9 ms·

I'd argue that if apple didn't have a monopoly, we'd have stores that catered to privacy conscious people far earlier. If apple didn't restrict the OS so much,

I'd argue that if apple didn't have a monopoly, we'd have stores that catered to privacy conscious people far earlier. If apple didn't restrict the OS so much, you'd have people making their own Facebook clients, wouldn't have mattered if Facebook liked it or not. The monopolization of Facebook's control on personal connections is partially because of closed OS's. And Apple's iOS is one of the most responsible OS's that gave rise to Facebook's data monopoly. Had it been like Windows, there wouldn't be a way that Facebook could've maintained their monopoly.

fsflover 6y ago
F-Droid proves your point.
- qwytw 6y ago
  Are there any "unofficial" Messenger apps on F-Droid?
  - papaf 6y ago
    F-Droid has a search box you could use to answer such questions for yourself: https://search.f-droid.org/?q=facebook&lang=en https://search.f-droid.org/?q=facebook&lang=en
    - qwytw 6y ago
      That was a rhetorical question. AFAIK the closest thing you can get is wrapper around messenger web app which (which by default doesn't work on mobile browser because FB wants to force everyone to use their native apps).
      - davidy123 6y ago
        While it wraps their web app, I use Frost for Facebook, which is an open source app that lets me access Facebook messages on mobile without using any of Facebook's apps.
  - BlueTemplar 6y ago
    I thought that Facebook didn't allow for any unofficial clients, be it for Facebook itself or Facebook Messenger ?
Nabati 6y ago
How does using Facebook via another client prevent or diminish Facebooks data monopoly?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- absolutelyrad 6y ago
  If you're serious about this question. The the answer is: a competitor could build their services on top of Facebook. They wouldn't have to start from scratch. Independent client's mean if the one user trusts you with their data, you can provide them a bigger value. Today you cannot innovate on top of Facebook. Their network effects mean if your service is superior, you need to beat the network effects first. And Facebook cannot reasonably offer independent access because: Cambridge Analytica. Independent client's do what they want without Facebook taking a hit on their reputation. No one blames apple for the crimes committed using their phones/computers do they?
  - the_french 6y ago
    I think that building a competitor on top of facebook is against their terms of service. You wouldn't be able to build an 'alternative facebook client', legally at least.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
tchalla 6y ago
There are other OS with a larger percentage of devices installed with other app stores possible. How many privacy focused stores do we see with privacy focused Facebook clients? How many of the users exercise those privacy options and give informed consent to share their data? Hypotheticals can be argued either way but it’s just one possible option, not the only one.
- absolutelyrad 6y ago
  The answer is chrome web store/firefox store and adblock/tracker block. They offer a hint into a more free future. Imagine if adblock wasn't allowed on those stores. Today the equivalent is alternative clients to Facebook not being allowed on iOS and the App Store. Look at YC startups like motion being built on top of the web. They are building on top of the network effects of gmail/google/facebook/slack etc. We aren't allowed any of that on mobile. Had they been allowed more access to the mobile OS's, they could be a very successful company. We haven't even touched the tip of cross OS productivity integrations.
- realusername 6y ago
  > There are other OS with a larger percentage of devices installed with other app stores possible. Like which ones? There's the AppStore, the PlayStore and that's it, nothing else is even worth being mentioned in terms of market share.
Razengan 6y ago
> I'd argue that if apple didn't have a monopoly, we'd have stores that catered to privacy conscious people far earlier. That didn’t happen before the App Store and isn’t happening anywhere else after the App Store either.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
dwighttk 6y ago
What’s the well-known privacy-conscious Android store that’s been running for a long time?
- papaf 6y ago
  F-Droid: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/io.kuenzler.whatsappwebtogo/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/io.kuenzler.whatsappwebtogo/
qwytw 6y ago
I'm not sure that it really workout that way, you wouldn't have Facebook clients on these privacy conscious stores because FB wouldn't provide an open API which they could use. Otherwise are there any reasons why these client can't be published on the App Store besides that there no way to make one? Instead it's probably more likely that FB would host Messenger and Whatsapp clients on their own app store with all the details hidden somewhere in the user agreement.
ascagnel_ 6y ago
> If apple didn't restrict the OS so much, you'd have people making their own Facebook clients, wouldn't have mattered if Facebook liked it or not. You're totally wrong on this. In fact, the first alternative FB clients I remember using sprang up on the iPad, before FB bothered to put a native app out for it. What killed alternative FB clients was FB itself -- they've slowly closed off the APIs you'd need to access to make an alternative client optional. FB has also closed off their own alternative clients as well (FB Paper), and have been forcing users into their official web or native clients for a while.

