4 ms·

A very simple solution to all these issues would be to allow iOS users the ability to download apps from outside the App Store and ecosystem like on Android dev

A very simple solution to all these issues would be to allow iOS users the ability to download apps from outside the App Store and ecosystem like on Android devices and computers. The user could do it at their own risk. This would solve all the antitrust and regulatory issues.

jjtheblunt 6y ago
I wonder if App Stores (Apple, Google, whatever) serve a purpose no one seems to mention. Do these app stores (try to) verify that apps behave appropriately once given access to carrier cellular networks?
- WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
  I don't think that's a purpose but I know that Google does run automated tests on the apps themselves... We submitted an app with access to Firebase and immediately started seeing data being added and deleted from a non-test IP.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  > Do these app stores (try to) verify that apps behave appropriately once given access to carrier cellular networks? It's automated, but sometimes underpaid contractors are given a few minutes to inspect an app. However, due to the lack of competition, there's no pressure for better screening of apps. A free market for mobile app distribution would gives users more security, better efficiency and experiences, and lower prices as companies competed to provide better mobile app distribution methods.
  - zepto 6y ago
    > A free market for mobile app distribution would gives users more security, better efficiency and experiences, and lower prices as companies competed to provide better mobile app distribution methods. Or it could just end up as a race to the bottom as the market for paid apps is completely eliminated by a few ad based platforms.
    - heavyset_go 6y ago
      And yet that hasn't happened on macOS despite existing for two decades. The same can be said for Android and Windows, as well, with their respective lifetimes. It could also just end up that the community, or even non-profits, step up and provide great distributions methods. In fact, I'd say this is the one of the most likely outcomes based on the past, given Maemo's user-supplied apt repositories[1], webOS's Preware[2], or Android's F-Droid[3]. We can also look at the prevailing commercial app stores on platforms with multiple app distribution methods to see what's most likely. They aren't ad based platforms, like Ubuntu's Snap Store[4], Amazon's AppStore[5] for Android, and Samsung's Galaxy Store[6] for Android. Game distribution stores aren't like that, like Steam, GOG, Humble Store, Microsoft store, etc. Even on iOS, Cydia[7] wasn't an ad based platform, and you could purchase paid apps on it. [1] https://maemo-leste.github.io/maemo-leste-repositories-and-community-packages.html https://maemo-leste.github.io/maemo-leste-repositories-and-c... [2] https://webos-internals.org/wiki/Application:Preware https://webos-internals.org/wiki/Application:Preware [3] https://www.f-droid.org/ https://www.f-droid.org/ [4] https://snapcraft.io/store https://snapcraft.io/store [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Appstore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Appstore [6] https://www.samsung.com/us/apps/galaxy-store/ https://www.samsung.com/us/apps/galaxy-store/ [7] https://cydia-app.com/ https://cydia-app.com/
      - zepto 6y ago
        > And yet that hasn't happened on macOS despite existing for two decades. Hasn’t it? Pretty much everyone else seems to think it has. The cottage industry of high quality Mac software makers is practically dead and even the Omni Group is struggling. As for Cydia, that was too small to be a model for anything. It’s also from another era. Remember Facebook was just a web app in those days, and nowhere near the behemoth it is today. Android stores other than Google play are all second class citizens and so not relevant. The proposals for alternate app stores on iOS are all explicit that they cannot be second class citizens. Facebook would love to approve apps that have a tracking identifier and don’t ask permission to track. What would stop them if they ran their own store?
- jjtheblunt 6y ago
  downvotes for a question?
kmeisthax 6y ago
The linked blog post explicitly argues that sideloading doesn't fix the problem. If competition law says Spotify should be allowed to run their own payment system on iPhones, then it also needs to be just as easy to install Spotify on iPhones as it is any app that doesn't use said payment system. If Apple says "ok you can still be on iPhone, but users have to jump through hoops to install Spotify", that's still almost as bad. There's two separate but related issues: 1. The App Store lockout 2. The requirement to use Apple's royalty-bearing payment methods for digital goods #1 is evidence of monopolistic intent, but #2 is the actual market harm. If the law considers #2 to be a market harm, then it's going to demand Apple hand direct payments in Spotify to you on a silver platter, not hide it in a back room with a bunch of safety warnings on it. Remember: Antitrust is not about freedom, it's about competition in recognized markets. If it was purely about freedom, they would've just repealed copyright and patents, and had the government directly subsidize all art and invention through monetary grants instead of monopoly rights. As an example of this... the EU fined Google billions of dollars for just having their own services come up first in Search. There is literally no coercion of users involved there; Google Search customers aren't required to use Google Shopping at all. The EU just considers the top of the SERP to be so valuable that they don't think Google should have any of it.
m463 6y ago
That would return control to the users. You could install software apple doesn't give you permission to have, like a firewall (seriously!) Seriously, we need apps that lets you find out what your phone is doing, and who it is talking to It would be nice to have free software available, and also compile and install your own software
- astrange 6y ago
  You can do that with a VPN, but of course it would be used for evil like Onavo.
heavyset_go 6y ago
Even the Android solution is mired in anticompetitive limitations imposed by Google to favor the Play Store. Google prevents mobile app distribution competitors from competing with the Play Store on feature parity because user installable 3rd party mobile app stores cannot implement automatic upgrades, background installation of apps, or batch installs of apps like the Play Store can. > The user could do it at their own risk. There's also this issue. Currently on Android and macOS, if you try to run an app that wasn't downloaded from the Play Store, or notarized by Apple in the case of macOS, the systems prevent the user from running it, and show them scary warnings that they don't see if Google or Apple distributed the app to them. macOS in particular will treat un-notarized apps as if they're radioactive, even refusing to open the apps when double-clicking them. Users must know the magic ritual to open those apps, by disabling Gatekeeper and by using the right-click context menu to launch them. The result is that apps supplied or authorized by Google and Apple run without a problem, but if the developer didn't pay the Google or Apple tax to distribute or authorize their apps, users are led to believe that those apps are either malicious or not working.

