4 ms·

The point being, that in a situation where there is a 2 company duopoly, with multi trillion dollar companies, then there is going to be laws that regulate thes

by stale2002 4y ago

The point being, that in a situation where there is a 2 company duopoly, with multi trillion dollar companies, then there is going to be laws that regulate these multi trillion dollar companies that have significant market power. > compete with open competition They can compete all they want. They simply can't use their market power to anti competitively prevent users from installing other app stores or browsers, of their own choice. A user is free to not install other app stores or browsers, if they don't want. > let's have governments decide how my phone works It is actually the user who will now be free to decide which app stores or browsers run on their own phone. Feel free to not install them, if you don't like those options. Anyways this conversation doesn't much matter because the laws are about to be passed. I look forward to people crying about being unable to prevent other people from doing what they want with their own phone in the future. Because there is nothing you or apple can do now, to prevent people from installing other app stores or browsers, on their own phone, pretty soon. The app store/browser war is over. Apple lost. And users will soon be able to actually do what they want with their own phone, and Apple will no longer be able to force users, against their will, from install other app stores or browsers.

simondotau 4y ago
> It is actually the user who will now be free to decide The user will be free to decide? Really? The user, most of whom are understandably ignorant to and/or disinterested in the nuances of privacy and tracking, won't remain captive to decisions implemented by programmers, hidden in code, concealed behind encryption and not exposed as a choice? Free to decide. I can't fathom that anyone actually might seriously believe this overly simplistic fairytale. This kind of freedom doesn't exist and the kind of rules the EU plans to implement don't change that. All they do is shuffle around influence from one set of global billion-dollar companies to another set of global billion-dollar companies. Or are you telling me that the EU will require mobile operating systems, app stores on those operating systems and all third party apps running on those operating systems to give users absolute freedom to control all aspects of how their privacy is handled? At least now we have Apple in a position to (and motivated to) enforce privacy standards on behalf of its ecosystem. It's not often that capitalistic forces are so squarely focused at the consumer interest; dismiss it at our collective peril.
- stale2002 4y ago
  > The user will be free to decide? Really? Yes, they can choose to not install whatever app store or browser that they want. > or disinterested in the nuances of privacy and tracking It sounds like you just don't like the user's choice. You could have just said that you disagree with what the user will do, and want to take away their choice to install whatever browser or app store that they want. Don't pretend like you care about user choice, if you are then going to pivot and say that you disagree with the choice of the user, because you think the user is dumb, or would choose different than your personal preference. Thats the problem. Just own your position. If you hate competition, and hate giving power to the user to choose whatever they want, and think that there needs to be a monopoly that anti-competitively controls everything that the user does, against their will, then just say that. Just take your mask off, and say that you think that you know better than everyone else, about their own property, and want to force everyone else to do what you want, and you want to take away their ability to choose for themselves. Don't dress it up like you were doing previously, like pretending like you care about markets. Just say that you hate the user's opinion, and you want to take away their freedoms to choose what they want to do with their own device, and stop hiding behind fake arguments that you don't believe in. > to give users absolute freedom to control all aspects of how their privacy is handled? Users will be given the choice to install whatever browser or app store that they want. If a user prefers whatever it is that you are talking about, then they are free to not install those app stores or browsers, and continue to use the Apple recommended choice. But once again, I look forward to people crying more about this soon. Because there is nothing you or Apple can do to stop users from installing alternative app stores and browser in the future, as the laws are about to be passed. Apple lost. You can't change that.
  - simondotau 4y ago
    It is doubtful whether there's any point in me replying as little of what you've said has anything to do with anything I said. It appears you read my post and entirely misunderstood it. I will nonetheless offer a response to what you have written. Your first misunderstanding is this assumption that competition and user choice hinges on the axis of "browsers and app stores". This isn't an objective fact, it's an opinion. A different and (at minimum) equally valid opinion is that user choice can hinge on the axis of phone ecosystems. Yet another axis could hinge on apps themselves — perhaps none of us are "free" until Facebook, Instagram, etc are all required by the EU to allow anyone to write fully featured native front-ends. Perhaps the freest of all is a marketplace with a diversity of axes, which is precisely what laws tend to demolish. Your second misunderstanding is your continued smuggling in of the concept of "user choice" in a marketplace where users do not and cannot have anything remotely resembling real freedom of choice, no matter how many browser engines or app stores are available. Open source ecosystems aside, >99% of "choices" are made by the software developer exclusively. Choosing to acquire the same corporate-capitalist closed source spyware from vendor A or vendor B is an illusion of choice. Your third misunderstanding is this absurd and self-evidently false claim that people who like the status quo will be able to simply ignore the new alternative app stores and browsers. If loading alternative app stores really does become seamless, companies like Facebook and Google will have absolutely no incentive to list their apps in Apple's store. In fact given that Apple's pro-privacy policies (like App Tracking Transparency) are causing these companies to lose enormous amounts of revenue, they have a MASSIVE commercial incentive to abandon the Apple App Store. You say these laws are about to be passed. I haven't seen how any of these EU laws get around the reality of Apple's ownership of its own intellectual property. I can't imagine how the EU could force Apple to supply its intellectual property to app developers under different terms. So even if the EU does force open iOS to alternative stores, I'm really not sure how developers are going to legally build apps to put in those stores. As for your continued barbs implying that I oppose user choice, I'm wearing a "mask", that I hate markets, that I hate opinions, that I'm taking away freedoms, that I am offering "fake arguments" which I "don't believe" and will be "crying" about EU laws. All I can say is that rejecting the possibility that someone can sincerely hold a different opinion to you is disappointing — and represents a barrier to intellectual curiosity.

