29 ms·

Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

647 points by skeletonjelly 5y ago

varispeed 5y ago
Do they have any teeth or is it just checkbox ticking exercise to make consumer feel something is being done? > There is a window of opportunity for Apple and Google themselves to take steps to improve outcomes for app developers and consumers by adopting the potential measures we have identified Why not just introduce new regulation? Companies will be dragging this as long as they can and reap profits, whereas such organisations continue to take salaries, do pointless meetings and then release more reports how the situation looks bad.
- paranoidrobot 5y ago
  They have teeth, and they are the regulator. This is basically an opening statement on their view of the world, and puts Apple and Google on notice that this is something the ACCC are interested in. It is basically a standard way the ACCC announces what they're doing and putting industry on notice. They did this for comparison sites that had secret sorting/recommendations that weren't in the best interest of the consumer. They've done this for retailers who didn't abide by Australian Consumer Law on warranties and various disclaimers given in-store. In most cases there's usually some kind of enforceable agreement reached, sometimes they go to court to enforce compliance.
hank808 5y ago
I'd love to see a solid non-OS specific app store come into being. I own anyapp.com and any.app, let me know if anyone wants to partner up.
- alfiedotwtf 5y ago
  F-droid tends to fill the gap for Andriod, but not enough developers sending their apps there. I guess when there's no monetary incentive, it's only the open source crowd that will participate
  - hyperpallium2 5y ago
    Only open source is allowed there.
    - SilverRed 5y ago
      Which is what you want. Whenever possible you should avoid running proprietary programs.
  - SilverRed 5y ago
    Fdroid was the thing I missed most about moving to ios. Sure, it had a limited app selection and the apps were basic. But every app on fdroid had a really wholesome feel to it, like the app devs have made this just for you to enjoy and not to try to squeeze money from you. Now on the app store, absolutely everything is crammed with adverts, tracking IAPs, and subscriptions. I can't just install an app and expect it to work because there is always some catch that ruins it.
  - m4rtink 5y ago
    F-droid also has the sane condition that all apps it distributes need to be built from source on its build infra (basically all Linux distros require the same). While really good for security and debugging I can imagine it can be complicated to suport for many less experienced developers used to cooling stuff together in an Android IDE where a binary APK falls out at the end that they then upload to the store.
- hank808 5y ago
  https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2021/4/30/resetting-the-app-store https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2021/4/30/resetting-...
dlgeek 5y ago
> The ACCC has put forward a series of potential measures in response to its findings, including that consumers be able to rate and review all apps, that consumers have the ability to change any pre-installed default app on their device, that app developers be allowed to provide consumers with information about alternative payment options and that information collected by Apple and Google in their capacity as app marketplace operators be ring-fenced from their other operations. Does anyone know what power the ACCC has to make these more than just "proposed"? I'm not familiar with it's role in the Australian political system.
- justaguy88 5y ago
  ACCC likely has full power to compel compliance (within Australia) if Apple/Google want to continue operating in Australia, they use this law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_and_Consumer_Act_2010 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_and_Consumer_Act_2...
- dmagee 5y ago
  Fair bit of teeth on the ACCC. https://theconversation.com/accc-world-first-australias-federal-court-found-google-misled-users-about-personal-location-data-159138 https://theconversation.com/accc-world-first-australias-fede...
  - trollian 5y ago
    God I miss living in a country with real consumer protection.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ptcampbell 5y ago
  I live in the US now but miss having an avenue to pursue if unjustly treated as a consumer. A watchdog with a modicum of actual power is a good thing. A small example: at one point it felt as though mere mention of the ombudsman was enough to sway dodgy phone carriers to acquiesce on minor matters such as billing, misleading advertising etc.
ent101 5y ago
I feel like we keep getting these inquiries/lawsuits/press releases every year but, literally, nothing gets any better at all. Every developer KNOWS that Google is extremely abusive towards them solely because of their position in the market yet nothing ever improves. If these are not illegal monopolies, what is?!
- mulmen 5y ago
  Well, the problem is that they aren't monopolies. They may be problematic but we don't have laws or regulations to deal with this specific situation. And when we call it a "monopoly" because that seems to be the closest thing then the defenders of these organizations can say "but it's not a monopoly!" and they are right. So if you think it is problematic to have two players in a market even when they are on equal footing then you need to promote legislation to make that illegal. Or if you think there's something specifically harmful about this pair of dominant players then those externalities need to be addressed through legislation. But shouting "monopoly" is, at this point, counter-productive IMHO.
  - clusterfish 5y ago
    Our laws leave a lot to be desired, but being a monopoly is neither sufficient nor required to get hammered: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bd2b38f1-9b66-448f-9bca-835c2fb9b94e https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bd2b38f1-9b66... What's required, and lacking, is the political will to prosecute.
  - wjdp 5y ago
    Oh go on then, a duopoly with fairly entrenched user bases and no real chance of additional players.
  - madeofpalk 5y ago
    "Citation needed". Whether they’re a monopoly or not is an opinion, one which Epic is currently trying to assert in court.
  - paranoidrobot 5y ago
jbverschoor 5y ago
Well I love my Apple App Store. It protects me for certain things with payments, and it’s another line of defense against some attacks.
- kaiju0 5y ago
  Yep it neatly organizes everything with subscriptions and vetted apps into a single location. Can't ask for more. The only people that want out of it is people who want a bigger rev cut, to bypass app store rules and infect devices.
  - SilverRed 5y ago
    > people who want a bigger rev cut This is not unreasonable. Apps like netfix and spotify can not possibly pay the Apple cut and stay competitive with apples own services which pay nothing. Not a single user is going to pay 30% extra to listen to the same music.
    - subroutine 5y ago
      Do netflix and spotify currently pay apple 30%?
      - jackson1442 5y ago
        They don’t allow you to subscribe in-app and are not allowed to show CTAs to subscribe online, just an opaque “sign in” screen.
      - SilverRed 5y ago
        When you install the app they throw you on a screen that says "You can't continue via the app. Yes, we know it sucks" They aren't allowed to tell you how to subscribe, they can just say you must and it can't be done in the app. While on Apples own services, it just uses your already filled payment details.
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
tmarsden 5y ago
It’s a shame we are reliant on (2) app stores. It would be nice if there was a way to safely implement browser plug-ins that would bring some of the functionality offered by native apps. Not sure if WASM/WASI might save the day here eventually, but the path we’re on now is looking pretty grim if the status quo wins out.
- Drew_ 5y ago
