19 ms·

Japan to crack down on Apple and Google app store monopolies

580 points by mfiguiere 3y ago

thriftwy 3y ago
All of the DIY monopoly stuff which tech giants has invented will fall apart once one large country starts poking holes in it. It doesn't even has to be US (variant: specific states). From right to repair to app store monopolies, they have invested in this walled garden, but they forgot to get permit to erect those walls in the first place.
- sylware 3y ago
  not to mention hardcore regulation on technical interop, with actually simple and cheap to implement alternatives (reuse what's there already), that stable in time. For instance, most online services can be reasonably provided to noscript/basic (x)html browsers.
- chongli 3y ago
  Why can’t they make carveouts on a country by country basis? So they lose in the EU and Japan, but they could still maintain their profits in the US. Look at the world of pharmaceuticals. Drugs are way more expensive in the US than most other countries. Big pharma companies make nearly all of their profits in the US.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    > Why can’t they make carveouts on a country by country basis? So they lose in the EU and Japan, but they could still maintain their profits in the US. I wouldn’t be surprised if they do so just to spite.
  - anonyme-honteux 3y ago
    That would still matter quite a lot. Imagine a world where every country on earth would pay drugs as much as the US does.
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    I think people are generally more wary of importing drugs than electronics, and it is really easy to import bits from other countries. Tech companies can definitely put up lots of hurdles here and might even manage to defeat their customers. But at least there will be some possibility to work around it…
    - chongli 3y ago
      I’m not sure how you could work around it. If you wanted to, say, import an iPhone from Europe then Apple could gate access to the App Store based on your IMSI. Then you’d need a European SIM with your imported phone, so you’d be roaming all the time. And presumably Apple could detect that you’re roaming and just redirect you to the US store anyway, disabling any 3rd party app stores anyway.
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    > Drugs are way more expensive in the US than most other countries. Big pharma companies make nearly all of their profits in the US. I wonder how sustainable this is. If the US imposed the same regulations on drug makers that the EU does, would there be a material effect on quantity or quality of drugs available across the entire globe? To what extent is the US subsidizing the low cost other countries like to brag about?
    - beebeepka 3y ago
      > To what extent is the US subsidizing the low cost other countries like to brag about? None whatsoever. It's preposterous to even consider it in a serious manner.
    - chongli 3y ago
      Most of the work of drug discovery is not done by the pharma companies, it's done by publicly-funded research labs. What big pharma pays for is the elaborate (and very large) clinical trials which are required by the FDA before a drug can be sold. One simple change the US could make is to direct the FDA to fast-track approval for drugs that have been approved in other countries the US considers to have high enough standards of rigour, such as the EU or Canada.
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    So you run a Japanese VPN, install all the apps you want from App Store alternative, and turn off the VPN.
- alexashka 3y ago
  They haven't invented anything. They merely implemented colonialism on the web. There are no permits for colonization.
ForkMeOnTinder 3y ago
> And although Google permits third-party app distribution platforms, it still requires apps to use its billing system. Can someone explain this line? If you publish an app on an alternative app store and someone downloads it on their de-googled phone, how in the world would Google prevent it from making a few API calls to Paypal?
- strombofulous 3y ago
  This is incorrect, if you distribute an app outside the play store you do not need to use their payment system, even by the letter of the law. The rule specifically applies to play store apps. It's common for developers of more technical apps (like VPN apps) to publish two nearly identical versions - one to the play store that doesn't support iap and one to f-droid/their website that takes payment via credit card. It's possible the people writing this complaint may be referring to the fact that you can't link to or reference those options from the play store edition of the app, but I think they might just be misinformed.
  - jdiff 3y ago
    There is a compounding effect of this though, the fact that the Play Store doesn't allow this greatly dampens development of libraries that would make it much easier for developers to add this functionality to their apps, making people more likely to rely on the Google's payments and just dealing with its cut.
    - Dalewyn 3y ago
      I believe it's fair: * Unlike Apple App Store on iOS, you are under no obligation to sell on Google Play Store on Android. * If you choose to sell on Google Play Store, it's reasonable to "pay rent" so to speak. If you don't want to accept payments through Google Play Store, you simply don't sell through Google Play Store.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
AC_8675309 3y ago
Great, but don't forget to open up the Nintendo eShop and the PlayStation store as well.
- Jensson 3y ago
  There is an order of magnitude difference in number of devices there, smaller brands that ship an order of magnitude less devices isn't a target for legislative action. Legislation might cover them but there is no reason to target them specifically since they are too small to matter.
  - CharlesW 3y ago
    Why would that make any difference, unless we want the government to punish success? And if ~140 million Switch consoles sold doesn’t constitute “success”, where is that line?
    - infotainment 3y ago
      In order to get to a monopoly position, quite a bit of success is generally required. Given that, anti-monopoly laws are by their very nature, punishing “success”. That kind of “success” for an individual company doesn’t necessarily lead to the best outcomes for the customer.
