5 ms·

Except every large player in the space is then incentivised to drag their audience out of the walled garden. "Want the Facebook app? Follow these three easy st

Except every large player in the space is then incentivised to drag their audience out of the walled garden. "Want the Facebook app? Follow these three easy steps to sideload our app." -> Now the rest of the iOS users lose the nice payment rails that Apple setup which result in higher privacy and lower fraud. "Want to play Fortnite or any other Epic game? Get it in 3 simple steps."

bpfrh 3y ago
Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies. It seems that companies don't want to risk users not install their apps because the installation is complicated. If there is really a fear of this, make it so you can only sideload apps if the development mode is enabled, which requires a few steps. This alone would it make it so most users won't use it for e.g. facebook, instagramm.
- krger 3y ago
  >Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies. 1. Epic. 2. Unlike Google, Apple each year pours thousands of hours of developer effort into making it harder for Facebook to track users without their consent. The difference between "what is allowed in the store" and "what is possible on the device" is greater on iOS.
  - bpfrh 3y ago
    In the case of epic it was not about the privacy settings but about the percentage they had to pay for on every transaction which is a different issue. I do think that it is a rare case that a company decides to not use the official appstore and the risk of all companies switching to their own appstore is minor. Android does restrict more and more things you can do and there seems to be no strong movement to alternative appstores, which makes it difficult to know what impact the strong privacy settings on ios would be with an alternative appstore. I kind of agree that less privacy protection this is a concern, but I think that should be solved by additional privacy laws.
    - krger 3y ago
      >In the case of epic it was not about the privacy settings but about the percentage they had to pay for on every transaction which is a different issue. The claim wasn't that nobody was sideloading for privacy settings. The claim was "Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies." >I kind of agree that less privacy protection this is a concern, but I think that should be solved by additional privacy laws. Oh, that's a great idea. We should definitely rely on laws alone for this. VC-backed technology firms are well-known for willingly abiding by the spirit of laws—especially privacy laws. They definitely aren't filled with people whose entire job is finding the slimist things they can get away with. Or—and I'm just spitballing here—we could have both the additional privacy laws and also a competitive marketplace where at least one vendor decides to use privacy as a market differentiator while leaving people free to choose to buy from other vendors with other priorities. You should have multiple options, but third parties should not be required to provide you with an option that gives you 100% of what you'd like to have. "I get to choose" does not mean "I get to have a bespoke solution."
wiseowise 3y ago
Epic miserably failed on Android and you think they will somehow succeed on iPhone? Are you out of your mind? If it’s not in AppStore it might as well not exist.
justinclift 3y ago
> Except every large player in the space is then incentivised to drag their audience out of the walled garden. That's an interesting point. I wonder what other levers Apple would then adjust to keep them in? Maybe lower the Apple tax a bit, maybe something else. Probably a few possibilities that we haven't thought of too. :)

bpfrh 3y ago

Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies. It seems that companies don't want to risk users not install their apps because the installation is complicated. If there is really a fear of this, make it so you can only sideload apps if the development mode is enabled, which requires a few steps. This alone would it make it so most users won't use it for e.g. facebook, instagramm.

krger 3y ago
>Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies. 1. Epic. 2. Unlike Google, Apple each year pours thousands of hours of developer effort into making it harder for Facebook to track users without their consent. The difference between "what is allowed in the store" and "what is possible on the device" is greater on iOS.
- bpfrh 3y ago
  In the case of epic it was not about the privacy settings but about the percentage they had to pay for on every transaction which is a different issue. I do think that it is a rare case that a company decides to not use the official appstore and the risk of all companies switching to their own appstore is minor. Android does restrict more and more things you can do and there seems to be no strong movement to alternative appstores, which makes it difficult to know what impact the strong privacy settings on ios would be with an alternative appstore. I kind of agree that less privacy protection this is a concern, but I think that should be solved by additional privacy laws.
  - krger 3y ago
    >In the case of epic it was not about the privacy settings but about the percentage they had to pay for on every transaction which is a different issue. The claim wasn't that nobody was sideloading for privacy settings. The claim was "Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies." >I kind of agree that less privacy protection this is a concern, but I think that should be solved by additional privacy laws. Oh, that's a great idea. We should definitely rely on laws alone for this. VC-backed technology firms are well-known for willingly abiding by the spirit of laws—especially privacy laws. They definitely aren't filled with people whose entire job is finding the slimist things they can get away with. Or—and I'm just spitballing here—we could have both the additional privacy laws and also a competitive marketplace where at least one vendor decides to use privacy as a market differentiator while leaving people free to choose to buy from other vendors with other priorities. You should have multiple options, but third parties should not be required to provide you with an option that gives you 100% of what you'd like to have. "I get to choose" does not mean "I get to have a bespoke solution."

wiseowise 3y ago

Epic miserably failed on Android and you think they will somehow succeed on iPhone? Are you out of your mind? If it’s not in AppStore it might as well not exist.

justinclift 3y ago

> Except every large player in the space is then incentivised to drag their audience out of the walled garden. That's an interesting point. I wonder what other levers Apple would then adjust to keep them in? Maybe lower the Apple tax a bit, maybe something else. Probably a few possibilities that we haven't thought of too. :)