fsflover 6y ago

F-Droid proves your point.

qwytw 6y ago
Are there any "unofficial" Messenger apps on F-Droid?
- papaf 6y ago
  F-Droid has a search box you could use to answer such questions for yourself: https://search.f-droid.org/?q=facebook&lang=en https://search.f-droid.org/?q=facebook&lang=en
  - qwytw 6y ago
    That was a rhetorical question. AFAIK the closest thing you can get is wrapper around messenger web app which (which by default doesn't work on mobile browser because FB wants to force everyone to use their native apps).
    - davidy123 6y ago
      While it wraps their web app, I use Frost for Facebook, which is an open source app that lets me access Facebook messages on mobile without using any of Facebook's apps.
- BlueTemplar 6y ago
  I thought that Facebook didn't allow for any unofficial clients, be it for Facebook itself or Facebook Messenger ?

Nabati 6y ago

How does using Facebook via another client prevent or diminish Facebooks data monopoly?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
absolutelyrad 6y ago
If you're serious about this question. The the answer is: a competitor could build their services on top of Facebook. They wouldn't have to start from scratch. Independent client's mean if the one user trusts you with their data, you can provide them a bigger value. Today you cannot innovate on top of Facebook. Their network effects mean if your service is superior, you need to beat the network effects first. And Facebook cannot reasonably offer independent access because: Cambridge Analytica. Independent client's do what they want without Facebook taking a hit on their reputation. No one blames apple for the crimes committed using their phones/computers do they?
- the_french 6y ago
  I think that building a competitor on top of facebook is against their terms of service. You wouldn't be able to build an 'alternative facebook client', legally at least.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

tchalla 6y ago

There are other OS with a larger percentage of devices installed with other app stores possible. How many privacy focused stores do we see with privacy focused Facebook clients? How many of the users exercise those privacy options and give informed consent to share their data? Hypotheticals can be argued either way but it’s just one possible option, not the only one.

absolutelyrad 6y ago
The answer is chrome web store/firefox store and adblock/tracker block. They offer a hint into a more free future. Imagine if adblock wasn't allowed on those stores. Today the equivalent is alternative clients to Facebook not being allowed on iOS and the App Store. Look at YC startups like motion being built on top of the web. They are building on top of the network effects of gmail/google/facebook/slack etc. We aren't allowed any of that on mobile. Had they been allowed more access to the mobile OS's, they could be a very successful company. We haven't even touched the tip of cross OS productivity integrations.
realusername 6y ago
> There are other OS with a larger percentage of devices installed with other app stores possible. Like which ones? There's the AppStore, the PlayStore and that's it, nothing else is even worth being mentioned in terms of market share.

Razengan 6y ago

> I'd argue that if apple didn't have a monopoly, we'd have stores that catered to privacy conscious people far earlier. That didn’t happen before the App Store and isn’t happening anywhere else after the App Store either.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

dwighttk 6y ago

What’s the well-known privacy-conscious Android store that’s been running for a long time?

papaf 6y ago
F-Droid: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/io.kuenzler.whatsappwebtogo/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/io.kuenzler.whatsappwebtogo/

qwytw 6y ago

I'm not sure that it really workout that way, you wouldn't have Facebook clients on these privacy conscious stores because FB wouldn't provide an open API which they could use. Otherwise are there any reasons why these client can't be published on the App Store besides that there no way to make one? Instead it's probably more likely that FB would host Messenger and Whatsapp clients on their own app store with all the details hidden somewhere in the user agreement.

ascagnel_ 6y ago

> If apple didn't restrict the OS so much, you'd have people making their own Facebook clients, wouldn't have mattered if Facebook liked it or not. You're totally wrong on this. In fact, the first alternative FB clients I remember using sprang up on the iPad, before FB bothered to put a native app out for it. What killed alternative FB clients was FB itself -- they've slowly closed off the APIs you'd need to access to make an alternative client optional. FB has also closed off their own alternative clients as well (FB Paper), and have been forcing users into their official web or native clients for a while.