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        This category of law is broadly referred to as competition law, because that's what it's concerned with. If you had five "competitors" but they all conspire to divide up the market between them so they don't have to compete with each other, this is problematic in the same way as a monopoly. But that's exactly what the game consoles do. Alice has a PlayStation, Bob has an Xbox, Carol has a Switch. If you want to sell your game to Alice, Bob and Carol you can't just strike an agreement with one of the console makers because that only allows you to reach a third of the market. You can't play Sony and Microsoft against each other to get the lowest fees because you need both of them rather than being able to choose the one offering the best deal. The best argument for why game consoles aren't like phones is that a non-trivial number of people have multiple game consoles, whereas hardly anyone carries two phones in their pocket. But even then, there are a large number of people who only have one console -- large enough that game developers still can't ignore them -- and few people who have all of them. Likewise, there are companies other than console makers who might like to make a game store, or make one that services all types of devices. Those companies are locked out of the market, even though their presence would be likely to drive down margins. So competition law should be concerned with this, because it's limiting competition.
TekMol 3y ago
I have a web application with a lot of users. My users are happy to use the web. But because of better monetization options, I sometimes dabble with the idea to build a native mobile app. Some years ago, I tried to build an Android app. It required an insane amount of tooling. Hundreds and hundreds of megabytes of stuff. GUI applications you have to use etc. I didn't even try to build an iOS app because that probably means you have to own a mac. Is this still the same? Or are there some linux command line tools these days I can use to convert a web app into an app that I can put on the Android/iOS app stores?
- tadfisher 3y ago
  Google has a CLI tool for producing an APK bundle: https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/bubblewrap https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/bubblewrap Tutorial here: https://developers.google.com/codelabs/pwa-in-play https://developers.google.com/codelabs/pwa-in-play
- layer8 3y ago
  It’s still the same. You can rent a Mac in the cloud for iOS development though.
- mksybr 3y ago
  You can build on the command line with gradle. I did end up installing Android Studio for the sdk and virtual machine installation, but I'd assume it could be done on the command line as well.
  - jjnoakes 3y ago
    I've downloaded just the command-line tools before and used 'sdkmanager' to list and download sdk versions and virtual machines, so it is definitely doable without Android Studio, although it isn't obvious (or at least it wasn't to me).
  - elric 3y ago
    I don't understand why this was getting downvoted? The parent commenter is right. You can build on the command line with gradle. It will still download hundreds of megabytes worth of dependencies (the Android SDK etc). But at least you don't need any GUI tools.
Pxtl 3y ago
I remember whent the DMCA was being proposed, there were arguments that the anti-circumvention protections would basically allow copyright holders to rewrite copyright law however they saw fit, with no regards to fair use. With or without the DMCA, that's proven prophetic. Between cryptographic protections and server-based architecture, we're into an era where "owning" things now means whatever the seller wants it to mean.
layer8 3y ago
https://archive.ph/KUyIW https://archive.ph/KUyIW
tehlike 3y ago
I'm curious how much apple and Google will be allowed to charge for alternative payment methods. In Korea, google and apple (iirc) still can charge 26% of the transaction as their fee, making the change fairly moot (and even counter productive).
- kelthuzad 3y ago
  when sideloading is finally available I don't see how Apple (or Google) would receive any share of developer profits since they can't see or control 3rd party payment api calls made by devs
  - clarle 3y ago
    The vast majority of users probably would never side load. The App Store and Play Store is more of a discovery and acquisition channel than anything else.
  - amadeuspagel 3y ago
    Sideloading is available now on android.
  - tehlike 3y ago
    right, when another app store takes off on the platform then their rules would apply. I am mostly thinking the medium term with alternative billing + existing store.
  - dagmx 3y ago
    They could possibly do what Epic do where it’s somewhat honor system and you’re subject to audits if you use their libraries/sdks. But I doubt they’d bother.
solidsnack9000 3y ago
I am puzzled as to how Apple -- or especially Google -- are supposed to run their business given this: "The legislation aims to force them to allow third-party app stores and payment systems as long as they are secure and protect user privacy." At present, Apple's model is based on a certain expected revenue per device that is a combination of some profit on the device and some profit due to apps. If the profit due to apps is reduced somehow, it stands to reason that profit on the device must go up -- in other words, the device must be sold for a higher price. Google does not always even sell the device and Android is open source -- the only revenue Google gets from many devices, apparently, is app sales. Maybe the margins of free-and-clear profit for Apple and Google are high enough that this really doesn't matter -- they'll still be able to cover whatever costs they formerly had with plenty left over to spare -- but even given that, I do wonder what the regulators think Apple and Google are going to do about a change like this. EDIT It seems like many people are taking the lead sentence ("I am puzzled as to how...") as expressing sympathy for Apple, Google and other large monopolies (one commenter writes "We shouldn't weep for monopolies."). This is not the focus I wanted to bring to the topic -- really it is more about how they will change, given that the old way of running their business will not work at the same rate of profit anymore. Maybe many commenters think that the rate of profit is high enough that nothing will change, &c. One commenter writes "Maybe by selling hardware?", but then I wonder, will Apple adjust prices upward? Maybe only in Japan? One commenter asks "Why should anyone be concerned with the well-being of Apple or Google?" and I would say, I'm not sure they should be; but it's worthwhile to be concerned about how they respond to this situation. I also wonder what the regulators thought about this problem -- how they modeled the tech giants' response.