jjtheblunt 6y ago

I wonder if App Stores (Apple, Google, whatever) serve a purpose no one seems to mention. Do these app stores (try to) verify that apps behave appropriately once given access to carrier cellular networks?

WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
I don't think that's a purpose but I know that Google does run automated tests on the apps themselves... We submitted an app with access to Firebase and immediately started seeing data being added and deleted from a non-test IP.
heavyset_go 6y ago
> Do these app stores (try to) verify that apps behave appropriately once given access to carrier cellular networks? It's automated, but sometimes underpaid contractors are given a few minutes to inspect an app. However, due to the lack of competition, there's no pressure for better screening of apps. A free market for mobile app distribution would gives users more security, better efficiency and experiences, and lower prices as companies competed to provide better mobile app distribution methods.
- zepto 6y ago
  > A free market for mobile app distribution would gives users more security, better efficiency and experiences, and lower prices as companies competed to provide better mobile app distribution methods. Or it could just end up as a race to the bottom as the market for paid apps is completely eliminated by a few ad based platforms.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    And yet that hasn't happened on macOS despite existing for two decades. The same can be said for Android and Windows, as well, with their respective lifetimes. It could also just end up that the community, or even non-profits, step up and provide great distributions methods. In fact, I'd say this is the one of the most likely outcomes based on the past, given Maemo's user-supplied apt repositories[1], webOS's Preware[2], or Android's F-Droid[3]. We can also look at the prevailing commercial app stores on platforms with multiple app distribution methods to see what's most likely. They aren't ad based platforms, like Ubuntu's Snap Store[4], Amazon's AppStore[5] for Android, and Samsung's Galaxy Store[6] for Android. Game distribution stores aren't like that, like Steam, GOG, Humble Store, Microsoft store, etc. Even on iOS, Cydia[7] wasn't an ad based platform, and you could purchase paid apps on it. [1] https://maemo-leste.github.io/maemo-leste-repositories-and-community-packages.html https://maemo-leste.github.io/maemo-leste-repositories-and-c... [2] https://webos-internals.org/wiki/Application:Preware https://webos-internals.org/wiki/Application:Preware [3] https://www.f-droid.org/ https://www.f-droid.org/ [4] https://snapcraft.io/store https://snapcraft.io/store [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Appstore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Appstore [6] https://www.samsung.com/us/apps/galaxy-store/ https://www.samsung.com/us/apps/galaxy-store/ [7] https://cydia-app.com/ https://cydia-app.com/
    - zepto 6y ago
      > And yet that hasn't happened on macOS despite existing for two decades. Hasn’t it? Pretty much everyone else seems to think it has. The cottage industry of high quality Mac software makers is practically dead and even the Omni Group is struggling. As for Cydia, that was too small to be a model for anything. It’s also from another era. Remember Facebook was just a web app in those days, and nowhere near the behemoth it is today. Android stores other than Google play are all second class citizens and so not relevant. The proposals for alternate app stores on iOS are all explicit that they cannot be second class citizens. Facebook would love to approve apps that have a tracking identifier and don’t ask permission to track. What would stop them if they ran their own store?
jjtheblunt 6y ago
downvotes for a question?