  Plenty of web APIs that offer native functionality. Apple will not implement them in Safari for obvious reasons. Apple will also not allow non-Safari browsers for the same reason. Apple knows that even simply allowing Web Push on iOS would noticeably eat into their services revenue.
  - kgin 5y ago
    100%. There's no reason why people can run spreadsheets and word processors and vector design apps on their Mac browsers but have to download a 100mb binary app on their iPhones to order pizza. Mobile web tech could support the overwhelming majority of use cases without jank with a few key, non-impossible improvements. And they would if there were any incentive for platform owners to do so.
- oscargrouch 5y ago
  While phone apps fall into the app store trap, browser are also falling into the cloud trap. Its not enough to run applications on the browser, you need to fix some of the things that make browsers weak giving we need to let go all the information to cloud providers who will then monetize on it somehow. Years ago i've put myself into this path to build something that could help a little bit on this. I hope this can cover some ground as the future looks bad for everyone else who is not part of the big tech paradise, as outside of it, everything is being sucked by a big straw and dying a long, slow and painful death..
encryptluks2 5y ago
You can have third-party Android app stores. Can you say the same about Apple? While I agree that Google has market-dominance, they are not anti-competition or anti-consumer in the same sense as Apple. Android is open source, Chrome OS is open source, etc. Google is actually providing and contributing something back to the community. Apple intentionally locks people to specific hardware and to their app store.
- hugi 5y ago
  Google is an ad company. I do not understand why people would choose to use an operating system created by an ad company, designed to harvest their personal information. I'm happy to use an iPhone, knowing my personal information is safe and it reduces my chances of being Harvested by Google.
  - sneak 5y ago
    The iPhone and iPad transmit their fixed and unchangeable hardware serial number to Apple every time you open the App Store, like a permanent supercookie. Apple has just as much reason to harvest your personal information and track you in their App Store as anyone else.
  - diogenesjunior 5y ago
    >I'm happy to use an iPhone, knowing my personal information is safe and it reduces my chances of being Harvested by Google LOL. Instead of bowing down to one master, you chose to bow down to the other?
    - hugi 5y ago
      I choose to spend my money on devices from a company that's explicitly and repeatedly stated that their mission is privacy. But if you choose to buy phones from ad companies, it's your decision.
      - harry8 5y ago
        They'll flip the nanosecond it suits them. Their commitment isn't valuable or enforceable or anything other than a dodgy sales pitch. Really. They can encode it in contact in a second and choose not to.
jsnell 5y ago
The full report is worth reading. It's really well written, seems well researched, and despite being opinionated gives the other side of the story.
jay_kyburz 5y ago
Its interesting that they talk about the "App Stores" and not the operating systems. If our phones could run open operating systems we would have no problem with the app stores.
mburst 5y ago
This reminds me of the Internet Explorer antitrust issue. Eventually Microsoft had to give users a choice on start up. Not sure if it directly led to better browsers or not, but it certainly didn't hurt. I could see the outcome being the same here where users will get to choose which store(s) they want on their device during setup rather than defaulting to the play or apple store
numair 5y ago
There is no reason Apple and Google couldn’t set up an App Store Certification framework which would allow trusted third parties to operate their own app stores that were regularly audited and liable for breaches of security. In fact, this would be far better than the current approach, where these business units are largely unaccountable and hidden behind layers of corporate complexity (which eventually leads to dysfunction, which eventually leads to slower growth). Apple and Google could then spin off their own in-house app stores into independent units, which might even unlock more value for shareholders as these businesses would be likely to be valued at a much higher multiple than the parent. This would be a way to get regulators and shareholders to work together to achieve the same end result. JPMorgan, Goldman et al would go nuts over the fees for the “AppStore spin out IPO.” Now that I think about it, that would probably be the biggest IPO since Alibaba, or whatever the last “biggest IPO” was.
- edrxty 5y ago
  By implying a mandate for auditing and liability, there's no reason to use any terms other than the terms they already attach to the existing app stores. It would just be more of the same policies, just enforced even more arbitrarily as people shop around for which store will erroneously publish their app if the main Apple/Google one doesn't Apple isn't going to magically endorse the "Code execution, Piracy, and Porn App Showroom".
- sfifs 5y ago
  Google already does this to a certain extent by allowing other app stores and will I think very likely move towards certifying other payment frameworks as app store payments is not a significant revenue stream for them - they'll probably negotiate this as part of an antitrust deal with prosecutors Apple OTOH seems to depend on this for 15-20% of annual revenue and this is going to be much more difficult for them
- paxys 5y ago
  Funny thing is, both companies do exactly this to operate in China. The government does not allow companies to run their own app stores, so Apple and Google (and others who have similar kinds of online stores) have to hand over all operations – including app submission, storage, approvals, install etc. to another local government-approved company completely outside their control. They do all this willingly because they have to, and you don't hear a peep about it from them as they fight other governments worldwide who are trying to enforce even the slightest amount of control of their own.
exikyut 5y ago
> "The ACCC has put forward a series of potential measures in response to its findings, including that [...] app developers be allowed to provide consumers with information about alternative payment options [...]" > "The ACCC is also concerned with restrictions imposed by Apple and Google which mean developers have no choice but to use Apple and Google’s own payment systems for any in-app purchases,” Mr Sims said. Newsflash: Epic Games relocates operations to Australia -- > "To address this market power, we believe app developers should have more information about how their apps are made discoverable to consumers and that consumers should have the ability to change or remove any pre-installed or default apps." > The ACCC has put forward a series of potential measures in response to its findings, including that consumers be able to rate and review all apps, that consumers have the ability to change any pre-installed default app on their device [...] All RIIIGHT!!! No more unremovable bloatware and background services! -- All this hopefulness has me wondering if we could successfully explain the benefits of unlocked bootloaders next. :D
simondotau 5y ago
This report is somewhat bipolar. On one hand it's arguing that Google and Apple exert too much control over smartphone app marketplaces. On the other hand its proposed remedy asks that Google and Apple exert even more control over these app marketplaces by stamping down on anti-consumer practices like subscription traps and scams. On the other other hand it proposes that Apple and Google should allow third party payment options, making it harder for Google and Apple to thwart subscription traps and scams.
- asdfaoeu 5y ago
  I think the general argument is that the stores are not competitive and providing a low value service (having scams and subscription traps) while collecting a large amount of proceeds from developers.
  - simondotau 5y ago
