8 ms·

As a user, for now I am glad this is only in the EU. I am not looking forward to how this will degrade the user experience in favor of "choice" for User, when i

As a user, for now I am glad this is only in the EU. I am not looking forward to how this will degrade the user experience in favor of "choice" for User, when in reality its choice for the developers and Users have to follow. I have yet to see a convincing argument that this was really necessary from a User prospective. The only argument I will buy is the limitations in what could be on the store like Adult apps, emulation, and similar. Which is valid, but not something requiring a separate store. The day that an app requires me to install a separate App Store to use is the day my smartphone becomes less useful and I stop using that particular app. Being on the App Store has benefits to me as a User, particularly when it comes to privacy and billing. Do we really need to bring up just how much companies like Facebook pushed back on the app tracking bulletin and the scary popups many apps put up to try to convince you to allow them to track you? Or the dark patterns that many companies continue to engage in regarding billing? Right now we are dealing with Cable companies complaining about yearly notices of renewal and being able to easily cancel, and you are going to try to tell me that companies won't find a way to abuse this? Literally today I was trying to cancel a task management app that I mistakenly signed up on the web instead of through the app, and I have to email them to do so. But they are more than happy to let me increase the cost of my subscription with a single click. So no this is not about choice for Users as this continues to be framed as, my choice was to go with an iOS Device in the first place for this walled garden. In the coming years the choice will be more and more made for me by developers. There is basically zero chance that Facebook, maybe Amazon, and companies big enough to try it won't jump at this chance when they have a big enough name to be able to leave the App Store and other developers can just piggy back on that.

