3 ms·
I don’t have any substantive basis to argue some other regulation versus this one that isn’t an emotional basis as a developer without doing further research, b
by multimoon 3y ago
I don’t have any substantive basis to argue some other regulation versus this one that isn’t an emotional basis as a developer without doing further research, but this regulation has now inadvertently made it a worse experience. To my perception this regulation has gone far deeper than any before defining the “market gatekeepers” and attempting to govern how a company can monetize its own market. Regulations are usually “how a company can sell a product in the free market” not “how a company can monetize the services of its already existing product”. That is a consideration of the consumer during purchasing of the product, or a consideration of the developer when developing for it.
At the minimum, this was a poorly planned and executed regulation as displayed by Apple here.
- toyg 3y agoYou should read up on the evolution of business regulations in the XIX and XX century. TL;DR: this is nowhere near the most-reaching one, nor the first to regulate how businesses can sell stuff in their own markets. Apple and Google (and Facebook, and Amazon, and Adobe, and and and...) are not special: they are just entitled.
- multimoon 3y agoDigital services revenue didn’t exist in the 19th and if even at all during the end of the 20th century, so this is still a relatively new space in the timescale of government regulation, and is an entirely new type of market.
- toyg 3y agoFinancial services, subscriptions, and other service-based commercial relationships pre-date digitalisation by decades. The main differences for digital products are actually items that Apple are rejecting even today: the fact that national borders are disappearing, and that unregulated everything-as-subscription creates neofeudal relationships. Hopefully we'll address that at some point.