    But the stores clearly do make it more difficult for developers to engage in scams and subscription traps. I strongly support increased pressure on Google and Apple to do a lot more in this regard (especially with certain kinds of pay-to-avoid-grinding games) but it's wrong to speak about this as though it was a binary state.
- hugh-avherald 5y ago
  I think you're looking for an inconsistency where there is none. Requiring Apple and Google to stamp down on subscription traps and scams is not handing more control to them.
  - simondotau 5y ago
    I did not say it was "handing" more control to them. I said it was asking them to exert more control. The ACCC are calling on Google and Apple to clamp down harder on what developers can get away with inside their walled gardens. If Apple and Google comply, this clamping down will be seen as anti-competitive in other contexts and used as evidence against them in other venues.
thewileyone 5y ago
Apple does use this monopoly to their advantage. You can ask the developers whose IP has been stolen and their app (money taken out of their wallets) taken off the AppStore because Apple decided to incorporate the app function and ability into iOS or an Apple app.
fblp 5y ago
It's important to note that competition law is broader and more broadly enforced than antitrust law in the US. A particularly relevant area for these issues is "Section 46 - Misuse of market power". This is distinct from laws in relation to price fixing, monopolies and merges. The ACCC (and possibly the later, Australian courts) will be trying to answer if Google / Apple are misusing market power as part of this inquiry. One area that is particularly ripe is "the market for in-app payments". The ACCC would be looking whether it can establish whether under s46: a) does the company have substantial market power? and b) is it engaging in conduct for the purpose, effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition? More info is available here: https://www.accc.gov.au/business/anti-competitive-behaviour/misuse-of-market-power#misuse-of-market-power-test https://www.accc.gov.au/business/anti-competitive-behaviour/... s46 - Misuse of market power was revised for easier enforcement/litigate under in 2017, and you can see a list of active cases include a case from Epic Games vs Apple and Unlockd Ltd v Google (Filed in Australia): https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=34d307e2-1d63-4032-871d-e0975846fd79 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=34d307e2-1d63... It is a BIG deal for a private company to take action under s46. There used to only be a couple cases every decade. It is possible that an undertaking or court-order that could emerge out of this inquiry would require Google/Apple to make it easier for apps to accept in-app payments from providers other than Google and Apple in Australia. As far as I know, the USA does not have an equivalent area of law, and if it does, it certainly is not enforced. *disclosure: I worked at the ACCC 2008-2011 and these are opinions of my own.
laingc 5y ago
Why does half of HN seem intent on ruining the iPhone for the rest of us? The explicit selling proposition of the iPhone is that it is a closed ecosystem. I and my family buy it for precisely this reason. If you want a choice about what you install, you can have it! It's called Android, and hundreds of phone manufacturers are lining up to sell you a compatible handset. Leave us with the one phone manufacturer who has managed to reliably deliver a mostly safe and secure handset.
- m4rtink 5y ago
  Anything legitimizing loss of user control over hardware and peddling proprietary walled garden as something good and desirable is simply immoral, dangerous for the future of Humanity and should not be legal.
- 8note 5y ago
  That's not why my family bought iPhones; they shouldn't be stuck with anticompetitive app store practices because they have iPhones. Eg. My mother can't use any apps because she doesn't trust apple with her credit card number, and since you can't use the app store for free apps without a credit card, she uses no apps on her phone
- ThatPlayer 5y ago
  Because at their size, developers cannot ignore them, and Apple is hurting developers by forcing their rules on them. That's what it means to have monopoly power or dominance as this article calls it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Apocryphon 5y ago
  Why do you have such little faith in Apple, to think they cannot provide a safe and secure handset with a semi-open ecosystem?
thombles 5y ago
Incidentally, if you have a business registered for GST in Australia you have to submit a quarterly activity statement. The tax office website had bizarre authentication requirements but the browser plugin was at least cross-platform. They now require you to use the myGovID app, which is - you guessed it - available only on the App Store and Play Store. You can't even run a business without being part of the duopoly. https://www.mygovid.gov.au/ https://www.mygovid.gov.au/
- hugi 5y ago
  How is that legal? Isn't that just incompetent government?
  - bogwog 5y ago
    Yes, Google and Apple's current situation is the result of incompetent government.
  - partomniscient 5y ago
    We're living in a time where if you don't have a mobile phone you can't complete the online form and therefore the transaction becomes impossible. This is even worse if you're on the phone and the person on the other end of the phone that works for the company is the one filling in the digital form. The fact that its now further embedded in an app. owned by international conglomerates is hardly suprising. They're slowly losing what control they had. Governments are incapable of doing sensible things involving ever changing technology. There are too many things understood by too few people for sensible decisions to be made, let alone worrying about do these things age well and just add to the behemoth of red tape^H^H^H^H digital bureaucratic cloud storage. Paper systems didn't have these problems (although they certainly had some disadvantages). The ACCC is one of Australia's few good independent bodies, but pretty much all of the others have had their funding greatly reduced over time. Whatever good ideas they come up with just get ignored a lot of the time, because corruption pays and ineptitude is normalised. The financial watchdog is basically toothless at this point. The Robodebt scheme [1] is just one of their recent screwups. Interestingly, there's now something similar that's come to light regarding Post Office budgets in the UK from a few decades ago. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robodebt_scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robodebt_scheme
_aunn 5y ago
can we get apple/google to factory unlock bootloaders too? how about x64 chipset options instead of locking down their phones with arm? i’m kind-of not kidding, either — more asking. is there precedent for governments being able to force companies to completely open up their systems to whatever the courts define as “competitive?”
rektide 5y ago
i really don't mind Google's app store because: 1. most Android phones I've seen let you install other app stores. the OS is built to support running additional app-stores. it takes a manufacturer being cruel to mess this liberty up on Android. 2. i can run other browsers on Android. iOS does not allow any form of competing web technology to exist on their platform. iOS makes everyone showing web content use Safari. on Android, i can use Google's app store to load other browsers which are free to support different sets of online technologies. on Apple's platforms, i will always be restricted in connecting to others with whatever means Apple affords me in their Safari browser. of the two entities, i only see one company engaged in outright anti-competitive behaviors. i would like to see both reduced in presence & dominance, yet i myself also often use Google's Play Store on my Android devices, and only occasionally reach out to the alternatives like F-droid. but i know, i expect & i do use these fallback stores on Android. and i do run other browsers. i would never considering buying an anti-consumer anti-competitive device like an Apple product, because sometimes good software does have a hard time making it through the gauntlet of approval & i do not want that constraint. i would not consider buying an anti-consumer anti-competitve device like an Apple product, because sometimes there are interesting new web & online standards & protocols & forever being limited to what Safari does is incredibly constraining. i would like to use Play Store less, but i am glad that the ecosystem it's built upon does not deliberately exclude all alternatives.
