9 ms·

better late than never. surprised CA didn't join the 'club'. App Store and Play Store have no competitions and they have been milking the developers for too lon

better late than never. surprised CA didn't join the 'club'. App Store and Play Store have no competitions and they have been milking the developers for too long. it's time to put a stop to it. either force them to allow third party app stores or provide third party payment options.

jedberg 5y ago
Apple Store and Play Store are both headquartered in CA and provide a lot of state tax funds. CA doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds it.
- hparadiz 5y ago
  It doesn't harm Google's Play store profits so why would it harm Apple? Plus any sales on any store owes California taxes when someone in California actually made the purchase. So again this all falls flat on it's face. It's baffling that on HN of all places I see people actively making this argument that you should NOT be able to install whatever the hell you want on your personal pocket computer that just happens to have an Apple logo on it. It doesn't make you more secure. It just doesn't. A locked down operating system quite literally makes you LESS secure because there's fewer people poking holes. They JUST a few days ago patched a critical zero day. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/apple/apple-silently-fixes-ios-zero-day-asks-bug-reporter-to-keep-quiet/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/apple/apple-silently-f... The ubiquity of Apple devices makes them a gigantic target for hackers. As a developer I own both devices but the iPhone I have is quite literally a really really nice toy. All the apps I use are free. It's literally a social networking box with an excellent camera. Meanwhile my Android does the exact same thing but I install and use open source apps on it to read manga that are simply not available on iOS.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - gopher_space 5y ago
    As a citizen and consumer I agree with your perspective, but as a developer I'm starting to wonder where the public/private line is being drawn in everyone's mind. The whole "does twitter owe someone a platform" conversation is fascinating.
    - hparadiz 5y ago
      To me it's a consumer rights issue. Apple shouldn't have any say what I can and can't install on my device. It would be like if Tesla made you sign an EULA for your car that prevented you from putting on your own tires and instead you were required to use Tesla ones. In the car market "for your safety" is an even stronger argument and yet everyone can see straight through that argument. Freedom has been under assault in computing now for the last 20 years and for some reason there's a loud contingent of nerds cheering it on. It really is baffling to me. The absolute best and exciting time for me for iOS was when people jailbroke their phones and used Cydia. Now it's just a bland corporate sell out of an operating system.
      - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
        "In the car market "for your safety" is an even stronger argument and yet everyone can see straight through that argument. Freedom has been under assault in computing now for the last 20 years" Our computer companies have stopped selling parts for repair because 'safety' but any housewife can buy breaks or engine block and offer a commercial repair service without any training or certification
      - hardolaf 5y ago
        As the district court pointed out, if a consumer doesn't agree with Apple's business model, they're free to buy a competing product.
    - d110af5ccf 5y ago
      > The whole "does twitter owe someone a platform" conversation is fascinating. It seems to reduce to bickering about the perception of a fuzzy line. My back yard is not a public space. A government owned city park is a public space. What if that park was owned by a private corporation but left open to the public? What if all the parks in the city were owned by the same private corporation? Clearly there's more to "public vs private" than just ownership but where exactly should we draw the line? I find it tiring as opposed to fascinating. It distracts from the real issue. Why such reliance on centralized walled garden communication infrastructure? At the core, how is Twitter functionally different from sending emails to a public listserv in the 90s? How is following an account different from polling an RSS feed? Sometimes it really seems like we're moving backwards, all the while loudly arguing over the precise direction to cede ground in. Has anyone perhaps considered going forward instead?
  - ben_w 5y ago
    > They JUST a few days ago patched a critical zero day. That neither supports nor refutes your point. First: Almost all useful software gets patched frequently, from closed source things like Duolingo (and wow, do I wish I could edit that app’s code to get rid of the animations and the news tab and a few other things), to entirely permissive open-source projects like most of any Linux distro. Better would be a comparison of the black market cost of zero-days. It’s been a while since I heard news about them (and I have not only no inclination but also don’t even know where to go to find ground-truth info), but a while ago that was Apple 0-days being cheaper than Android ones, i.e. implying they were more common. If that’s still true, that would support your point. Second: One of these is about the apps, the other is about the OS itself, the only overlap is the OS refusing to let you install arbitrary apps. Except you can install arbitrary apps on iOS in much the same way you can install them on Linux: get the source code and compile yourself, just (unlike e.g. Steam on Linux) there are no convenient pre-compiled app stores besides Apple’s.
    - idle_zealot 5y ago
