10 ms·

Going to put in some positivity compared to the other comments here— Good. The OS store should have to compete with other software stores. If their store is ac

• wcarey 5y ago
  I'd support this if app developers were also required to release their apps on all the available stores and obey the policies of a particular store for users who obtain the app through that store.
  • healsdata 5y ago
    Why is that? If an App Store is cruel to the app developers, either through terms or actions, why should developers be forced to support them? This is particularly important for stores like Amazon which dictate things you're allowed to do with your app outside of the Amazon store. (i.e., you can't charge a lower fee outside of Amazon regardless of what Amazon is charging you.)
    • pchristensen 5y ago
      Because the App Store acts as the user's agent. I have no ability to force Facebook not to track me, but Apple can. In the GP's comment, think of the App Stores as a jurisdiction and set of rules that the app maker and user agree on. Maybe Facebook doesn't want to follow Apple's rules, but I don't want to use Facebook on Android's terms.
      • DougWebb 5y ago
        So... don't install Facebook unless it's from the Apple App store. Problem solved, right?
        • filoleg 5y ago
          That's why the grandparent comment said "I'd support this if app developers were also required to release their apps on all the available stores". Without that clause, your approach wouldn't work, because what incentive would Facebook even have to release it on the Apple App Store and follow Apple's tighter privacy/anti-tracking rules, when they can just release it on the Facebook App Store for iOS (or whatever else they decide to call it or, alternatively, another third-party app store)? Sure, having third-party app stores helps smaller devs. But it also unchains all the anti-tracking and privacy shackles from the tech giants like FB who don't care which app store they are on (as long as they can set their own rules), because FB/Instagram/etc. users will follow to whatever app store their app is on (no matter how much or how little privacy protection that specific app store is willing to enforce on FB).
          • rahkiin 5y ago
            Facebook might not be the best example of course, but I shudder when thinking about apps I truly need… WhatsApp in Europe is 90% of friend communication. Banking apps and other 2fa apps are required to do any banking.
          • michaelmrose 5y ago
            Why ought a developer be forced to accept all terms on offer? If I released an app store that forced you to offer the app for the lowest price it's available elsewhere while charging the dev 1/2 of the profit and inspired users to use it by giving them a rebate equal to 30% of the cost I presume I could get some takers. After all if it's 10 bucks on the apple store it's 7 on mine. 3rd party stores aren't a check on unreasonable terms if developers are legally forced to do business on the oems terms no matter how unreasonable.
            • llukas 5y ago
              User bought platform that requires app to comply with do not track me request from the user. It is property of each app. Do not want to respect it but still be on the platform? Please gtfo…
      • LadyCailin 5y ago
        That has nothing to do with the App Store, but rather the platform which the app runs on.
        • pchristensen 5y ago
          The App Store is an important part of the platform - what 3rd party dev can and can't do, and how I as a user interact with them. My experience as a user it better because of the rules Apple forces app developers to follow.
          • LadyCailin 5y ago
            Yeah, but that’s just laziness on Apple’s part. They could easily move those restrictions to the OS itself, rather than the App Store. Then, it would be consistently applied, since it wouldn’t be done by human review.
      • deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    • fhood 5y ago
      because most pc steam competitors are 1 step removed from malware and yet I am virtually required to install them. Or take the moral high ground, but that sucks.
      • michaelmrose 5y ago
        Why are you required to install them?
  • dane-pgp 5y ago
    I agree with you up to a point, namely that developers should be prevented from making their apps exclusive to any specific app store, but they shouldn't have to spend any resources making their app acceptable to any other app store. So if Epic Games want to create their own app store, they can, but Apple should be allowed to list their games on its own app store too (and pay Epic whatever the relevant price is for each download of a game, out of the amount that Apple bills the user for it).
    • michaelmrose 5y ago
      Why should Epic be made to do business with Apple if you can't get a game via the app store of your choosing and it's that important play something else.