kmeisthax 6y ago

The linked blog post explicitly argues that sideloading doesn't fix the problem. If competition law says Spotify should be allowed to run their own payment system on iPhones, then it also needs to be just as easy to install Spotify on iPhones as it is any app that doesn't use said payment system. If Apple says "ok you can still be on iPhone, but users have to jump through hoops to install Spotify", that's still almost as bad. There's two separate but related issues: 1. The App Store lockout 2. The requirement to use Apple's royalty-bearing payment methods for digital goods #1 is evidence of monopolistic intent, but #2 is the actual market harm. If the law considers #2 to be a market harm, then it's going to demand Apple hand direct payments in Spotify to you on a silver platter, not hide it in a back room with a bunch of safety warnings on it. Remember: Antitrust is not about freedom, it's about competition in recognized markets. If it was purely about freedom, they would've just repealed copyright and patents, and had the government directly subsidize all art and invention through monetary grants instead of monopoly rights. As an example of this... the EU fined Google billions of dollars for just having their own services come up first in Search. There is literally no coercion of users involved there; Google Search customers aren't required to use Google Shopping at all. The EU just considers the top of the SERP to be so valuable that they don't think Google should have any of it.

m463 6y ago

That would return control to the users. You could install software apple doesn't give you permission to have, like a firewall (seriously!) Seriously, we need apps that lets you find out what your phone is doing, and who it is talking to It would be nice to have free software available, and also compile and install your own software

astrange 6y ago
You can do that with a VPN, but of course it would be used for evil like Onavo.

heavyset_go 6y ago

Even the Android solution is mired in anticompetitive limitations imposed by Google to favor the Play Store. Google prevents mobile app distribution competitors from competing with the Play Store on feature parity because user installable 3rd party mobile app stores cannot implement automatic upgrades, background installation of apps, or batch installs of apps like the Play Store can. > The user could do it at their own risk. There's also this issue. Currently on Android and macOS, if you try to run an app that wasn't downloaded from the Play Store, or notarized by Apple in the case of macOS, the systems prevent the user from running it, and show them scary warnings that they don't see if Google or Apple distributed the app to them. macOS in particular will treat un-notarized apps as if they're radioactive, even refusing to open the apps when double-clicking them. Users must know the magic ritual to open those apps, by disabling Gatekeeper and by using the right-click context menu to launch them. The result is that apps supplied or authorized by Google and Apple run without a problem, but if the developer didn't pay the Google or Apple tax to distribute or authorize their apps, users are led to believe that those apps are either malicious or not working.