      > Except you can install arbitrary apps on iOS in much the same way you can install them on Linux: get the source code and compile yourself Sort of. You can do this, but only for three apps at a time. And you have to be tethered to a PC that does the compiling. And you have to validate your credentials with Apple online for them to let you sign the app (which is required for running it on your phone). And the app will refuse to open after seven days have passed. The three app limit is lifted and seven day killswitch changed to a 365 day one if you pay Apple $100 annually. Even then the other restrictions remain, so you can't, for instance, have your apps auto-update. Compare to Android, where you can download an f-droid.apk, hit a switch or two in your settings, and get untethered app installs with semi-automatic updates. Unfortunately Android restricts fully automatic updates to preinstalled stores.
      - commoner 5y ago
        > Unfortunately Android restricts fully automatic updates to preinstalled stores. Android 12 has improved this a bit by allowing automatic updates from user-installed third-party app stores in some situations: https://www.xda-developers.com/android-12-alternative-app-stores-update-apps-background/ https://www.xda-developers.com/android-12-alternative-app-st... Imagine an F-Droid for iOS, with or without automatic updates. Not having to pay the $99 fee per year to keep apps in the App Store would encourage many developers to publish free and open source apps, expanding the selection of ad-free apps for iOS users. Not being beholden to App Store rules means that useful apps like NewPipe, apps banned by certain governments, and apps with GPL licensing conflicts would finally be made available to iOS users again.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    "It's baffling that on HN of all places I see people actively making this argument that you should NOT be able to install whatever the hell you want on your personal pocket computer" The community famous for 'mah free market' does not believe in your right to control your private property, its a paradox. Up there with 'freedom of speech' people burning books.
- threeseed 5y ago
  Quite sure that the App Store revenue are attributed to their Irish holding company. So Apple is not paying US taxes on that specific revenue stream.
kart23 5y ago
CA has always been light on big tech imo. A particularly egregious case was Gavin Newsom staying completely neutral on prop 22, while tons of out-of-state democrats were quite outspoken against the proposition. Even Biden and Harris came out against it.
- rhexs 5y ago
  California is entirely funded by big tech. Of course they aren’t going to oppose them.
  - jedberg 5y ago
    Up until very recently California got more taxes from Southern California than Northern (and that may still be the case). Hollywood is still an important industry in California, even moreso now that some of the biggest tech companies in the state are entertainment companies.
felipelemos 5y ago
Play store have competition, btw: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android. And the big argument against Apple is that you can't have the same for iPhones.
- arepublicadoceu 5y ago
  > Play store have competition, btw: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android. Oh the illusion of choice. Nobody* is sideloading an appstore on their phone to have access to a new catalogue of apps. What is beyond comprehension to me is why Apple doesn't take notice on google playbook and put the option to sideload apps/stores behind 20 menus deep and 5 warning screens. It would applacate a lot of people, keep nerds happy and 0.001% would do this. * Outside technically inclined folks.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    That would indeed be all it would take to make most people happy. Unfortunately, Apple seems unwilling to budge on this unless they're forced by the state.
  - lenkite 5y ago
    Would love to have something like f-droid for iOS. Number of "technically inclined" people is actually in the millions. If you add up all the consumers of all third-party app stores in the Android ecosystem it would be easily >200 million. It is not some vanishing minority. So yes, I do hope the US govt forces Apple to un-clench a bit.
    - arepublicadoceu 5y ago
      > Number of "technically inclined" people is actually in the millions. If you add up all the consumers of all third-party app stores in the Android ecosystem it would be easily >200 million. You’re probably right, but how many of these >200 millions are users that installed said third party store after going through the speed bumps that google put there. And how many of these are people that their phone came with said third party store? For instance fire tv, fire tablet, Chinese phones etc? Even though I’m being heavily downvoted I still think that 0.001% would actually install third party stores as apple is the sole provider of iOS (no one else could bundle their store with iOS devices). If you have statics that shows that most of these >200 millions (didn’t check) are users that went though the phone settings, activated developer settings, downloaded apk from amazon and installed on their phones I would be happy to be proved wrong. Edit. > Would love to have something like f-droid for iOS. > So yes, I do hope the US govt forces Apple to un-clench a bit. We’re not in disagreement here.
innocentoldguy 5y ago
I’m OK with third-party payment options but the last thing in the world I want is a bunch of competing app stores, all with different apps, that I then have to install, subscribe to, and manage.
- LegitShady 5y ago
  but you don't have to install or manage any of them. You can continue to use apple's store. you may just lose access to some apps that don't want to share revenue with apple.
grishka 5y ago
You're not required to use play store to distribute an android app — android supports installing apps without any app stores. On iOS however, you're required to go through the app store.