paxys 3y ago
Do you consider your PC "less useful" because there isn't a single app store for all your software, a single browser engine, a 30% surcharge for all your spending etc.?
- nerdjon 3y ago
  My PC is a single purpose device, and that is for gaming. Which considering I use Steam for many of my games (not all) that 30% commission is already there. The reality is many people use their PC's far differently than they use their phones. When my PC was my primary computing device many of the things I use and pay for on my phone either simply didn't exist, or I would never dream to pay for them. Also you are missing the point, my phone becomes less useful because I flat out refuse to hand over access to my phone to a company which wishes to abuse that privilege of an alternative store. If they were going to act the way I want them to act, they would have no reason to use an alternative store.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Hamuko 3y ago
    Did your PC ship with Steam installed?
    - nerdjon 3y ago
      No, which in reality emphasizes the point I am trying to make. As a gamer I basically have zero choice but to install Steam, Epic Game Store, EA Store, or any other stupid launcher that a publisher decides to force on me when there is a perfectly fine game store built into Windows and Mac.
      - madeofpalk 3y ago
        The "or" in your sentence indicates the choice in the market.
        riversflow 3y ago
        There isn't user choice, only developer choice. For example, if I want to play Fortnite with my IRL friends I must download Epic Launcher. If I want to play WoW with my friends I must download BattleNet, if I want to play Counter Strike I must download Steam. I don't get much choice in what my already existing community of friends decides to play. This is likely to be mirrored in phone app stores. Need whatsapp/facebook/instagram on your phone? download the Meta Store! Don't like their T&C? Pound sand.
        shaan7 3y ago
        Don't like their T&C, don't use them. As simple as that. I do not like Trucaller's T&C, so I do not use it. If some day I don't like WhatsApp's T&C, I won't use it. My friends and family will be asked to contact me via Signal (as an example). To your examples with games, there are lots of games that I do not install simply because I don't like those launchers. Whats wrong with that? It is _my choice_. I am not forced to use only Windows Store, for example. The argument that "because third party app stores can be shitty, they shouldn't be possible" is strange.
- spullara 3y ago
  For sure. I agree with their whole post. There isn't any advantage whatsoever as a user to have Steam, Microsoft App Store, Epic Store, etc. All those stores take their pound of flesh and it is up to me to manage them all. It sucks.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    F-Droid gets this right out of the box. A one-stop-shop for Free, Open Source applications has annihilated my desire to purchase apps at all. I don't buy PDF readers or file browsers or launchers or basic system utilities any other user would expect for free. I install it, because I have that choice. Without F-Droid or the ability to install Open Source software, I wouldn't use Android. It's that much of a game-changer, and I suspect Apple wants to avoid a similar disruption at all costs.
  - nerdjon 3y ago
    Wasn't the Epic Game store also found to be a privacy nightmare? I could be wrong but I felt like that was a major reason the Heroic Game Launcher got so much traction (which is fantastic btw)
  - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
    This attitude is completely baffling to me. I certainly understand if you don't want to use those other stores and loading options, but I feel like everyone has Stockholm Syndrome thinking it's a good thing that alternative ways to run software on a device you own should be forbidden by our tech overloads. On a site called Hacker News no less! Seriously, WTF???
    - Agingcoder 3y ago
      As a user of said stores, I understand the frustration : because of exclusivity deals, some games are available on shop x but not shop y, and you end up with a fragmented view of your games, different rules etc. Now as you pointed out forbidding alternative ways is not necessarily the one true solution !
    - spullara 3y ago
- droopyEyelids 3y ago
  "useful" is too coarse a metric. It includes the concept of what you can build or create with a device. A personal computer wins that by a long shot. It includes accessibility- pre-literate and illiterate people can use an iOS device. It includes the risk. How many iOS users have suffered viruses/malware vs laptop users?
- s3p 3y ago
  Why do we keep pretending PCs are comparable with phones? They compute, that's the end of their similarities. They have completely different use cases and are needed for different reasons. Things that are good on a PC might not be good on a phone.
- kehrin 3y ago
  None, except for the fact that the 30% fee will be reduced (not eliminated), has been achieved by the EU ruling. - Alternative browser engines are useless if the rest of the world doesn't test for them (which they won't because they don't have access) - You cannot start another marketplace without showing Apple you have the ability to financially support it - And thanks for the need to support it, 30% surcharge will only be the ceiling
- Bud 3y ago
  [dead]
rdtsc 3y ago
> I am not looking forward to how this will degrade the user experience in favor of "choice" for User, when in reality its choice for the developers and Users have to follow. That's an interesting point. I can see Apple figuring this out as well and choosing this model, precisely to annoy users and degrade the user experience. If users complain they can shrug and say "Well EU asked for it and we complied. Talk to your representatives, I guess..." I've seen this strategy in politics, when a party goes through some effort to subtly sabotage initiatives and projects promoted by their opponents only to later say "look, how badly they failed".
darkwizard42 3y ago
I mean some of these changes are excellent... like the ability to use your own non-WebKit/Safari browser.
- nerdjon 3y ago
  That one on paper I don't mind, I mean I don't particularly enjoy the idea of Google being able to have even more of a stranglehold on the Browser market by them pushing Chrome heavily on iOS. But yes, that is a good change that should have happened a long time ago. Same with the game streaming one.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    > I don't particularly enjoy the idea of Google being able to have even more of a stranglehold on the Browser market by them pushing Chrome heavily on iOS. Aren't you just describing... competition? If Apple's browser product is superior, users will use it. If those users want a feature Chrome has, Apple can either implement the feature or ignore it. That's no different than things are today, if you wanted to avoid a Chrome hegemony then we should have invested in a better cross-platform delivery mechanism than Electron. We didn't get one. Apple's support to WebKit and Safari is entirely compulsory. I agree that it's a positive impact on the web as a Firefox user, but I'd also argue Apple's ends did not justify their means. The development of Safari is very distinctly neglected to increase demand for native (read: taxable) APIs.
    - nerdjon 3y ago
      My problem here is Google, we can't deny they have used their position in Search, Gmail, Maps and others to push users towards Chrome with constant reminders to use their tools. I mean if I sign into Google on my iPhone I basically instantly get an email about setting up my iPhone with google or something, which is ridiculous. Competition in this space is great but Google has far too much control of the browser market for my comfort and we are seeing the harm of that with third party cookies, tracking, AMP, and other things. And again I welcome this particular change, I am just worried about what it will mean as Google pushes harder.
s3p 3y ago
Yeah, agreed. I am especially upset at the custom browser rendering engines, as I really do like Safari and I'm not at all excited about my favorite apps stuffing a Chrome instance inside of them (electron for iOS now??) I hope user choice is prioritized, and it seems like the way Apple has it set up, apps won't be able to get a significant following by distributing outside the App store.
madeofpalk 3y ago
You can’t sign up for Netflix on the iPhone app. Users lose because of that.
- nerdjon 3y ago
  That is Netflix's choice, they could allow it they are choosing not too. And your right, it is hurting users since they loose the protections granted to them by App Store billing. The solution to that problem is not moving to another store though.
hamandcheese 3y ago
The only entity you should be blaming is Apple themselves. They could have eased up their grip just a little bit to prevent this from happening, but instead they chose to be dragged kicking and screaming.

