct they are accusing Apple of.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  Didn’t Epic initially go around the Play Store and require you to download an installer from their website? And then it turned out that it was a good malware vector? That’s what I fear will happen if we get alternate stores: lax security leading to malware.
  - Kuinox 6y ago
    Make it that you must sign the binaries. Google distribute/manage the keys, but are not allowed to veto legal things.
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      That serves no purpose. If Google can’t veto any signature requests, it’s no different than having no signature at all; You’ll just have signed malware.
      - 6y ago
drexlspivey 6y ago
That argument is pretty rich coming from epic considering that they sign exclusive deals for games pretty aggressively for their Epic games store.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  When has a developer ever been forced into an exclusive deal? They get paid extra for that. It's pro-competitive, because it's what allows new stores to get off the ground, meanwhile nothing stops you from using Epic's store and Steam and five others at the same time. The biggest problem with Apple's store isn't what they allow into it, it's that people can't use it and any other store at the same time.

applecrazy 6y ago

> devs who feel that they can supply their own marketing and payment processing can do it themselves. The issue I have with that is that then a ton of companies think it's a good idea to ship a crappy "launcher" that needs to run on startup, taking up resources in the background while providing little to no added functionality. We can see that with PC games; it used to be just Steam, but now there's the Epic Games Launcher, Origin, GoG, and a bunch of more obscure launchers that need to be installed to play particular games.

vbezhenar 6y ago
If you don't like their launchers, don't use their apps, it's simple as that. They're free to create a software in a way they feel appropriate. You're free to use or not to use that software.
- DonaldPShimoda 6y ago
  If you don't like the App Store, don't use an iPhone, it's simple as that. They're free to manage their platform in a way they feel appropriate. You're free to use or not use that platform. --- I'm not necessarily saying I think Apple is in the right, but your argument doesn't hold because it works equally well when applied at a higher level, which runs counter to your point.
  - canofbars 6y ago
    >If you don't like the App Store, don't use an iPhone This is not the main issue, its on the other end. If you are a developer, and you don't like the App Store, you have no options. You can't publish on an alt store because those are not allowed. So your only option is to not provide services to 50% of your customers and thats assuming the google play store doesn't have the same issue you are avoiding. A real world example of this is vape companies provide an app which lets you do things like lock your vape so kids can't use it. Apple said those apps are not allowed on the app store. The vape company has no options, they just can't sell products to apple users now. The problem is these tech companies hold way to much power. It would be like if 2 landlords owned literally every single block of land in the entire country. Now normally it would be fair for the landlord to pick which types of businesses to rent out to but when both options say your business isn't accepted and the only alternative is to build your own island in the ocean and create a civilisation on it so you can open your store then something is seriously wrong.
    - jbverschoor 6y ago
      Same for Nintendo, PS, Xbox, Android. And the other 'appstores' - steam, epic, etc Quite frankly, the lockdown of the OS and rejection of this is one of the primary reasons I'm on iPhone.
      - tasssko 6y ago
        I couldn't agree more. It will only get worse if companies are allowed to create their own Appstores. Using these devices is already a difficult user experience we should be doing more to protect consumers who have already invested in the ecosystem. Apple is indirectly doing this.
      - vbezhenar 6y ago
        So you're happy as a consumer that developer's freedom is taken away from them, but you have more freedom. That's understandable, but you should realize that some developers value their freedom and will just avoid such a locked-down platform. There are plenty of apps missing in iPhone because of that.
- Lev1a 6y ago
  That's not so simple with the hypocrite named Epic who preach about competition being better for all while buying exclusive distribution rights from devs/publishers on PC, sometimes even for games that had been long announced to be coming out on Steam and/or were crowdfunded on that and other premises. Case in point: "Satisfactory". I was pretty excited about the game when it was first shown, then found later * it would be removed from Steam, * I'd have to get an account for another store, * use a store made by some incompetents who couldn't implement basic functionality like a "shopping cart" even months after release (does it have one by now?) * give part of my money through Epic to fucking Tencent and install a piece of Chinese spyware on my PC in order to run it. Also no implicit Linux support because no Proton and because Sweeney loves to bend over for Microsoft exclusively.
  - jfim 6y ago
    You can buy it on Steam now: https://store.steampowered.com/app/526870/Satisfactory/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/526870/Satisfactory/
    - Fnoord 6y ago
      Sure, years later. Compare to Iron Harvest, for example. You could invest in the development via Kickstarter. Which boils down to making the project happen (due to lack of otherwise investors aka due to crowdfunding). Now, basically right after release, you can buy the game from Steam, too, but you pay full price for it (in contrast to the crowdfunders). Contrast this to EGS. Stuff gets released on Steam many months later, say 6 months or a year, due to EGS getting the sack of money for being the sole distributor. Then, they release for full price on Steam. Why would I pay full price for a 6-12 month old game? I won't.
      - colejohnson66 6y ago
        A recent example of Epic exclusives was Borderlands 3. It was highly anticipated, and then it came out that it would be exclusive to EGS for 6 months. I refuse to use EGS (for my own reasons), so when the hype died down after a few months and it arrived on Steam, I forgot to buy it. In fact, I still keep forgetting.
simion314 6y ago
And this is a good thing, competition between this stores is good for the users, some users got free games, some developers got better deals. The "needs to launch on startup" is FALSE , you can have this launchers set no to start at all and you launch the game and the launcher will start if needed (not all Steam games need Steam in background). FYI GOG launcher is optional, you can just download the game from the website with a browser and then install it as in old times. Competition is good and except the Epic drama I did not see anyone complaining the GOG, HumbleBundle, itch.io or downloading from Patreon is a bad thing for PC. I expect though if Apple blocks all launchers on the new OSX for ARM then an army of people will say that downloading a small game directly from Patron is too complicated and insecure for the average Apple user mind.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  If I want a store competition I go to shopping mall. The only store that has a place on my devices is the OS vendor store.
  - harpratap 6y ago
    No one's stopping you from using only Apple store. Why force your choice on other consumers? Let people decide what's best for them
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      They have the choice to buy other brands.
      - dr_dshiv 6y ago
        They also have the choice to avoid smartphones altogether. What they want, though, is the ability to use apple hardware and non-apple software. The only reason they can't is because Apple won't let them, unless they pay a 30% commission
        6y ago
rhn_mk1 6y ago
The GoG launcher doesn't fit here as an example; it's entirely optional.
- Crosseye_Jack 6y ago
  Unless you want to play online. Some of the titles on the store allow peer to peer connection multiplayer which doesn’t have any drm checks. But most titles that use servers to simplify matchmaking or connection with other players have a check that validates that gog galaxy is logged into an account that has purchased the game.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  No, GoG Galaxy is not entirely optional. It is required to run many newer games, and can be required even if you're not trying to play multiplayer. I don't understand how this is supposed to be compatible with GoG's marketing as "the DRM-free home for games".
  - speeder 6y ago
    What game requires GoG Galaxy? EDIT: even googled it, found out Darkest Dungeon by default install a version that does need GoG Galaxy, but the DRM-free version is available on GoG site too, just need to choose that downloader instead. But that was it. Didn't found any other obvious complaints of GoG Galaxy being required.
    - thaumasiotes 6y ago
      Northgard requires Galaxy for single-player content. It's not subtle about it. Your response says more about what you can tell with a quick google search than anything else. I'm fascinated that I've been complaining about this here on HN for months, and the only response I ever get -- which comes up every time -- is "what are you talking about, that's not true". This isn't a matter of opinion. It's not even difficult to check. And yet, there are so many people whose worldview apparently rests on the opposite of the facts.

