15 ms·

The funny thing is that Europeans will eventually have a better experience with Apple than U.S. residents. It's not my intention to poison the well, but Apple

The funny thing is that Europeans will eventually have a better experience with Apple than U.S. residents. It's not my intention to poison the well, but Apple feels like treating its customers like cattle.

jachee 3y ago
I’m a U.S. resident who’s eyeballs deep in the ecosystem… (well, I will be, come Friday…) and I feel much more valued by Apple than cattle. If there’s a future where there’s an app that requires me to install their store on my device to have the privilege of buying their app, I’m simply not buying that app. I’m pretty sure I’m not alone in that.
- JoshTriplett 3y ago
  And if that turns out to be the case, then it doesn't need to be enforced, as people will select accordingly. And then, the people who do want to run things that Apple won't permit in the app store (browsers/emulators/JITs/scripting/etc), or that aren't economically viable with a 30% cut, will have the option of doing so. The existence of an option does not force you to choose that option.
  - floydnoel 3y ago
    until there's another pandemic, and your local government decides everyone has to install their tracking app. or any number of situations where users will be pressured by institutions they don’t have any control over.
    - Tijdreiziger 3y ago
      Android proves the contrary here. How many government apps are even available outside the Play Store?
    - xigoi 3y ago
      So instead you want your government to pay money to a (possibly foreign) company just to be able to publish an app?
      - caslon 3y ago
        Historically, Apple has demonstrated more trustworthiness and greater morality than the United States Government, when direct comparison has been available. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d... Even recently, the EU has been pushing for less safety for users. https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/09/eu_casm_expert_identities/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/09/eu_casm_expert_identi... More generally, your argument doesn't really hold up. Apple's never owned slaves. Apple's never killed coal miners. Apple's never put humans into concentration camps. The United States Government has done all of these things. Why should anyone trust it?
        AlphaCerium 3y ago
        I trust a company that stands to only gain a profit from me using their products just as little as the state I reside in, if not less.
        realusername 3y ago
        Except we know about PRISM and how Apple is collaborating to the surveillance system.
    - dns_snek 3y ago
      You're not supposed to say the quiet part out loud. Suggesting that we should rely on a for-profit corporation to "save us" from democratically-elected officials is such an extreme idea I'm surprised it's being voiced so openly. I say this as someone who strongly opposed any kind of mandatory apps.
    - Eisenstein 3y ago
      Your local government is staffed by people accountable to you, and it is easy enough to call them, and to get everyone you know to call them, and tell them if they do this they will be out of a job next election.
- tomxor 3y ago
  > a future where there’s an app that requires me to install their store [...] I’m simply not buying that app. Why is it so hard to understand that market pressure will affect you indirectly. Monopolies are harmful to even those who will never step outside Apple's walled garden... The mere threat from the EU, and anti-trust hearings in the US has already benefitted you by reducing the commission from 30% to 17% for apps with revenue under $1M.
  - pbh101 3y ago
    This applies in the other direction too: in this DMA world, at some point perhaps an app I will want will only be available in Meta’s Store and I’ll have to either accept their (maybe ickier) terms or forgo the app, whereas without the DMA I’d have the option to download from Apple’s Store.
    - tomxor 3y ago
      You're assuming a developer would have bothered submitting such an app to Apple's store in the first place or hasn't tried to already. The reality right now is that many people just give up because of either Apple arbitrarily banning things for opaque reasons, Apple banning things because they compete with Apple, or because it's not economical enough to be worth the effort (the other effect of high commission rates, not only do users end up paying more for apps that are available, but it causes some apps to never exist). This also assumes that Apple won't make their store more friendly to developers once they have competition... i.e that app that would have never existed could now exist in Apple's store because they are forced to actually compete. As I said - indirect benefits.
  - dwaite 3y ago
    > The mere threat from the EU, and anti-trust hearings in the US has already benefitted you by reducing the commission from 30% to 17% for apps with revenue under $1M. The old terms had it at 15% (small business program).
- HumblyTossed 3y ago
  That’s great. And that’s the way it should be.
hayst4ck 3y ago
> Apple feels like treating its customers like cattle. How do you feel apple is treating their customers like cattle?
huytersd 3y ago
We’ll see. I feel like it’s going to be a good Petri dish to see how shitty the third party stuff makes the Apple ecosystem.
- HumblyTossed 3y ago
  Weird. How would it? You don’t have to buy anything except from the Apple Store if you don’t want to.
  - mrtksn 3y ago
    The idea is that, if for example some "evil company" you really depend on decides to do things that Apple is protecting you against they can be like "you have to install our app from outside the App Store". That "evil company" can be Facebook, Epic Games, your bank, your government etc.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      Well both Facebook and Google have already convinced consumers in the past to install certificates that were only meant for internally distributed iOS apps so they could spy on end users.
  - hayst4ck 3y ago
    Imagine if Apple tried to implement privacy labels in a multi app store world. Rather than complying with an action that benefits the consumer, Google and Facebook could work together to create an app store that doesn't require privacy labels and then only publish GMail and WhatsApp/FBMessenger to their app store, forcing me to download and use their app store or not use my e-mail or standard means of communicating with my friends. It becomes a race to the bottom, where rather than the app stores competing for consumers by improving features, the app stores compete for companies with apps at the cost of the consumer. You can see this pattern emerge across many marketplaces. Look at AirBNB, terrible customer experience because they are competing for hosts. Amazon turned one of the worlds largest stores into a co-mingled flea market. Because apple has a captive audience, apps have a choice to have access to apple customers or not. Apple does not have to have to make concessions to business interests they would if they had to compete with other app stores to attract apps.
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
Or a worse experience? I mean android phones and tablets are already something you can buy, people still buy Apple products despite that. > It's not my intention to poison the well, but Apple feels like treating its customers like cattle A lot of remember how the computing world was before, the Wild West that the EU is trying to make the only option. We aren’t eager to return to that, and would make different platform purchasing decisions if we did. The EU is simply taking away choice, not adding to it. I get it, Apple has an unfair advantage because they lock down their platform, and the EU making it suck as much as the other platforms, Apple will compete with the other platforms more fairly.
- jchw 3y ago
  The reason iPad is good is not because you're not allowed to choose what browser engine to use. It's, largely, because the hardware is simply better than anything else on the market. I think it is amusing that there is a contingent of Apple fans that actually believe the platform will get significantly worse because people are allowed to sideload and install browsers that have their own browser engines. I think this is a truly ridiculous line of argument. I don't like the other line of argument, which goes somewhere along the lines of "We should tolerate Microsoft-esque anti-competitive behavior because otherwise Google Chrome's anti-competitive behavior might win", but that is literally a better argument, to be fair.
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    We know it will because we remember what life was like before. Sucky platforms that were never good enough, always some weird piece of software that you thought was benign gunking up your system. It really did suck. And then…most of the problems were gone and things just worked. I’m ok if this is actually all optional, but I don’t think the anti-Apple crowd is going to be content until iOS is just another Windows. That somehow it won’t just be an unlock that we have buy into and know what we’re are getting into.
    - ChrisLTD 3y ago
      Why can’t iOS be more like MacOS instead of going all the way to being like Windows?
chii 3y ago
It's called a cash cow for a reason. And this isn't referring to the product, but the customer!
bdcravens 3y ago
Choice is good, though I can't help but wonder what % of European customers will start getting their applications from third-parties. In 12 or so years of on-again, off-again usage of Android (usually as a secondary phone), I've sideloaded one app: a pre-release game that I happily pulled down from the official channel once it went "official"
- realusername 3y ago
  Side loading on Android is just a legal argument in courts, its made too complicated for normal users to use it.
  - MatekCopatek 3y ago
    What? Are we thinking of the same sideloading? You literally download an app (.apk) like any other file and then open it to start the installation. OK, and the first time you do it, you get a warning and you have to enable loading apps from 3rd party sources.
    - realusername 3y ago
      You can't just open the apk directly, you have to enable installations for the browser and also go to deep in the settings and go past the scary warnings. That's not possible for the average user, not everybody is a developer. That's not a viable distribution channel at scale and that's intended.
      - AlphaCerium 3y ago
        When I open an .apk file from a new application for the first time, I get a popup that asks me if I want to allow installations from unknown sources for this app, with a button that directly takes me to the setting to toggle this, and then immediately allows me to install the application.
    - miohtama 3y ago
      I think he must be talking about the US users (:
hhh 3y ago
I have a feeling I am going to dislike a lot of the changes coming down the pipe. I like things as they are.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  Good thing the greater good is more important than what you personally like or dislike. There are people who like to smoke indoors, but thankfully that's also not allowed (everywhere). Also, nobody is forcing you out of Apple's ranch. You are free to stay locked in if that's what you like. It's the other people who now have an alternative.
d0mine 3y ago
To distract/exhaust people, pseudo-solutions analogous to cookie pop-ups (do not improve privacy), recommending shorter shower to battle a drought (malicious/idiotic), etc may be suggested. People interests appear to be used as a rhetoric device, while the actual solutions are harmful to EU business (latest example: AI regulations). Nothing to be jealous of.