- echelon 3y ago
  > I am puzzled as to how Apple -- or especially Google -- are supposed to run their business given this Maybe by selling hardware? Maybe by offering a better set of platform services than everyone else? Proper competition in a market full of alternatives. We shouldn't weep for monopolies. Especially given the smartphone is the most important invention and device of the century. They've managed to become central to every type of communication and commerce, and they're dominated by two companies. There should be intense competition for this space, not a steady state between two giants. These companies are obscene with the control they wield. They tax 30% of revenue, force you to use their payment and login rails, prevent you from having any sort of customer relationship of your own, let competitors place ads against your product (forcing you to pay even more), and don't even let you make your own technology choices or deploy when you want. They're not customer friendly either. They give children psychological issues about having the latest device and right color text bubbles. They don't let you self service, replace the battery, and brick themselves when you use third party components. These devices are essential for navigation, dating, hailing a ride, delivering food or items, ordering at or reserving a restaurant, performing many types of jobs, finding work, scheduling events, etc. etc. etc. It's almost impossible to live without one. And every action gets taxed and controlled by two companies. These two companies are heinous and this needs to immediately be opened up for competition from all sides. This is broader than Standard Oil even dreamed.
freedomben 3y ago
I think Google really made a strategic mistake by copying Apple on the payment restrictions. It kills me to see Apple and Google lumped together as "monopolies" when Google's policy is IMHO 100x less monopolistic than Apple's given you can sideload and use completely different app stores, and enable "developer mode" without paying a subscription fee just to run your own app on your own device. But the payment restrictions are definitely monopolistic-style abuse. Had they not have copied that, I don't think they'd be under this microscope and losing lawsuits and what not. It does still blow my mind that Apple won their lawsuit from Epic, yet Google lost, when Google is far less restrictive. IANAL but from what I've understood it mainly came down to the fact that G execs put the stuff in writing whereas Apple did not, so with G there was some real damning evidence of the anti-competitive behavior. But ironically, the reason G execs were in the position of having to buy off people and make deals to stifle competition is because of their looser reins over the platform. If they'd been draconian and hyper-controlling from the start, refusing side-loading and similar like Apple does, they wouldn't have had to pay people off and make deals to crush competition as that competition couldn't have even gotten off the ground in the first place.
- jahewson 3y ago
  > enable "developer mode" without paying a subscription fee just to run your own app on your own device Apple actually doesn’t charge a fee for this. You can build an app in Xcode and install it on your own device. You can’t distribute that app publicly though. > G execs were in the position of having to buy off people There’s your answer - having a monopoly is not problem, abusing it is.
  - ElectroNomad 3y ago
    It only works for around 10 days…
    - jahewson 3y ago
      1 year if you have a developer account, otherwise yeah 7 days?
dehrmann 3y ago
I'm curious to see how this shakes out. Will there be viable third-party app stores? Will we find that the gatekeepers added value in controlling quality? How many viable apps did they keep of the market for anticompetitive reasons? What does a more fair revenue cut look like?
- seydor 3y ago
  we are not going to uncharted territory. this has been the standard way to install applications since the beginning of time, it is only in the past 15 years that the general publi has been deemed "too dumb to save themselves"
  - dehrmann 3y ago
    Ignore that *nix distros have had package management for a long time. Those platforms are too niche to draw conclusions from. I used to fix computers as a side hustle from ~2000-~2006. There was a lot of shit software on the market, no one knew what was good, and the public really was "too dumb to save themselves." Back then, just look at antivirus software. These days, look at VPN snake oil. What's different now is apps are more sandboxed, but new apps are just a few taps away.
    - izacus 3y ago
      And that's a small cost to pay to make sure market competition still exists in the future and that the corporations in the west are forced to innovate instead of killing economy by stagnation and walled gardens.
    - sumuyuda 3y ago
      A lot of apps in the AppStore and PlayStore are filled with spyware and adware or contain obscenely priced subscriptions and loot boxes that people still fall for. So I’m not for sure if there is a big difference, as the gatekeepers willing allow this junk in.
- spogbiper 3y ago
  I'm not sure how you define "viable" but Amazon has their own app store for Android. I recall that some years ago I installed it because they gave away paid apps every so often. Looks like its still a thing: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp
octacat 3y ago
Web platform is already pretty secure/privacy oriented (maybe more than the phone apps). But web apps are impossible to install on the phones, because apple/google love and push their native apps (love their 30% cut). oh, people would say "but what is about resources?"... - many apps are just web-view anyway.
