>I find it hard to see as a win for consumers based on the scummy practices of the companies in this advocacy group. Comparatively consumers are much better wi

>I find it hard to see as a win for consumers based on the scummy practices of the companies in this advocacy group. Comparatively consumers are much better with Apples requirements from my perspective. Its a clear win for users and developers because of competition in stores. Different stores will have different overheads and operating costs and can offer different discounts to both users and developers. Apple's brutal monopoly prevents that. >So given that there is potential for significant harm AND developers have a choice of platforms to develop for why should Apples rights be taken away? There is harm being doing today by Apple to users and developers. We need to undo that. >So if I sell an app that does something like only sells to white people Apple shouldn’t be allowed to step in even though the negative press is likely to harm their brand image? That went straight over my head, sorry. I didn't understand what your point was.. >Apple should be forced to work on behalf of other companies with no benefit for them? Apple keeps their own APIs secret, or rather, artificially bans Apps from using them. This is merely leveling the playing field to allow other app stores to operate. >Is this not true today? If it’s not Apple setting those standards it’s surely some other biased entity right? How is one better than the other? Multiple app-stores will ensure competition. >Why? It’s their platform. Developers are free to develop their own phone / OS, right? I don't want Windows to ban Chrome or Firefox or arbitrarily block people from accessing websites either. "Its their platform" so they get to abuse their position of power is not a winning argument for me anyway. Clearly our views differ on this. >Apple would surely say developers do not pay an unfair or unreasonable amount. Who sets this standard? We set a fair income tax through the political process (however flawed) that allows stakeholders to participate. No system is perfect and we can only strive to improve the existing one. Right now, its Apple's dictatorial approach that is setting the rules. I'm glad there is a pushback. >Why? If your App Store bricks an iPhone, Apple shouldn’t be able to prevent that from being installed on their devices? That is ludicrous. A madman could use a knife to kill you so lets ban knifes?! If we have to be mature and rational about it, we need to evaluate things in a much more nuanced fashion. >Transparent is subjective. I don’t see how this won’t result in the same types of TOS that people without legal degrees are not equipped to parse/understand. Everything is subjective here. Apple's robbing of 30% of sales needs to end.