simondotau 4y ago

> It is actually the user who will now be free to decide The user will be free to decide? Really? The user, most of whom are understandably ignorant to and/or disinterested in the nuances of privacy and tracking, won't remain captive to decisions implemented by programmers, hidden in code, concealed behind encryption and not exposed as a choice? Free to decide. I can't fathom that anyone actually might seriously believe this overly simplistic fairytale. This kind of freedom doesn't exist and the kind of rules the EU plans to implement don't change that. All they do is shuffle around influence from one set of global billion-dollar companies to another set of global billion-dollar companies. Or are you telling me that the EU will require mobile operating systems, app stores on those operating systems and all third party apps running on those operating systems to give users absolute freedom to control all aspects of how their privacy is handled? At least now we have Apple in a position to (and motivated to) enforce privacy standards on behalf of its ecosystem. It's not often that capitalistic forces are so squarely focused at the consumer interest; dismiss it at our collective peril.

stale2002 4y ago
> The user will be free to decide? Really? Yes, they can choose to not install whatever app store or browser that they want. > or disinterested in the nuances of privacy and tracking It sounds like you just don't like the user's choice. You could have just said that you disagree with what the user will do, and want to take away their choice to install whatever browser or app store that they want. Don't pretend like you care about user choice, if you are then going to pivot and say that you disagree with the choice of the user, because you think the user is dumb, or would choose different than your personal preference. Thats the problem. Just own your position. If you hate competition, and hate giving power to the user to choose whatever they want, and think that there needs to be a monopoly that anti-competitively controls everything that the user does, against their will, then just say that. Just take your mask off, and say that you think that you know better than everyone else, about their own property, and want to force everyone else to do what you want, and you want to take away their ability to choose for themselves. Don't dress it up like you were doing previously, like pretending like you care about markets. Just say that you hate the user's opinion, and you want to take away their freedoms to choose what they want to do with their own device, and stop hiding behind fake arguments that you don't believe in. > to give users absolute freedom to control all aspects of how their privacy is handled? Users will be given the choice to install whatever browser or app store that they want. If a user prefers whatever it is that you are talking about, then they are free to not install those app stores or browsers, and continue to use the Apple recommended choice. But once again, I look forward to people crying more about this soon. Because there is nothing you or Apple can do to stop users from installing alternative app stores and browser in the future, as the laws are about to be passed. Apple lost. You can't change that.
- simondotau 4y ago
  It is doubtful whether there's any point in me replying as little of what you've said has anything to do with anything I said. It appears you read my post and entirely misunderstood it. I will nonetheless offer a response to what you have written. Your first misunderstanding is this assumption that competition and user choice hinges on the axis of "browsers and app stores". This isn't an objective fact, it's an opinion. A different and (at minimum) equally valid opinion is that user choice can hinge on the axis of phone ecosystems. Yet another axis could hinge on apps themselves — perhaps none of us are "free" until Facebook, Instagram, etc are all required by the EU to allow anyone to write fully featured native front-ends. Perhaps the freest of all is a marketplace with a diversity of axes, which is precisely what laws tend to demolish. Your second misunderstanding is your continued smuggling in of the concept of "user choice" in a marketplace where users do not and cannot have anything remotely resembling real freedom of choice, no matter how many browser engines or app stores are available. Open source ecosystems aside, >99% of "choices" are made by the software developer exclusively. Choosing to acquire the same corporate-capitalist closed source spyware from vendor A or vendor B is an illusion of choice. Your third misunderstanding is this absurd and self-evidently false claim that people who like the status quo will be able to simply ignore the new alternative app stores and browsers. If loading alternative app stores really does become seamless, companies like Facebook and Google will have absolutely no incentive to list their apps in Apple's store. In fact given that Apple's pro-privacy policies (like App Tracking Transparency) are causing these companies to lose enormous amounts of revenue, they have a MASSIVE commercial incentive to abandon the Apple App Store. You say these laws are about to be passed. I haven't seen how any of these EU laws get around the reality of Apple's ownership of its own intellectual property. I can't imagine how the EU could force Apple to supply its intellectual property to app developers under different terms. So even if the EU does force open iOS to alternative stores, I'm really not sure how developers are going to legally build apps to put in those stores. As for your continued barbs implying that I oppose user choice, I'm wearing a "mask", that I hate markets, that I hate opinions, that I'm taking away freedoms, that I am offering "fake arguments" which I "don't believe" and will be "crying" about EU laws. All I can say is that rejecting the possibility that someone can sincerely hold a different opinion to you is disappointing — and represents a barrier to intellectual curiosity.