- i5-2520M 3y ago
  How are web apps impossible to install?
  - octacat 3y ago
    You have to use browser on mobile to enter them (no way to add an icon for them). + there are some other limitations. There was an article about that. Web platform is pretty capable to be used for app development, it would save a lot of developer hours to not develop for 3 platforms.
    - Borgz 3y ago
      This is a problem that PWAs address
    - jeroenhd 3y ago
      You can definitely add an icon for them, in both Android and iOS. I'm not sure about mobile Linux, as Firefox has dropped any interest in PWAs on desktop style browsers for some reason, but the most common operating systems let you install web apps straight from the browser.
- amadeuspagel 3y ago
  Web apps are easy to install on phones[1]. [1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Progressive_web_apps/Guides/Making_PWAs_installable https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Progressive_web...
danieldrehmer 3y ago
*to katana slice
kmeisthax 3y ago
For context, the Japanese market is as favorable to Apple as America is. Japan has a lot of very specific features that phones need to support[0] and Apple is usually ahead of Google on implementing them. This is in contrast to the EU where Android dominates because they used to be the only 'cheap' option. [0] Most notably, Felica, the protocol used by all the contactless payment cards Japan's transit systems use. If you've ever been to Japan, you probably have a PASMO or Suica card[1] knocking around somewhere in your drawer. Japanese flipphones have supported that protocol since right when it came out. Apple added it at the same time they added Apple Pay and NFC support in the states. Also, emoji used to be a Japan-only thing that required an NTT or AU SIM until westerners started noticing the funny faces and started writing copy-paste apps to get around the missing keyboard. [1] Suica game but it's transit cards instead of watermelons
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- fomine3 3y ago
  > Japan has a lot of very specific features that phones need to support[0] and Apple is usually ahead of Google on implementing them. It hadn't been true until iPhone 7. There were features lacked on iPhone but available on JDM Android phones: Felica, IrDA, TV tuner. Thankfully both supports emoji from early. In 2016, Felica was implemented on iPhone (in far more elegant way than legacy Android Felica). Rest of the features were no longer wanted by people. iPhone had been loved even before iPhone 7 because it works well than many crappy Android phones. Galaxy phones are tend to non-crappy but Korean brand was unpopular in Japan. After iPhone 7, iPhone officially become the national loved phone.
codedokode 3y ago
Shouldn't this apply to Japanese game consoles as well? Why American companies must allow third-party stores, but consoles must not?
- deviantfero 3y ago
  Comment above said that it's because consoles are not general purpose computing devices.
hinkley 3y ago
I don’t want to sift through garbage and spyware on my phone, so I’ve always been a bit, “why is this a problem” about this whole situation, but recently had the thought, “I sure would like to not have to but the Civ VI expansions through both Steam and the App Store.” It makes me wonder, if Apple and/or Google partnered with Valve if that would be enough good will, or if nobody will be happy until every device is a market for lemons.
- layer8 3y ago
  It wouldn’t be a problem if Apple only checked for malware, scams, age restrictions, and illegal content. But they are excluding emulators, browser engines, certain programming and app creation tools, all kind of contents that they think doesn’t fit their desired public image, in-app content purchases not subject to the Apple tax (e.g. Kindle purchases), etc.
  - Eggpants 3y ago
    Which is exactly the same for Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo… No one is forcing you to buy an iPhone, just like nothing is stopping Epic/tencent from developing a phone of there own. It’s just cheaper to leach off other R&D efforts.
    - HDThoreaun 3y ago
      “It’s not a problem that they illegally stifle completion on their platform because you can just use the other platform that also stifles competiton”
shmerl 3y ago
Good. Apple should be punished for banning competing browsers.
- Eggpants 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    At this point, you'd be an ignorant fool to trust any of them to protect your info: https://www.macrumors.com/2023/12/06/apple-governments-surveil-push-notifications/ https://www.macrumors.com/2023/12/06/apple-governments-surve...
anomaly_ 3y ago
Ridiculous protectionism. Expected from the EU, but disappointing from Japan. People seemingly want their cake and to eat it too. If you don't like the locked down nature of the Apple ecosystem, buy a different product.
elryry 3y ago
I am excited for app store gachas
idle_zealot 3y ago
I wonder how hard Apple is going to fight this. When laws start rolling out and iOS supports 3rd party stores and sideloading, will they region-lock it to just phones purchased in the EU and Japan? Will they tie it to Apple accounts somehow? I guess what I'm really wondering is what hoops I'll have to jump through as a US-located user to be able to sideload on my phone next year.
jumasheff 3y ago
Can you imagine that we, Software Engineers in Kyrgyzstan, cannot publish apps on Google Play?! Google is blocking whole countries from publishing apps. This is not just about missing out on business opportunities; it's about being denied the basic platform to share our creativity and hard work with others! Unfair discrimination! I am deeply frustrated by this situation. Even more so because I know there are Kyrgyz people working at Google, and one confided that the developers had made plans to include Kyrgyzstan in the list of allowed countries. However, these plans were inexplicably rolled back on orders from another department. This isn't just a technical hurdle; it feels like a deliberate sidelining of our nation and our talents. I urge you to consider the struggles of smaller nations like ours. We don't ask for special treatment, just a fair chance to participate on the global stage.
b0a04gl 3y ago
[dead]