paxys 3y ago

Do you consider your PC "less useful" because there isn't a single app store for all your software, a single browser engine, a 30% surcharge for all your spending etc.?

nerdjon 3y ago
My PC is a single purpose device, and that is for gaming. Which considering I use Steam for many of my games (not all) that 30% commission is already there. The reality is many people use their PC's far differently than they use their phones. When my PC was my primary computing device many of the things I use and pay for on my phone either simply didn't exist, or I would never dream to pay for them. Also you are missing the point, my phone becomes less useful because I flat out refuse to hand over access to my phone to a company which wishes to abuse that privilege of an alternative store. If they were going to act the way I want them to act, they would have no reason to use an alternative store.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- Hamuko 3y ago
  Did your PC ship with Steam installed?
  - nerdjon 3y ago
    No, which in reality emphasizes the point I am trying to make. As a gamer I basically have zero choice but to install Steam, Epic Game Store, EA Store, or any other stupid launcher that a publisher decides to force on me when there is a perfectly fine game store built into Windows and Mac.
    - madeofpalk 3y ago
      The "or" in your sentence indicates the choice in the market.
      - riversflow 3y ago
        There isn't user choice, only developer choice. For example, if I want to play Fortnite with my IRL friends I must download Epic Launcher. If I want to play WoW with my friends I must download BattleNet, if I want to play Counter Strike I must download Steam. I don't get much choice in what my already existing community of friends decides to play. This is likely to be mirrored in phone app stores. Need whatsapp/facebook/instagram on your phone? download the Meta Store! Don't like their T&C? Pound sand.
        shaan7 3y ago
        Don't like their T&C, don't use them. As simple as that. I do not like Trucaller's T&C, so I do not use it. If some day I don't like WhatsApp's T&C, I won't use it. My friends and family will be asked to contact me via Signal (as an example). To your examples with games, there are lots of games that I do not install simply because I don't like those launchers. Whats wrong with that? It is _my choice_. I am not forced to use only Windows Store, for example. The argument that "because third party app stores can be shitty, they shouldn't be possible" is strange.
spullara 3y ago
For sure. I agree with their whole post. There isn't any advantage whatsoever as a user to have Steam, Microsoft App Store, Epic Store, etc. All those stores take their pound of flesh and it is up to me to manage them all. It sucks.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  F-Droid gets this right out of the box. A one-stop-shop for Free, Open Source applications has annihilated my desire to purchase apps at all. I don't buy PDF readers or file browsers or launchers or basic system utilities any other user would expect for free. I install it, because I have that choice. Without F-Droid or the ability to install Open Source software, I wouldn't use Android. It's that much of a game-changer, and I suspect Apple wants to avoid a similar disruption at all costs.
- nerdjon 3y ago
  Wasn't the Epic Game store also found to be a privacy nightmare? I could be wrong but I felt like that was a major reason the Heroic Game Launcher got so much traction (which is fantastic btw)
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  This attitude is completely baffling to me. I certainly understand if you don't want to use those other stores and loading options, but I feel like everyone has Stockholm Syndrome thinking it's a good thing that alternative ways to run software on a device you own should be forbidden by our tech overloads. On a site called Hacker News no less! Seriously, WTF???
  - Agingcoder 3y ago
    As a user of said stores, I understand the frustration : because of exclusivity deals, some games are available on shop x but not shop y, and you end up with a fragmented view of your games, different rules etc. Now as you pointed out forbidding alternative ways is not necessarily the one true solution !
  - spullara 3y ago
droopyEyelids 3y ago
"useful" is too coarse a metric. It includes the concept of what you can build or create with a device. A personal computer wins that by a long shot. It includes accessibility- pre-literate and illiterate people can use an iOS device. It includes the risk. How many iOS users have suffered viruses/malware vs laptop users?
s3p 3y ago
Why do we keep pretending PCs are comparable with phones? They compute, that's the end of their similarities. They have completely different use cases and are needed for different reasons. Things that are good on a PC might not be good on a phone.
kehrin 3y ago
None, except for the fact that the 30% fee will be reduced (not eliminated), has been achieved by the EU ruling. - Alternative browser engines are useless if the rest of the world doesn't test for them (which they won't because they don't have access) - You cannot start another marketplace without showing Apple you have the ability to financially support it - And thanks for the need to support it, 30% surcharge will only be the ceiling
Bud 3y ago
[dead]