withinboredom 5y ago
A friend of mine got a system76 computer and was shopping for speakers. Their partner had used iOS since they were a teen and never used anything non-apple. Their partner was so confused that you could buy any speaker, it just works, and freaked out at the choices. It was very interesting.
gigatexal 5y ago
Honestly I am for a single store and for pushing all things through Apple Pay etc etc (send your hate of my fanboyism to email in my profile). But… It seems this is a fight not worth dying for. Sure Apple and Google will fight and spend millions on lawyers but ultimately whether they win in court they’ll likely lose the next time legislation gets passed. Better to instead be thinking about the next must have gadget or service to further their business than the AppStore.
- trissylegs 5y ago
  Note that Australia fought the entire cigarette industry in multiple courts and won. I think they deal with tech companies. As long as they don't send any Emus.
hroa 5y ago
I have worked on many mobile app development projects, and I am grateful that google and apple try to protect the consumer. App devs are in full control of the stack in the app, and it is very easy to unintentionally (or intentionally) handle your data insecurely. For example, app devs can disable https communication with their own external APIs, secretly transmit your data on their own servers, harvest your data from other apps like contacts, and build on buggy/sketchy/outdated middleware. And, there is typically no visibility for the user. Yes - same is true for desktop apps. I appreciate Apple's recent moves to make this more transparent. More needs to be done. It is much harder (not impossible) to maliciously handle your data in browsers because of standard security features (like the green lock icon when https is enabled) and powerful dev tools to examine network communication and code libraries. After building many apps, I tend to only install apps from companies that have commercial pressure to handle my data properly.
- cortexio 5y ago
  Google and apple are not securing your data. Any app on your phone that uses the internet already talks to an external API. And they can sell your data to anyone at any time without google/apple ever knowing about it. And that's normal. https doesnt really do much to make your data secure. But google/apple arent even needed to force apps to use https. Your phone can just say it's required by default. Google/apple are just pretending they do something for you, it's just all about control, so they can have all the profit. It's basically the same as the government saying they do not allow any other foodstores other than storeX. Because other stores might sell you food that's poisoned or expired. So to protect u, we dont allow any other stores. And storeX can just decide what the price is, what food you're allowed to buy, etc etc. It's shit. You dont want this.
JacobSeated 5y ago
This is just another clear example of Google refusing to fulfill their responsibilities. Of course, if someone violated the rules they should also be entitled to know exactly which rules was violated, and exactly what is wrong with their implementation. The fact that Google refuses to provide this information is a strong indication that Google is not acting with the best of intentions, and that is something that is worth looking into. Preferably we should push towards more open systems that does not rely on centralized "app stores"; of course, be it Google Play store or Apple's App Store, the fact that they can just block apps they do not like is extremely problematic. There has to be other ways to install apps, without using these centralized mechanisms.
therealmarv 5y ago
And they are doing that world wide. Why does the world need to adopt what Apple and Google think is appropriate? Like two companies defining basically what apps we can use according to the political correctness in USA!
snyp 5y ago
Apart from the article, I am pretty sure a lot of the arguments against the AppStore would disappear if Apple just paid more to the developers and reduced it's cut. I hope they find a good middle ground, we definitely need an App Store for the majority of the users out there, something that is relatively safe and allows for massive distribution but also keeps out a lot of malicious actors (its not perfect but its better than a lot of other options). It would be nice if developers also got paid a lot more.
- skohan 5y ago
  Honestly I don't see how they can justify more than a few percent cut. They offer no value in terms of discoverability anymore, app stores essentially only serve the purpose of a file host. But even if they were only taking a 5% cut, I think the argument still stands that they have a negative impact on consumers in that they decide what the hardware you bought is and isn't allowed to do. Apple can invalidate entire business models if they disallow an app on their store, and an entrepreneur can spend millions developing a business only to have it rendered inviable by a change to the terms and services which can be made over night without warning. All of this could be solved by allowing side-loading. It wouldn't even have to be made easy to do - go ahead and bury it deep in the settings behind a bunch of scary warnings. But I see no excuse for not allowing this at all.
- aabbcc1241 5y ago
  Ubuntu, Archlinux, centos, npm, conda all have 'official app store'. They work well as gatekeeper to avoid majority users getting malicious software. At the same time, those 'app store' are not exclusive, they allow 3rd party 'app lists' or at least allow other means to distribute 'apps'.
EricE 5y ago
Can you have third-party Android app stores and access to all of Google services that have the same level of ease of access? Nope. If adding a third party app store was so easy Epic wouldn't be suing Google the same as they are suing Apple. I used to be a staunch supporter of Apple and Google as gatekeepers of their own respective ecosystems but the more I watch them botch the management of those ecosystems (from not stopping malware as promised, automation banning valid apps with days/weeks/months before resolution/restoration, app banning for political reasons that are questionable, etc) it's clear that an open marketplace is still the best solution. Time to level the playing field and update antitrust laws to account for more modern times.
PoignardAzur 5y ago
For those like me who had trouble finding the full report, here it is: https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20platform%20services%20inquiry%20-%20March%202021%20interim%20report.pdf https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20platform%20se...
darepublic 5y ago
I think those of us who dislike this need to hedge by making an open source phone.
6510 5y ago
I hear praise of current standards which just makes me laugh. The standards are pathetic. Just look at any other industry. There are always detailed rules and you will be told when you break them with great accuracy. The inquisition had higher standards than these. I honest to god can't develop software or run any business if I cant rule out faceless executive punishment without clarification. I cant even take web development all that seriously with googles dictatorship. I believe this to the the right analogy: Imagine building a brick and mortar store before asking for permission to open it. You get the permission but move some shelves around and buy a new carpet. You get a letter from Acme Corporation: We don't like something! Your business is hereby terminated. You naively reply and ask why? Is it the shelves? Then they visit you, wack you over the head with an AK47 and burn the place to the ground. Outside there are people cheering the purification.