580 points by mfiguiere 3y ago

All of the DIY monopoly stuff which tech giants has invented will fall apart once one large country starts poking holes in it. It doesn't even has to be US (variant: specific states). From right to repair to app store monopolies, they have invested in this walled garden, but they forgot to get permit to erect those walls in the first place.

sylware 3y ago
not to mention hardcore regulation on technical interop, with actually simple and cheap to implement alternatives (reuse what's there already), that stable in time. For instance, most online services can be reasonably provided to noscript/basic (x)html browsers.
chongli 3y ago
Why can’t they make carveouts on a country by country basis? So they lose in the EU and Japan, but they could still maintain their profits in the US. Look at the world of pharmaceuticals. Drugs are way more expensive in the US than most other countries. Big pharma companies make nearly all of their profits in the US.
- wiseowise 3y ago
  > Why can’t they make carveouts on a country by country basis? So they lose in the EU and Japan, but they could still maintain their profits in the US. I wouldn’t be surprised if they do so just to spite.
- anonyme-honteux 3y ago
  That would still matter quite a lot. Imagine a world where every country on earth would pay drugs as much as the US does.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  I think people are generally more wary of importing drugs than electronics, and it is really easy to import bits from other countries. Tech companies can definitely put up lots of hurdles here and might even manage to defeat their customers. But at least there will be some possibility to work around it…
  - chongli 3y ago
    I’m not sure how you could work around it. If you wanted to, say, import an iPhone from Europe then Apple could gate access to the App Store based on your IMSI. Then you’d need a European SIM with your imported phone, so you’d be roaming all the time. And presumably Apple could detect that you’re roaming and just redirect you to the US store anyway, disabling any 3rd party app stores anyway.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  > Drugs are way more expensive in the US than most other countries. Big pharma companies make nearly all of their profits in the US. I wonder how sustainable this is. If the US imposed the same regulations on drug makers that the EU does, would there be a material effect on quantity or quality of drugs available across the entire globe? To what extent is the US subsidizing the low cost other countries like to brag about?
  - beebeepka 3y ago
    > To what extent is the US subsidizing the low cost other countries like to brag about? None whatsoever. It's preposterous to even consider it in a serious manner.
  - chongli 3y ago
    Most of the work of drug discovery is not done by the pharma companies, it's done by publicly-funded research labs. What big pharma pays for is the elaborate (and very large) clinical trials which are required by the FDA before a drug can be sold. One simple change the US could make is to direct the FDA to fast-track approval for drugs that have been approved in other countries the US considers to have high enough standards of rigour, such as the EU or Canada.
- thriftwy 3y ago
  So you run a Japanese VPN, install all the apps you want from App Store alternative, and turn off the VPN.
alexashka 3y ago
They haven't invented anything. They merely implemented colonialism on the web. There are no permits for colonization.

ForkMeOnTinder 3y ago

> And although Google permits third-party app distribution platforms, it still requires apps to use its billing system. Can someone explain this line? If you publish an app on an alternative app store and someone downloads it on their de-googled phone, how in the world would Google prevent it from making a few API calls to Paypal?

strombofulous 3y ago
This is incorrect, if you distribute an app outside the play store you do not need to use their payment system, even by the letter of the law. The rule specifically applies to play store apps. It's common for developers of more technical apps (like VPN apps) to publish two nearly identical versions - one to the play store that doesn't support iap and one to f-droid/their website that takes payment via credit card. It's possible the people writing this complaint may be referring to the fact that you can't link to or reference those options from the play store edition of the app, but I think they might just be misinformed.
- jdiff 3y ago
  There is a compounding effect of this though, the fact that the Play Store doesn't allow this greatly dampens development of libraries that would make it much easier for developers to add this functionality to their apps, making people more likely to rely on the Google's payments and just dealing with its cut.
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    I believe it's fair: * Unlike Apple App Store on iOS, you are under no obligation to sell on Google Play Store on Android. * If you choose to sell on Google Play Store, it's reasonable to "pay rent" so to speak. If you don't want to accept payments through Google Play Store, you simply don't sell through Google Play Store.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]

AC_8675309 3y ago

Great, but don't forget to open up the Nintendo eShop and the PlayStation store as well.