rdtsc 3y ago

> I am not looking forward to how this will degrade the user experience in favor of "choice" for User, when in reality its choice for the developers and Users have to follow. That's an interesting point. I can see Apple figuring this out as well and choosing this model, precisely to annoy users and degrade the user experience. If users complain they can shrug and say "Well EU asked for it and we complied. Talk to your representatives, I guess..." I've seen this strategy in politics, when a party goes through some effort to subtly sabotage initiatives and projects promoted by their opponents only to later say "look, how badly they failed".

darkwizard42 3y ago

I mean some of these changes are excellent... like the ability to use your own non-WebKit/Safari browser.

nerdjon 3y ago
That one on paper I don't mind, I mean I don't particularly enjoy the idea of Google being able to have even more of a stranglehold on the Browser market by them pushing Chrome heavily on iOS. But yes, that is a good change that should have happened a long time ago. Same with the game streaming one.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > I don't particularly enjoy the idea of Google being able to have even more of a stranglehold on the Browser market by them pushing Chrome heavily on iOS. Aren't you just describing... competition? If Apple's browser product is superior, users will use it. If those users want a feature Chrome has, Apple can either implement the feature or ignore it. That's no different than things are today, if you wanted to avoid a Chrome hegemony then we should have invested in a better cross-platform delivery mechanism than Electron. We didn't get one. Apple's support to WebKit and Safari is entirely compulsory. I agree that it's a positive impact on the web as a Firefox user, but I'd also argue Apple's ends did not justify their means. The development of Safari is very distinctly neglected to increase demand for native (read: taxable) APIs.
  - nerdjon 3y ago
    My problem here is Google, we can't deny they have used their position in Search, Gmail, Maps and others to push users towards Chrome with constant reminders to use their tools. I mean if I sign into Google on my iPhone I basically instantly get an email about setting up my iPhone with google or something, which is ridiculous. Competition in this space is great but Google has far too much control of the browser market for my comfort and we are seeing the harm of that with third party cookies, tracking, AMP, and other things. And again I welcome this particular change, I am just worried about what it will mean as Google pushes harder.

s3p 3y ago

Yeah, agreed. I am especially upset at the custom browser rendering engines, as I really do like Safari and I'm not at all excited about my favorite apps stuffing a Chrome instance inside of them (electron for iOS now??) I hope user choice is prioritized, and it seems like the way Apple has it set up, apps won't be able to get a significant following by distributing outside the App store.

madeofpalk 3y ago

You can’t sign up for Netflix on the iPhone app. Users lose because of that.

nerdjon 3y ago
That is Netflix's choice, they could allow it they are choosing not too. And your right, it is hurting users since they loose the protections granted to them by App Store billing. The solution to that problem is not moving to another store though.

hamandcheese 3y ago

The only entity you should be blaming is Apple themselves. They could have eased up their grip just a little bit to prevent this from happening, but instead they chose to be dragged kicking and screaming.