647 points by skeletonjelly 5y ago

Do they have any teeth or is it just checkbox ticking exercise to make consumer feel something is being done? > There is a window of opportunity for Apple and Google themselves to take steps to improve outcomes for app developers and consumers by adopting the potential measures we have identified Why not just introduce new regulation? Companies will be dragging this as long as they can and reap profits, whereas such organisations continue to take salaries, do pointless meetings and then release more reports how the situation looks bad.

paranoidrobot 5y ago
They have teeth, and they are the regulator. This is basically an opening statement on their view of the world, and puts Apple and Google on notice that this is something the ACCC are interested in. It is basically a standard way the ACCC announces what they're doing and putting industry on notice. They did this for comparison sites that had secret sorting/recommendations that weren't in the best interest of the consumer. They've done this for retailers who didn't abide by Australian Consumer Law on warranties and various disclaimers given in-store. In most cases there's usually some kind of enforceable agreement reached, sometimes they go to court to enforce compliance.

hank808 5y ago

I'd love to see a solid non-OS specific app store come into being. I own anyapp.com and any.app, let me know if anyone wants to partner up.

alfiedotwtf 5y ago
F-droid tends to fill the gap for Andriod, but not enough developers sending their apps there. I guess when there's no monetary incentive, it's only the open source crowd that will participate
- hyperpallium2 5y ago
  Only open source is allowed there.
  - SilverRed 5y ago
    Which is what you want. Whenever possible you should avoid running proprietary programs.
- SilverRed 5y ago
  Fdroid was the thing I missed most about moving to ios. Sure, it had a limited app selection and the apps were basic. But every app on fdroid had a really wholesome feel to it, like the app devs have made this just for you to enjoy and not to try to squeeze money from you. Now on the app store, absolutely everything is crammed with adverts, tracking IAPs, and subscriptions. I can't just install an app and expect it to work because there is always some catch that ruins it.
- m4rtink 5y ago
  F-droid also has the sane condition that all apps it distributes need to be built from source on its build infra (basically all Linux distros require the same). While really good for security and debugging I can imagine it can be complicated to suport for many less experienced developers used to cooling stuff together in an Android IDE where a binary APK falls out at the end that they then upload to the store.
hank808 5y ago
https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2021/4/30/resetting-the-app-store https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2021/4/30/resetting-...

dlgeek 5y ago

> The ACCC has put forward a series of potential measures in response to its findings, including that consumers be able to rate and review all apps, that consumers have the ability to change any pre-installed default app on their device, that app developers be allowed to provide consumers with information about alternative payment options and that information collected by Apple and Google in their capacity as app marketplace operators be ring-fenced from their other operations. Does anyone know what power the ACCC has to make these more than just "proposed"? I'm not familiar with it's role in the Australian political system.

justaguy88 5y ago
ACCC likely has full power to compel compliance (within Australia) if Apple/Google want to continue operating in Australia, they use this law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_and_Consumer_Act_2010 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_and_Consumer_Act_2...
dmagee 5y ago
Fair bit of teeth on the ACCC. https://theconversation.com/accc-world-first-australias-federal-court-found-google-misled-users-about-personal-location-data-159138 https://theconversation.com/accc-world-first-australias-fede...
- trollian 5y ago
  God I miss living in a country with real consumer protection.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ptcampbell 5y ago
I live in the US now but miss having an avenue to pursue if unjustly treated as a consumer. A watchdog with a modicum of actual power is a good thing. A small example: at one point it felt as though mere mention of the ombudsman was enough to sway dodgy phone carriers to acquiesce on minor matters such as billing, misleading advertising etc.

ent101 5y ago

I feel like we keep getting these inquiries/lawsuits/press releases every year but, literally, nothing gets any better at all. Every developer KNOWS that Google is extremely abusive towards them solely because of their position in the market yet nothing ever improves. If these are not illegal monopolies, what is?!

mulmen 5y ago
Well, the problem is that they aren't monopolies. They may be problematic but we don't have laws or regulations to deal with this specific situation. And when we call it a "monopoly" because that seems to be the closest thing then the defenders of these organizations can say "but it's not a monopoly!" and they are right. So if you think it is problematic to have two players in a market even when they are on equal footing then you need to promote legislation to make that illegal. Or if you think there's something specifically harmful about this pair of dominant players then those externalities need to be addressed through legislation. But shouting "monopoly" is, at this point, counter-productive IMHO.
- clusterfish 5y ago
  Our laws leave a lot to be desired, but being a monopoly is neither sufficient nor required to get hammered: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bd2b38f1-9b66-448f-9bca-835c2fb9b94e https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=bd2b38f1-9b66... What's required, and lacking, is the political will to prosecute.
- wjdp 5y ago
  Oh go on then, a duopoly with fairly entrenched user bases and no real chance of additional players.
- madeofpalk 5y ago
  "Citation needed". Whether they’re a monopoly or not is an opinion, one which Epic is currently trying to assert in court.
- paranoidrobot 5y ago

jbverschoor 5y ago

Well I love my Apple App Store. It protects me for certain things with payments, and it’s another line of defense against some attacks.

kaiju0 5y ago
Yep it neatly organizes everything with subscriptions and vetted apps into a single location. Can't ask for more. The only people that want out of it is people who want a bigger rev cut, to bypass app store rules and infect devices.
- SilverRed 5y ago
  > people who want a bigger rev cut This is not unreasonable. Apps like netfix and spotify can not possibly pay the Apple cut and stay competitive with apples own services which pay nothing. Not a single user is going to pay 30% extra to listen to the same music.
  - subroutine 5y ago
    Do netflix and spotify currently pay apple 30%?
    - jackson1442 5y ago
      They don’t allow you to subscribe in-app and are not allowed to show CTAs to subscribe online, just an opaque “sign in” screen.
    - SilverRed 5y ago
      When you install the app they throw you on a screen that says "You can't continue via the app. Yes, we know it sucks" They aren't allowed to tell you how to subscribe, they can just say you must and it can't be done in the app. While on Apples own services, it just uses your already filled payment details.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago

tmarsden 5y ago

It’s a shame we are reliant on (2) app stores. It would be nice if there was a way to safely implement browser plug-ins that would bring some of the functionality offered by native apps. Not sure if WASM/WASI might save the day here eventually, but the path we’re on now is looking pretty grim if the status quo wins out.

