3 ms·

A much simpler and elegant solution compared to mandating changes for Apple's app store policies, is simply requiring them to allow users to install apps from o

A much simpler and elegant solution compared to mandating changes for Apple's app store policies, is simply requiring them to allow users to install apps from other sources (e.g. directly from webpages, or from other app stores). You could do this on the basis that the real problem isn't that Apple has some particular policy for their store, but rather the problem is that their store is a monopoly within the iOS ecosystem. And the government has a history of intervening when it comes to monopolies (at least some of the time), so it matches precedent.

sdoering 6y ago
In principle, I agree. Of course, I prefer the freer model, where I can install whatever software I want on my computing device. I grew up with this possibility since I was 14 (first apple, later Linux and Windows). I'm still irritated by app stores today and I personally don't understand the appeal of a "walled garden". This leads to the following value question, which I will illustrate with an example: Should a company like Nestle be prevented from contracting with a municipality to pump and sell its spring water? Why would anyone want to regulate this? I am not forced to buy this water and support such business practices. No consumer is forced to do so. And if the people in such a community have democratically decided that short-term profit is worth more to them than the long-term supply of groundwater, no one should be able to prevent this community from selling their water either. And that's how I see Apple.Every company has the right to set the rules for their platform that they see fit. And every user has the right to go to the self-imposed prison that protects him from "evil software", pornography, fake news (and what else). Or not to enter this ecosystem. [edit typo]

3 ms·

A much simpler and elegant solution compared to mandating changes for Apple's app store policies, is simply requiring them to allow users to install apps from o

by TulliusCicero 6y ago

sdoering 6y ago
In principle, I agree. Of course, I prefer the freer model, where I can install whatever software I want on my computing device. I grew up with this possibility since I was 14 (first apple, later Linux and Windows). I'm still irritated by app stores today and I personally don't understand the appeal of a "walled garden". This leads to the following value question, which I will illustrate with an example: Should a company like Nestle be prevented from contracting with a municipality to pump and sell its spring water? Why would anyone want to regulate this? I am not forced to buy this water and support such business practices. No consumer is forced to do so. And if the people in such a community have democratically decided that short-term profit is worth more to them than the long-term supply of groundwater, no one should be able to prevent this community from selling their water either. And that's how I see Apple.Every company has the right to set the rules for their platform that they see fit. And every user has the right to go to the self-imposed prison that protects him from "evil software", pornography, fake news (and what else). Or not to enter this ecosystem. [edit typo]