3 ms·

You're missing the point too. The App store did have some enforcement of privacy and security, which can't exist in a decentralized system that has now been enf

You're missing the point too. The App store did have some enforcement of privacy and security, which can't exist in a decentralized system that has now been enforced. Sure, app developers would have more freedoms, but we're back to the OP's point - this is not a good thing as they too don't have the user's best interest in mind. Looking at the record of data breaches, I see it's Apple or Google who have held a high standard so far, while app developers have been rampantly abusing users for their own interests.

stale2002 4y ago
> The App store did have some enforcement of privacy and security Ok, thats fine. And if this is something that you care about, then presumably you should recommend a way to do that, while also making sure that Apple gets a 0% cut, so that one of the purposes of the DMA is also fulfilled. > but we're back to the OP's point - this is not a good thing The OP gave no recommendations that actually helped with privacy and security. Instead, they simply thought of a way to give Apple more money. If you care about security, or whatever, fine. But the original proposed solution that the OP gave, was that Apple should charge more money to 3rd party developers. Charging more money to 3rd party developers is not a solution that has much to do with anything related to security. Instead it does not help users, and just gives money to Apple.