Drew_ 5y ago
Plenty of web APIs that offer native functionality. Apple will not implement them in Safari for obvious reasons. Apple will also not allow non-Safari browsers for the same reason. Apple knows that even simply allowing Web Push on iOS would noticeably eat into their services revenue.
- kgin 5y ago
  100%. There's no reason why people can run spreadsheets and word processors and vector design apps on their Mac browsers but have to download a 100mb binary app on their iPhones to order pizza. Mobile web tech could support the overwhelming majority of use cases without jank with a few key, non-impossible improvements. And they would if there were any incentive for platform owners to do so.
oscargrouch 5y ago
While phone apps fall into the app store trap, browser are also falling into the cloud trap. Its not enough to run applications on the browser, you need to fix some of the things that make browsers weak giving we need to let go all the information to cloud providers who will then monetize on it somehow. Years ago i've put myself into this path to build something that could help a little bit on this. I hope this can cover some ground as the future looks bad for everyone else who is not part of the big tech paradise, as outside of it, everything is being sucked by a big straw and dying a long, slow and painful death..

encryptluks2 5y ago

You can have third-party Android app stores. Can you say the same about Apple? While I agree that Google has market-dominance, they are not anti-competition or anti-consumer in the same sense as Apple. Android is open source, Chrome OS is open source, etc. Google is actually providing and contributing something back to the community. Apple intentionally locks people to specific hardware and to their app store.

hugi 5y ago
Google is an ad company. I do not understand why people would choose to use an operating system created by an ad company, designed to harvest their personal information. I'm happy to use an iPhone, knowing my personal information is safe and it reduces my chances of being Harvested by Google.
- sneak 5y ago
  The iPhone and iPad transmit their fixed and unchangeable hardware serial number to Apple every time you open the App Store, like a permanent supercookie. Apple has just as much reason to harvest your personal information and track you in their App Store as anyone else.
- diogenesjunior 5y ago
  >I'm happy to use an iPhone, knowing my personal information is safe and it reduces my chances of being Harvested by Google LOL. Instead of bowing down to one master, you chose to bow down to the other?
  - hugi 5y ago
    I choose to spend my money on devices from a company that's explicitly and repeatedly stated that their mission is privacy. But if you choose to buy phones from ad companies, it's your decision.
    - harry8 5y ago
      They'll flip the nanosecond it suits them. Their commitment isn't valuable or enforceable or anything other than a dodgy sales pitch. Really. They can encode it in contact in a second and choose not to.

jsnell 5y ago

The full report is worth reading. It's really well written, seems well researched, and despite being opinionated gives the other side of the story.

jay_kyburz 5y ago

Its interesting that they talk about the "App Stores" and not the operating systems. If our phones could run open operating systems we would have no problem with the app stores.

mburst 5y ago

This reminds me of the Internet Explorer antitrust issue. Eventually Microsoft had to give users a choice on start up. Not sure if it directly led to better browsers or not, but it certainly didn't hurt. I could see the outcome being the same here where users will get to choose which store(s) they want on their device during setup rather than defaulting to the play or apple store

numair 5y ago

There is no reason Apple and Google couldn’t set up an App Store Certification framework which would allow trusted third parties to operate their own app stores that were regularly audited and liable for breaches of security. In fact, this would be far better than the current approach, where these business units are largely unaccountable and hidden behind layers of corporate complexity (which eventually leads to dysfunction, which eventually leads to slower growth). Apple and Google could then spin off their own in-house app stores into independent units, which might even unlock more value for shareholders as these businesses would be likely to be valued at a much higher multiple than the parent. This would be a way to get regulators and shareholders to work together to achieve the same end result. JPMorgan, Goldman et al would go nuts over the fees for the “AppStore spin out IPO.” Now that I think about it, that would probably be the biggest IPO since Alibaba, or whatever the last “biggest IPO” was.

edrxty 5y ago
By implying a mandate for auditing and liability, there's no reason to use any terms other than the terms they already attach to the existing app stores. It would just be more of the same policies, just enforced even more arbitrarily as people shop around for which store will erroneously publish their app if the main Apple/Google one doesn't Apple isn't going to magically endorse the "Code execution, Piracy, and Porn App Showroom".
sfifs 5y ago
Google already does this to a certain extent by allowing other app stores and will I think very likely move towards certifying other payment frameworks as app store payments is not a significant revenue stream for them - they'll probably negotiate this as part of an antitrust deal with prosecutors Apple OTOH seems to depend on this for 15-20% of annual revenue and this is going to be much more difficult for them
paxys 5y ago
Funny thing is, both companies do exactly this to operate in China. The government does not allow companies to run their own app stores, so Apple and Google (and others who have similar kinds of online stores) have to hand over all operations – including app submission, storage, approvals, install etc. to another local government-approved company completely outside their control. They do all this willingly because they have to, and you don't hear a peep about it from them as they fight other governments worldwide who are trying to enforce even the slightest amount of control of their own.

exikyut 5y ago

> "The ACCC has put forward a series of potential measures in response to its findings, including that [...] app developers be allowed to provide consumers with information about alternative payment options [...]" > "The ACCC is also concerned with restrictions imposed by Apple and Google which mean developers have no choice but to use Apple and Google’s own payment systems for any in-app purchases,” Mr Sims said. Newsflash: Epic Games relocates operations to Australia -- > "To address this market power, we believe app developers should have more information about how their apps are made discoverable to consumers and that consumers should have the ability to change or remove any pre-installed or default apps." > The ACCC has put forward a series of potential measures in response to its findings, including that consumers be able to rate and review all apps, that consumers have the ability to change any pre-installed default app on their device [...] All RIIIGHT!!! No more unremovable bloatware and background services! -- All this hopefulness has me wondering if we could successfully explain the benefits of unlocked bootloaders next. :D

simondotau 5y ago

This report is somewhat bipolar. On one hand it's arguing that Google and Apple exert too much control over smartphone app marketplaces. On the other hand its proposed remedy asks that Google and Apple exert even more control over these app marketplaces by stamping down on anti-consumer practices like subscription traps and scams. On the other other hand it proposes that Apple and Google should allow third party payment options, making it harder for Google and Apple to thwart subscription traps and scams.