jedberg 5y ago

Apple Store and Play Store are both headquartered in CA and provide a lot of state tax funds. CA doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds it.

hparadiz 5y ago
It doesn't harm Google's Play store profits so why would it harm Apple? Plus any sales on any store owes California taxes when someone in California actually made the purchase. So again this all falls flat on it's face. It's baffling that on HN of all places I see people actively making this argument that you should NOT be able to install whatever the hell you want on your personal pocket computer that just happens to have an Apple logo on it. It doesn't make you more secure. It just doesn't. A locked down operating system quite literally makes you LESS secure because there's fewer people poking holes. They JUST a few days ago patched a critical zero day. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/apple/apple-silently-fixes-ios-zero-day-asks-bug-reporter-to-keep-quiet/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/apple/apple-silently-f... The ubiquity of Apple devices makes them a gigantic target for hackers. As a developer I own both devices but the iPhone I have is quite literally a really really nice toy. All the apps I use are free. It's literally a social networking box with an excellent camera. Meanwhile my Android does the exact same thing but I install and use open source apps on it to read manga that are simply not available on iOS.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- gopher_space 5y ago
  As a citizen and consumer I agree with your perspective, but as a developer I'm starting to wonder where the public/private line is being drawn in everyone's mind. The whole "does twitter owe someone a platform" conversation is fascinating.
  - hparadiz 5y ago
    To me it's a consumer rights issue. Apple shouldn't have any say what I can and can't install on my device. It would be like if Tesla made you sign an EULA for your car that prevented you from putting on your own tires and instead you were required to use Tesla ones. In the car market "for your safety" is an even stronger argument and yet everyone can see straight through that argument. Freedom has been under assault in computing now for the last 20 years and for some reason there's a loud contingent of nerds cheering it on. It really is baffling to me. The absolute best and exciting time for me for iOS was when people jailbroke their phones and used Cydia. Now it's just a bland corporate sell out of an operating system.
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      "In the car market "for your safety" is an even stronger argument and yet everyone can see straight through that argument. Freedom has been under assault in computing now for the last 20 years" Our computer companies have stopped selling parts for repair because 'safety' but any housewife can buy breaks or engine block and offer a commercial repair service without any training or certification
    - hardolaf 5y ago
      As the district court pointed out, if a consumer doesn't agree with Apple's business model, they're free to buy a competing product.
  - d110af5ccf 5y ago
    > The whole "does twitter owe someone a platform" conversation is fascinating. It seems to reduce to bickering about the perception of a fuzzy line. My back yard is not a public space. A government owned city park is a public space. What if that park was owned by a private corporation but left open to the public? What if all the parks in the city were owned by the same private corporation? Clearly there's more to "public vs private" than just ownership but where exactly should we draw the line? I find it tiring as opposed to fascinating. It distracts from the real issue. Why such reliance on centralized walled garden communication infrastructure? At the core, how is Twitter functionally different from sending emails to a public listserv in the 90s? How is following an account different from polling an RSS feed? Sometimes it really seems like we're moving backwards, all the while loudly arguing over the precise direction to cede ground in. Has anyone perhaps considered going forward instead?
- ben_w 5y ago
  > They JUST a few days ago patched a critical zero day. That neither supports nor refutes your point. First: Almost all useful software gets patched frequently, from closed source things like Duolingo (and wow, do I wish I could edit that app’s code to get rid of the animations and the news tab and a few other things), to entirely permissive open-source projects like most of any Linux distro. Better would be a comparison of the black market cost of zero-days. It’s been a while since I heard news about them (and I have not only no inclination but also don’t even know where to go to find ground-truth info), but a while ago that was Apple 0-days being cheaper than Android ones, i.e. implying they were more common. If that’s still true, that would support your point. Second: One of these is about the apps, the other is about the OS itself, the only overlap is the OS refusing to let you install arbitrary apps. Except you can install arbitrary apps on iOS in much the same way you can install them on Linux: get the source code and compile yourself, just (unlike e.g. Steam on Linux) there are no convenient pre-compiled app stores besides Apple’s.
  - idle_zealot 5y ago
    > Except you can install arbitrary apps on iOS in much the same way you can install them on Linux: get the source code and compile yourself Sort of. You can do this, but only for three apps at a time. And you have to be tethered to a PC that does the compiling. And you have to validate your credentials with Apple online for them to let you sign the app (which is required for running it on your phone). And the app will refuse to open after seven days have passed. The three app limit is lifted and seven day killswitch changed to a 365 day one if you pay Apple $100 annually. Even then the other restrictions remain, so you can't, for instance, have your apps auto-update. Compare to Android, where you can download an f-droid.apk, hit a switch or two in your settings, and get untethered app installs with semi-automatic updates. Unfortunately Android restricts fully automatic updates to preinstalled stores.
    - commoner 5y ago
      > Unfortunately Android restricts fully automatic updates to preinstalled stores. Android 12 has improved this a bit by allowing automatic updates from user-installed third-party app stores in some situations: https://www.xda-developers.com/android-12-alternative-app-stores-update-apps-background/ https://www.xda-developers.com/android-12-alternative-app-st... Imagine an F-Droid for iOS, with or without automatic updates. Not having to pay the $99 fee per year to keep apps in the App Store would encourage many developers to publish free and open source apps, expanding the selection of ad-free apps for iOS users. Not being beholden to App Store rules means that useful apps like NewPipe, apps banned by certain governments, and apps with GPL licensing conflicts would finally be made available to iOS users again.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "It's baffling that on HN of all places I see people actively making this argument that you should NOT be able to install whatever the hell you want on your personal pocket computer" The community famous for 'mah free market' does not believe in your right to control your private property, its a paradox. Up there with 'freedom of speech' people burning books.
threeseed 5y ago
Quite sure that the App Store revenue are attributed to their Irish holding company. So Apple is not paying US taxes on that specific revenue stream.