Jensson 3y ago
There is an order of magnitude difference in number of devices there, smaller brands that ship an order of magnitude less devices isn't a target for legislative action. Legislation might cover them but there is no reason to target them specifically since they are too small to matter.
- CharlesW 3y ago
  Why would that make any difference, unless we want the government to punish success? And if ~140 million Switch consoles sold doesn’t constitute “success”, where is that line?
  - infotainment 3y ago
    In order to get to a monopoly position, quite a bit of success is generally required. Given that, anti-monopoly laws are by their very nature, punishing “success”. That kind of “success” for an individual company doesn’t necessarily lead to the best outcomes for the customer.
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      This category of law is broadly referred to as competition law, because that's what it's concerned with. If you had five "competitors" but they all conspire to divide up the market between them so they don't have to compete with each other, this is problematic in the same way as a monopoly. But that's exactly what the game consoles do. Alice has a PlayStation, Bob has an Xbox, Carol has a Switch. If you want to sell your game to Alice, Bob and Carol you can't just strike an agreement with one of the console makers because that only allows you to reach a third of the market. You can't play Sony and Microsoft against each other to get the lowest fees because you need both of them rather than being able to choose the one offering the best deal. The best argument for why game consoles aren't like phones is that a non-trivial number of people have multiple game consoles, whereas hardly anyone carries two phones in their pocket. But even then, there are a large number of people who only have one console -- large enough that game developers still can't ignore them -- and few people who have all of them. Likewise, there are companies other than console makers who might like to make a game store, or make one that services all types of devices. Those companies are locked out of the market, even though their presence would be likely to drive down margins. So competition law should be concerned with this, because it's limiting competition.

TekMol 3y ago

I have a web application with a lot of users. My users are happy to use the web. But because of better monetization options, I sometimes dabble with the idea to build a native mobile app. Some years ago, I tried to build an Android app. It required an insane amount of tooling. Hundreds and hundreds of megabytes of stuff. GUI applications you have to use etc. I didn't even try to build an iOS app because that probably means you have to own a mac. Is this still the same? Or are there some linux command line tools these days I can use to convert a web app into an app that I can put on the Android/iOS app stores?

tadfisher 3y ago
Google has a CLI tool for producing an APK bundle: https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/bubblewrap https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/bubblewrap Tutorial here: https://developers.google.com/codelabs/pwa-in-play https://developers.google.com/codelabs/pwa-in-play
layer8 3y ago
It’s still the same. You can rent a Mac in the cloud for iOS development though.
mksybr 3y ago
You can build on the command line with gradle. I did end up installing Android Studio for the sdk and virtual machine installation, but I'd assume it could be done on the command line as well.
- jjnoakes 3y ago
  I've downloaded just the command-line tools before and used 'sdkmanager' to list and download sdk versions and virtual machines, so it is definitely doable without Android Studio, although it isn't obvious (or at least it wasn't to me).
- elric 3y ago
  I don't understand why this was getting downvoted? The parent commenter is right. You can build on the command line with gradle. It will still download hundreds of megabytes worth of dependencies (the Android SDK etc). But at least you don't need any GUI tools.

Pxtl 3y ago

I remember whent the DMCA was being proposed, there were arguments that the anti-circumvention protections would basically allow copyright holders to rewrite copyright law however they saw fit, with no regards to fair use. With or without the DMCA, that's proven prophetic. Between cryptographic protections and server-based architecture, we're into an era where "owning" things now means whatever the seller wants it to mean.

layer8 3y ago

https://archive.ph/KUyIW https://archive.ph/KUyIW

tehlike 3y ago

I'm curious how much apple and Google will be allowed to charge for alternative payment methods. In Korea, google and apple (iirc) still can charge 26% of the transaction as their fee, making the change fairly moot (and even counter productive).

kelthuzad 3y ago
when sideloading is finally available I don't see how Apple (or Google) would receive any share of developer profits since they can't see or control 3rd party payment api calls made by devs
- clarle 3y ago
  The vast majority of users probably would never side load. The App Store and Play Store is more of a discovery and acquisition channel than anything else.
- amadeuspagel 3y ago
  Sideloading is available now on android.
- tehlike 3y ago
  right, when another app store takes off on the platform then their rules would apply. I am mostly thinking the medium term with alternative billing + existing store.
- dagmx 3y ago
  They could possibly do what Epic do where it’s somewhat honor system and you’re subject to audits if you use their libraries/sdks. But I doubt they’d bother.

solidsnack9000 3y ago

I am puzzled as to how Apple -- or especially Google -- are supposed to run their business given this: "The legislation aims to force them to allow third-party app stores and payment systems as long as they are secure and protect user privacy." At present, Apple's model is based on a certain expected revenue per device that is a combination of some profit on the device and some profit due to apps. If the profit due to apps is reduced somehow, it stands to reason that profit on the device must go up -- in other words, the device must be sold for a higher price. Google does not always even sell the device and Android is open source -- the only revenue Google gets from many devices, apparently, is app sales. Maybe the margins of free-and-clear profit for Apple and Google are high enough that this really doesn't matter -- they'll still be able to cover whatever costs they formerly had with plenty left over to spare -- but even given that, I do wonder what the regulators think Apple and Google are going to do about a change like this. EDIT It seems like many people are taking the lead sentence ("I am puzzled as to how...") as expressing sympathy for Apple, Google and other large monopolies (one commenter writes "We shouldn't weep for monopolies."). This is not the focus I wanted to bring to the topic -- really it is more about how they will change, given that the old way of running their business will not work at the same rate of profit anymore. Maybe many commenters think that the rate of profit is high enough that nothing will change, &c. One commenter writes "Maybe by selling hardware?", but then I wonder, will Apple adjust prices upward? Maybe only in Japan? One commenter asks "Why should anyone be concerned with the well-being of Apple or Google?" and I would say, I'm not sure they should be; but it's worthwhile to be concerned about how they respond to this situation. I also wonder what the regulators thought about this problem -- how they modeled the tech giants' response.