asdfaoeu 5y ago
I think the general argument is that the stores are not competitive and providing a low value service (having scams and subscription traps) while collecting a large amount of proceeds from developers.
- simondotau 5y ago
  But the stores clearly do make it more difficult for developers to engage in scams and subscription traps. I strongly support increased pressure on Google and Apple to do a lot more in this regard (especially with certain kinds of pay-to-avoid-grinding games) but it's wrong to speak about this as though it was a binary state.
hugh-avherald 5y ago
I think you're looking for an inconsistency where there is none. Requiring Apple and Google to stamp down on subscription traps and scams is not handing more control to them.
- simondotau 5y ago
  I did not say it was "handing" more control to them. I said it was asking them to exert more control. The ACCC are calling on Google and Apple to clamp down harder on what developers can get away with inside their walled gardens. If Apple and Google comply, this clamping down will be seen as anti-competitive in other contexts and used as evidence against them in other venues.

thewileyone 5y ago

Apple does use this monopoly to their advantage. You can ask the developers whose IP has been stolen and their app (money taken out of their wallets) taken off the AppStore because Apple decided to incorporate the app function and ability into iOS or an Apple app.

fblp 5y ago

It's important to note that competition law is broader and more broadly enforced than antitrust law in the US. A particularly relevant area for these issues is "Section 46 - Misuse of market power". This is distinct from laws in relation to price fixing, monopolies and merges. The ACCC (and possibly the later, Australian courts) will be trying to answer if Google / Apple are misusing market power as part of this inquiry. One area that is particularly ripe is "the market for in-app payments". The ACCC would be looking whether it can establish whether under s46: a) does the company have substantial market power? and b) is it engaging in conduct for the purpose, effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition? More info is available here: https://www.accc.gov.au/business/anti-competitive-behaviour/misuse-of-market-power#misuse-of-market-power-test https://www.accc.gov.au/business/anti-competitive-behaviour/... s46 - Misuse of market power was revised for easier enforcement/litigate under in 2017, and you can see a list of active cases include a case from Epic Games vs Apple and Unlockd Ltd v Google (Filed in Australia): https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=34d307e2-1d63-4032-871d-e0975846fd79 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=34d307e2-1d63... It is a BIG deal for a private company to take action under s46. There used to only be a couple cases every decade. It is possible that an undertaking or court-order that could emerge out of this inquiry would require Google/Apple to make it easier for apps to accept in-app payments from providers other than Google and Apple in Australia. As far as I know, the USA does not have an equivalent area of law, and if it does, it certainly is not enforced. *disclosure: I worked at the ACCC 2008-2011 and these are opinions of my own.

laingc 5y ago

Why does half of HN seem intent on ruining the iPhone for the rest of us? The explicit selling proposition of the iPhone is that it is a closed ecosystem. I and my family buy it for precisely this reason. If you want a choice about what you install, you can have it! It's called Android, and hundreds of phone manufacturers are lining up to sell you a compatible handset. Leave us with the one phone manufacturer who has managed to reliably deliver a mostly safe and secure handset.

m4rtink 5y ago
Anything legitimizing loss of user control over hardware and peddling proprietary walled garden as something good and desirable is simply immoral, dangerous for the future of Humanity and should not be legal.
8note 5y ago
That's not why my family bought iPhones; they shouldn't be stuck with anticompetitive app store practices because they have iPhones. Eg. My mother can't use any apps because she doesn't trust apple with her credit card number, and since you can't use the app store for free apps without a credit card, she uses no apps on her phone
ThatPlayer 5y ago
Because at their size, developers cannot ignore them, and Apple is hurting developers by forcing their rules on them. That's what it means to have monopoly power or dominance as this article calls it.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Apocryphon 5y ago
Why do you have such little faith in Apple, to think they cannot provide a safe and secure handset with a semi-open ecosystem?

thombles 5y ago

Incidentally, if you have a business registered for GST in Australia you have to submit a quarterly activity statement. The tax office website had bizarre authentication requirements but the browser plugin was at least cross-platform. They now require you to use the myGovID app, which is - you guessed it - available only on the App Store and Play Store. You can't even run a business without being part of the duopoly. https://www.mygovid.gov.au/ https://www.mygovid.gov.au/

hugi 5y ago
How is that legal? Isn't that just incompetent government?
- bogwog 5y ago
  Yes, Google and Apple's current situation is the result of incompetent government.
- partomniscient 5y ago
  We're living in a time where if you don't have a mobile phone you can't complete the online form and therefore the transaction becomes impossible. This is even worse if you're on the phone and the person on the other end of the phone that works for the company is the one filling in the digital form. The fact that its now further embedded in an app. owned by international conglomerates is hardly suprising. They're slowly losing what control they had. Governments are incapable of doing sensible things involving ever changing technology. There are too many things understood by too few people for sensible decisions to be made, let alone worrying about do these things age well and just add to the behemoth of red tape^H^H^H^H digital bureaucratic cloud storage. Paper systems didn't have these problems (although they certainly had some disadvantages). The ACCC is one of Australia's few good independent bodies, but pretty much all of the others have had their funding greatly reduced over time. Whatever good ideas they come up with just get ignored a lot of the time, because corruption pays and ineptitude is normalised. The financial watchdog is basically toothless at this point. The Robodebt scheme [1] is just one of their recent screwups. Interestingly, there's now something similar that's come to light regarding Post Office budgets in the UK from a few decades ago. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robodebt_scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robodebt_scheme

_aunn 5y ago

can we get apple/google to factory unlock bootloaders too? how about x64 chipset options instead of locking down their phones with arm? i’m kind-of not kidding, either — more asking. is there precedent for governments being able to force companies to completely open up their systems to whatever the courts define as “competitive?”

rektide 5y ago

i really don't mind Google's app store because: 1. most Android phones I've seen let you install other app stores. the OS is built to support running additional app-stores. it takes a manufacturer being cruel to mess this liberty up on Android. 2. i can run other browsers on Android. iOS does not allow any form of competing web technology to exist on their platform. iOS makes everyone showing web content use Safari. on Android, i can use Google's app store to load other browsers which are free to support different sets of online technologies. on Apple's platforms, i will always be restricted in connecting to others with whatever means Apple affords me in their Safari browser. of the two entities, i only see one company engaged in outright anti-competitive behaviors. i would like to see both reduced in presence & dominance, yet i myself also often use Google's Play Store on my Android devices, and only occasionally reach out to the alternatives like F-droid. but i know, i expect & i do use these fallback stores on Android. and i do run other browsers. i would never considering buying an anti-consumer anti-competitive device like an Apple product, because sometimes good software does have a hard time making it through the gauntlet of approval & i do not want that constraint. i would not consider buying an anti-consumer anti-competitve device like an Apple product, because sometimes there are interesting new web & online standards & protocols & forever being limited to what Safari does is incredibly constraining. i would like to use Play Store less, but i am glad that the ecosystem it's built upon does not deliberately exclude all alternatives.