gigatexal 6y ago

I see this argument everywhere and it makes no sense. The ToS is up to the owner of the platform. It's the same reason I don't use Facebook: I think the company and what they do with my data is diametrically opposed to my way of thinking so I voted to leave by deleting my account. Developer's do have a choice: abide by the ToS and enjoy the trappings of a user base that tends to spend more on applications be they subscriptions or one-offs than Android or vote with your wallets and don't abide by it but to cry foul and try to usurp one's will on the company that built the platform makes no sense. Some counter arguments: If the ToS of the app store are likened to the tax laws in the USA then failing to abide the law that requires taxes to be paid is the same thing here as Epic using their own payments system to subvert the iOS tax of 30%. The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit). After years of investment in the iPhone and building the ecosystem around it the AppStore is just one way to monetize that. A 30% cut might sound high but they did spend tens(hundreds?) of billions in R&D and this is just one way, among many, that the iPhone is being monetized, this is just a return on investment on top of the sales price of the phone. All of the arguments I have heard from those in the Epic camp strike me as temper tantrums thrown by children.

realusername 6y ago
> The ToS is up to the owner of the platform When there's only two companies fully controlling the next era of computing platforms, there's some argument that they have way too much power in their hand. > The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit). Except the phone isn't owned by Apple, and that's why every analogy similar to this one fails.
- gigatexal 6y ago
  It is owned by Apple in that they own the OS. If I wanted full autonomy I’d root my phone. The whole appeal of the phone is the secure cohesive experience not the hodge-podge setup of the PC for example. It’s much more of a console in that sense.

tssva 6y ago

Android allows installation of apps outside of the Google Play store but Epic is pursuing the same path against Google.

Kuinox 6y ago
Yes, for a different reason. Epics wanted a deal with oneplus for to have epic store preinstalled on their device, and google pressured oneplus to cancel the deal. https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368395/fortnite-epic-games-oneplus-deal-google-play-store-lawsuit-lg https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368395/fortnite-epic-ga...
- tssva 6y ago
  Although brought up in the lawsuit it is not a basis for any of the counts in the lawsuit. The counts in the lawsuit all go to the same conduct they are accusing Apple of.
colejohnson66 6y ago
Didn’t Epic initially go around the Play Store and require you to download an installer from their website? And then it turned out that it was a good malware vector? That’s what I fear will happen if we get alternate stores: lax security leading to malware.
- Kuinox 6y ago
  Make it that you must sign the binaries. Google distribute/manage the keys, but are not allowed to veto legal things.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    That serves no purpose. If Google can’t veto any signature requests, it’s no different than having no signature at all; You’ll just have signed malware.
    - 6y ago

drexlspivey 6y ago

That argument is pretty rich coming from epic considering that they sign exclusive deals for games pretty aggressively for their Epic games store.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
When has a developer ever been forced into an exclusive deal? They get paid extra for that. It's pro-competitive, because it's what allows new stores to get off the ground, meanwhile nothing stops you from using Epic's store and Steam and five others at the same time. The biggest problem with Apple's store isn't what they allow into it, it's that people can't use it and any other store at the same time.