echelon 3y ago
> I am puzzled as to how Apple -- or especially Google -- are supposed to run their business given this Maybe by selling hardware? Maybe by offering a better set of platform services than everyone else? Proper competition in a market full of alternatives. We shouldn't weep for monopolies. Especially given the smartphone is the most important invention and device of the century. They've managed to become central to every type of communication and commerce, and they're dominated by two companies. There should be intense competition for this space, not a steady state between two giants. These companies are obscene with the control they wield. They tax 30% of revenue, force you to use their payment and login rails, prevent you from having any sort of customer relationship of your own, let competitors place ads against your product (forcing you to pay even more), and don't even let you make your own technology choices or deploy when you want. They're not customer friendly either. They give children psychological issues about having the latest device and right color text bubbles. They don't let you self service, replace the battery, and brick themselves when you use third party components. These devices are essential for navigation, dating, hailing a ride, delivering food or items, ordering at or reserving a restaurant, performing many types of jobs, finding work, scheduling events, etc. etc. etc. It's almost impossible to live without one. And every action gets taxed and controlled by two companies. These two companies are heinous and this needs to immediately be opened up for competition from all sides. This is broader than Standard Oil even dreamed.

freedomben 3y ago

I think Google really made a strategic mistake by copying Apple on the payment restrictions. It kills me to see Apple and Google lumped together as "monopolies" when Google's policy is IMHO 100x less monopolistic than Apple's given you can sideload and use completely different app stores, and enable "developer mode" without paying a subscription fee just to run your own app on your own device. But the payment restrictions are definitely monopolistic-style abuse. Had they not have copied that, I don't think they'd be under this microscope and losing lawsuits and what not. It does still blow my mind that Apple won their lawsuit from Epic, yet Google lost, when Google is far less restrictive. IANAL but from what I've understood it mainly came down to the fact that G execs put the stuff in writing whereas Apple did not, so with G there was some real damning evidence of the anti-competitive behavior. But ironically, the reason G execs were in the position of having to buy off people and make deals to stifle competition is because of their looser reins over the platform. If they'd been draconian and hyper-controlling from the start, refusing side-loading and similar like Apple does, they wouldn't have had to pay people off and make deals to crush competition as that competition couldn't have even gotten off the ground in the first place.

jahewson 3y ago
> enable "developer mode" without paying a subscription fee just to run your own app on your own device Apple actually doesn’t charge a fee for this. You can build an app in Xcode and install it on your own device. You can’t distribute that app publicly though. > G execs were in the position of having to buy off people There’s your answer - having a monopoly is not problem, abusing it is.
- ElectroNomad 3y ago
  It only works for around 10 days…
  - jahewson 3y ago
    1 year if you have a developer account, otherwise yeah 7 days?

dehrmann 3y ago

I'm curious to see how this shakes out. Will there be viable third-party app stores? Will we find that the gatekeepers added value in controlling quality? How many viable apps did they keep of the market for anticompetitive reasons? What does a more fair revenue cut look like?

seydor 3y ago
we are not going to uncharted territory. this has been the standard way to install applications since the beginning of time, it is only in the past 15 years that the general publi has been deemed "too dumb to save themselves"
- dehrmann 3y ago
  Ignore that *nix distros have had package management for a long time. Those platforms are too niche to draw conclusions from. I used to fix computers as a side hustle from ~2000-~2006. There was a lot of shit software on the market, no one knew what was good, and the public really was "too dumb to save themselves." Back then, just look at antivirus software. These days, look at VPN snake oil. What's different now is apps are more sandboxed, but new apps are just a few taps away.
  - izacus 3y ago
    And that's a small cost to pay to make sure market competition still exists in the future and that the corporations in the west are forced to innovate instead of killing economy by stagnation and walled gardens.
  - sumuyuda 3y ago
    A lot of apps in the AppStore and PlayStore are filled with spyware and adware or contain obscenely priced subscriptions and loot boxes that people still fall for. So I’m not for sure if there is a big difference, as the gatekeepers willing allow this junk in.
spogbiper 3y ago
I'm not sure how you define "viable" but Amazon has their own app store for Android. I recall that some years ago I installed it because they gave away paid apps every so often. Looks like its still a thing: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp

octacat 3y ago

Web platform is already pretty secure/privacy oriented (maybe more than the phone apps). But web apps are impossible to install on the phones, because apple/google love and push their native apps (love their 30% cut). oh, people would say "but what is about resources?"... - many apps are just web-view anyway.