withinboredom 5y ago

A friend of mine got a system76 computer and was shopping for speakers. Their partner had used iOS since they were a teen and never used anything non-apple. Their partner was so confused that you could buy any speaker, it just works, and freaked out at the choices. It was very interesting.

gigatexal 5y ago

Honestly I am for a single store and for pushing all things through Apple Pay etc etc (send your hate of my fanboyism to email in my profile). But… It seems this is a fight not worth dying for. Sure Apple and Google will fight and spend millions on lawyers but ultimately whether they win in court they’ll likely lose the next time legislation gets passed. Better to instead be thinking about the next must have gadget or service to further their business than the AppStore.

trissylegs 5y ago
Note that Australia fought the entire cigarette industry in multiple courts and won. I think they deal with tech companies. As long as they don't send any Emus.

hroa 5y ago

I have worked on many mobile app development projects, and I am grateful that google and apple try to protect the consumer. App devs are in full control of the stack in the app, and it is very easy to unintentionally (or intentionally) handle your data insecurely. For example, app devs can disable https communication with their own external APIs, secretly transmit your data on their own servers, harvest your data from other apps like contacts, and build on buggy/sketchy/outdated middleware. And, there is typically no visibility for the user. Yes - same is true for desktop apps. I appreciate Apple's recent moves to make this more transparent. More needs to be done. It is much harder (not impossible) to maliciously handle your data in browsers because of standard security features (like the green lock icon when https is enabled) and powerful dev tools to examine network communication and code libraries. After building many apps, I tend to only install apps from companies that have commercial pressure to handle my data properly.

cortexio 5y ago
Google and apple are not securing your data. Any app on your phone that uses the internet already talks to an external API. And they can sell your data to anyone at any time without google/apple ever knowing about it. And that's normal. https doesnt really do much to make your data secure. But google/apple arent even needed to force apps to use https. Your phone can just say it's required by default. Google/apple are just pretending they do something for you, it's just all about control, so they can have all the profit. It's basically the same as the government saying they do not allow any other foodstores other than storeX. Because other stores might sell you food that's poisoned or expired. So to protect u, we dont allow any other stores. And storeX can just decide what the price is, what food you're allowed to buy, etc etc. It's shit. You dont want this.

JacobSeated 5y ago

This is just another clear example of Google refusing to fulfill their responsibilities. Of course, if someone violated the rules they should also be entitled to know exactly which rules was violated, and exactly what is wrong with their implementation. The fact that Google refuses to provide this information is a strong indication that Google is not acting with the best of intentions, and that is something that is worth looking into. Preferably we should push towards more open systems that does not rely on centralized "app stores"; of course, be it Google Play store or Apple's App Store, the fact that they can just block apps they do not like is extremely problematic. There has to be other ways to install apps, without using these centralized mechanisms.

therealmarv 5y ago

And they are doing that world wide. Why does the world need to adopt what Apple and Google think is appropriate? Like two companies defining basically what apps we can use according to the political correctness in USA!

snyp 5y ago

Apart from the article, I am pretty sure a lot of the arguments against the AppStore would disappear if Apple just paid more to the developers and reduced it's cut. I hope they find a good middle ground, we definitely need an App Store for the majority of the users out there, something that is relatively safe and allows for massive distribution but also keeps out a lot of malicious actors (its not perfect but its better than a lot of other options). It would be nice if developers also got paid a lot more.

skohan 5y ago
Honestly I don't see how they can justify more than a few percent cut. They offer no value in terms of discoverability anymore, app stores essentially only serve the purpose of a file host. But even if they were only taking a 5% cut, I think the argument still stands that they have a negative impact on consumers in that they decide what the hardware you bought is and isn't allowed to do. Apple can invalidate entire business models if they disallow an app on their store, and an entrepreneur can spend millions developing a business only to have it rendered inviable by a change to the terms and services which can be made over night without warning. All of this could be solved by allowing side-loading. It wouldn't even have to be made easy to do - go ahead and bury it deep in the settings behind a bunch of scary warnings. But I see no excuse for not allowing this at all.
aabbcc1241 5y ago
Ubuntu, Archlinux, centos, npm, conda all have 'official app store'. They work well as gatekeeper to avoid majority users getting malicious software. At the same time, those 'app store' are not exclusive, they allow 3rd party 'app lists' or at least allow other means to distribute 'apps'.

EricE 5y ago

Can you have third-party Android app stores and access to all of Google services that have the same level of ease of access? Nope. If adding a third party app store was so easy Epic wouldn't be suing Google the same as they are suing Apple. I used to be a staunch supporter of Apple and Google as gatekeepers of their own respective ecosystems but the more I watch them botch the management of those ecosystems (from not stopping malware as promised, automation banning valid apps with days/weeks/months before resolution/restoration, app banning for political reasons that are questionable, etc) it's clear that an open marketplace is still the best solution. Time to level the playing field and update antitrust laws to account for more modern times.

PoignardAzur 5y ago

For those like me who had trouble finding the full report, here it is: https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20platform%20services%20inquiry%20-%20March%202021%20interim%20report.pdf https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20platform%20se...

darepublic 5y ago

I think those of us who dislike this need to hedge by making an open source phone.

6510 5y ago

I hear praise of current standards which just makes me laugh. The standards are pathetic. Just look at any other industry. There are always detailed rules and you will be told when you break them with great accuracy. The inquisition had higher standards than these. I honest to god can't develop software or run any business if I cant rule out faceless executive punishment without clarification. I cant even take web development all that seriously with googles dictatorship. I believe this to the the right analogy: Imagine building a brick and mortar store before asking for permission to open it. You get the permission but move some shelves around and buy a new carpet. You get a letter from Acme Corporation: We don't like something! Your business is hereby terminated. You naively reply and ask why? Is it the shelves? Then they visit you, wack you over the head with an AK47 and burn the place to the ground. Outside there are people cheering the purification.