kart23 5y ago

CA has always been light on big tech imo. A particularly egregious case was Gavin Newsom staying completely neutral on prop 22, while tons of out-of-state democrats were quite outspoken against the proposition. Even Biden and Harris came out against it.

rhexs 5y ago
California is entirely funded by big tech. Of course they aren’t going to oppose them.
- jedberg 5y ago
  Up until very recently California got more taxes from Southern California than Northern (and that may still be the case). Hollywood is still an important industry in California, even moreso now that some of the biggest tech companies in the state are entertainment companies.

felipelemos 5y ago

Play store have competition, btw: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android. And the big argument against Apple is that you can't have the same for iPhones.

arepublicadoceu 5y ago
> Play store have competition, btw: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get-appstore/android. Oh the illusion of choice. Nobody* is sideloading an appstore on their phone to have access to a new catalogue of apps. What is beyond comprehension to me is why Apple doesn't take notice on google playbook and put the option to sideload apps/stores behind 20 menus deep and 5 warning screens. It would applacate a lot of people, keep nerds happy and 0.001% would do this. * Outside technically inclined folks.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  That would indeed be all it would take to make most people happy. Unfortunately, Apple seems unwilling to budge on this unless they're forced by the state.
- lenkite 5y ago
  Would love to have something like f-droid for iOS. Number of "technically inclined" people is actually in the millions. If you add up all the consumers of all third-party app stores in the Android ecosystem it would be easily >200 million. It is not some vanishing minority. So yes, I do hope the US govt forces Apple to un-clench a bit.
  - arepublicadoceu 5y ago
    > Number of "technically inclined" people is actually in the millions. If you add up all the consumers of all third-party app stores in the Android ecosystem it would be easily >200 million. You’re probably right, but how many of these >200 millions are users that installed said third party store after going through the speed bumps that google put there. And how many of these are people that their phone came with said third party store? For instance fire tv, fire tablet, Chinese phones etc? Even though I’m being heavily downvoted I still think that 0.001% would actually install third party stores as apple is the sole provider of iOS (no one else could bundle their store with iOS devices). If you have statics that shows that most of these >200 millions (didn’t check) are users that went though the phone settings, activated developer settings, downloaded apk from amazon and installed on their phones I would be happy to be proved wrong. Edit. > Would love to have something like f-droid for iOS. > So yes, I do hope the US govt forces Apple to un-clench a bit. We’re not in disagreement here.

innocentoldguy 5y ago

I’m OK with third-party payment options but the last thing in the world I want is a bunch of competing app stores, all with different apps, that I then have to install, subscribe to, and manage.

LegitShady 5y ago
but you don't have to install or manage any of them. You can continue to use apple's store. you may just lose access to some apps that don't want to share revenue with apple.

grishka 5y ago

You're not required to use play store to distribute an android app — android supports installing apps without any app stores. On iOS however, you're required to go through the app store.