i5-2520M 3y ago
How are web apps impossible to install?
- octacat 3y ago
  You have to use browser on mobile to enter them (no way to add an icon for them). + there are some other limitations. There was an article about that. Web platform is pretty capable to be used for app development, it would save a lot of developer hours to not develop for 3 platforms.
  - Borgz 3y ago
    This is a problem that PWAs address
  - jeroenhd 3y ago
    You can definitely add an icon for them, in both Android and iOS. I'm not sure about mobile Linux, as Firefox has dropped any interest in PWAs on desktop style browsers for some reason, but the most common operating systems let you install web apps straight from the browser.
amadeuspagel 3y ago
Web apps are easy to install on phones[1]. [1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Progressive_web_apps/Guides/Making_PWAs_installable https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Progressive_web...

danieldrehmer 3y ago

*to katana slice

kmeisthax 3y ago

For context, the Japanese market is as favorable to Apple as America is. Japan has a lot of very specific features that phones need to support[0] and Apple is usually ahead of Google on implementing them. This is in contrast to the EU where Android dominates because they used to be the only 'cheap' option. [0] Most notably, Felica, the protocol used by all the contactless payment cards Japan's transit systems use. If you've ever been to Japan, you probably have a PASMO or Suica card[1] knocking around somewhere in your drawer. Japanese flipphones have supported that protocol since right when it came out. Apple added it at the same time they added Apple Pay and NFC support in the states. Also, emoji used to be a Japan-only thing that required an NTT or AU SIM until westerners started noticing the funny faces and started writing copy-paste apps to get around the missing keyboard. [1] Suica game but it's transit cards instead of watermelons

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
fomine3 3y ago
> Japan has a lot of very specific features that phones need to support[0] and Apple is usually ahead of Google on implementing them. It hadn't been true until iPhone 7. There were features lacked on iPhone but available on JDM Android phones: Felica, IrDA, TV tuner. Thankfully both supports emoji from early. In 2016, Felica was implemented on iPhone (in far more elegant way than legacy Android Felica). Rest of the features were no longer wanted by people. iPhone had been loved even before iPhone 7 because it works well than many crappy Android phones. Galaxy phones are tend to non-crappy but Korean brand was unpopular in Japan. After iPhone 7, iPhone officially become the national loved phone.

codedokode 3y ago

Shouldn't this apply to Japanese game consoles as well? Why American companies must allow third-party stores, but consoles must not?

deviantfero 3y ago
Comment above said that it's because consoles are not general purpose computing devices.

hinkley 3y ago

I don’t want to sift through garbage and spyware on my phone, so I’ve always been a bit, “why is this a problem” about this whole situation, but recently had the thought, “I sure would like to not have to but the Civ VI expansions through both Steam and the App Store.” It makes me wonder, if Apple and/or Google partnered with Valve if that would be enough good will, or if nobody will be happy until every device is a market for lemons.

layer8 3y ago
It wouldn’t be a problem if Apple only checked for malware, scams, age restrictions, and illegal content. But they are excluding emulators, browser engines, certain programming and app creation tools, all kind of contents that they think doesn’t fit their desired public image, in-app content purchases not subject to the Apple tax (e.g. Kindle purchases), etc.
- Eggpants 3y ago
  Which is exactly the same for Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo… No one is forcing you to buy an iPhone, just like nothing is stopping Epic/tencent from developing a phone of there own. It’s just cheaper to leach off other R&D efforts.
  - HDThoreaun 3y ago
    “It’s not a problem that they illegally stifle completion on their platform because you can just use the other platform that also stifles competiton”

shmerl 3y ago

Good. Apple should be punished for banning competing browsers.

Eggpants 3y ago
[flagged]
- smoldesu 3y ago
  At this point, you'd be an ignorant fool to trust any of them to protect your info: https://www.macrumors.com/2023/12/06/apple-governments-surveil-push-notifications/ https://www.macrumors.com/2023/12/06/apple-governments-surve...

anomaly_ 3y ago

Ridiculous protectionism. Expected from the EU, but disappointing from Japan. People seemingly want their cake and to eat it too. If you don't like the locked down nature of the Apple ecosystem, buy a different product.

elryry 3y ago

I am excited for app store gachas

idle_zealot 3y ago

I wonder how hard Apple is going to fight this. When laws start rolling out and iOS supports 3rd party stores and sideloading, will they region-lock it to just phones purchased in the EU and Japan? Will they tie it to Apple accounts somehow? I guess what I'm really wondering is what hoops I'll have to jump through as a US-located user to be able to sideload on my phone next year.

jumasheff 3y ago

Can you imagine that we, Software Engineers in Kyrgyzstan, cannot publish apps on Google Play?! Google is blocking whole countries from publishing apps. This is not just about missing out on business opportunities; it's about being denied the basic platform to share our creativity and hard work with others! Unfair discrimination! I am deeply frustrated by this situation. Even more so because I know there are Kyrgyz people working at Google, and one confided that the developers had made plans to include Kyrgyzstan in the list of allowed countries. However, these plans were inexplicably rolled back on orders from another department. This isn't just a technical hurdle; it feels like a deliberate sidelining of our nation and our talents. I urge you to consider the struggles of smaller nations like ours. We don't ask for special treatment, just a fair chance to participate on the global stage.

b0a04gl 3y ago

[dead]