      • dane-pgp 5y ago
        The point or the justification for this sort of legislation is that monopolies and bundling are bad for consumers, so enabling companies to force users to use their app stores in order to download their games doesn't seem like a very consistent approach.
        • Drew_ 5y ago
          There is no monopoly if there is competition between the stores. Users are not forced to download anything if there is competition. If this practice is as bad as you think, it will be driven out by competition (spoiler alert: it's not bad at all and will remain in vogue).
          • dane-pgp 5y ago
            You could equally say that Apple don't have a monopoly on phones, which is true, but they do have monopoly-like control over the apps which iOS users can install, which this legislation is trying to remedy. Similarly, if the Epic Store is the only place you can download Fortnite, and you really like Fortnite, but hate the advertising and data harvesting and battery use of the Epic Store, then you are being denied the ability to participate freely in the market for app stores. Saying "just play a different game" is as unhelpful as saying "just buy a different phone", and doesn't address the underlying complaint that product tying is an anti-competitive practice that consumers should be protected against: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29
• tomjen3 5y ago
  Counterpoint: I wish to install say Facebook messenger, because my friends use it and I can't get them to change to something sensible. With an appstore monopoly, Apple can say "you must respect the users privacy, not use these apis and only request location permission through us and if denied you must still have a functional app". If Facebook wants to be on the iPhone at all they will have to play ball. With an alternative app, they can just require that I install their store and accept their terms. I am between a rock and a hard place, and I would like to choose the Orchard in that case.
  • asddubs 5y ago
    I think android is a pretty good case study of this not happening (so far). Most people wouldn't bother downloading other app stores, and making your app much more confusing to find for the default experience is a costly endeavour.
    • rahkiin 5y ago
      I am not sure. Google has restrictions on third party stores at this time: huge warnings, settings that require changing, and the store cannot do auto-updates. This will likely not be allowed under this bill. I don’t think we can use Android as a case study.
  • stale2002 5y ago
    > I would like to choose the Orchard in that case. You can. What you won't get to do is force all your friends to agree with you. I am not sure how you have somehow turned a situation, where you being unable to force your friends to use something else, is an infringement on you.
  • Vespasian 5y ago
    Then the way to fix this isn't a benevolent for-profit organisation deciding what is good and right but a data protection law that with teeth. Apple right now can change their stance on any of their rules on a dime (e.g. leadership change).
• vernie 5y ago
  If I wanted a more-open-but-more-dogshit experience I could always switch to Android and Linux. I don't want that. And I definitely don't want that for my nontechnical family members.
  • michaelmrose 5y ago
    Nobody cares what you want for other people. I think those other people ought to pick for themselves
    • plandis 5y ago
      Just to play devils advocate but isn’t this already possible? Who is forcing people to buy Apple phones? Doesn’t Android already allow other app stores? Isnt it possible that Apples users like the fact that apps are curated on an App Store by Apple?
      • michaelmrose 5y ago
        With only 2 players what exactly is keeping Google from closing up. Depending on the decency of the human race is a sucker bet.
• ljm 5y ago
  I don't want another software store or walled garden, I just want a way download my software and run it. This is how I install software on my PC, if it's not in the distro's package repo: wget -o the-binary https://path.to.binary.com/bin.01.02 mv ~/.local/bin/the-binary chmod +x !$ If I don't do that, I compile the source.
  • throwaway984393 5y ago
    The app store is your Phone's distro's package repo. The big difference is all the dumb extra restrictions app stores put on their "packages", like taking a cut of their money, or not allowing apps to be published for various reasons. Also, you can already download and run unsigned phone apps that way (on Android anyway). It's just that mostly nobody publishes their apps that way.
  • asddubs 5y ago
    the bill also includes sideloading software explicitly no?
  • Terretta 5y ago
    My aunt does that too. No, wait, she sideloads malware from chain emails claiming the attachments are Sunday hymns PowerPoint players. There are more like her than like you.