jachee 3y ago

I’m a U.S. resident who’s eyeballs deep in the ecosystem… (well, I will be, come Friday…) and I feel much more valued by Apple than cattle. If there’s a future where there’s an app that requires me to install their store on my device to have the privilege of buying their app, I’m simply not buying that app. I’m pretty sure I’m not alone in that.

JoshTriplett 3y ago
And if that turns out to be the case, then it doesn't need to be enforced, as people will select accordingly. And then, the people who do want to run things that Apple won't permit in the app store (browsers/emulators/JITs/scripting/etc), or that aren't economically viable with a 30% cut, will have the option of doing so. The existence of an option does not force you to choose that option.
- floydnoel 3y ago
  until there's another pandemic, and your local government decides everyone has to install their tracking app. or any number of situations where users will be pressured by institutions they don’t have any control over.
  - Tijdreiziger 3y ago
    Android proves the contrary here. How many government apps are even available outside the Play Store?
  - xigoi 3y ago
    So instead you want your government to pay money to a (possibly foreign) company just to be able to publish an app?
    - caslon 3y ago
      Historically, Apple has demonstrated more trustworthiness and greater morality than the United States Government, when direct comparison has been available. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d... Even recently, the EU has been pushing for less safety for users. https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/09/eu_casm_expert_identities/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/09/eu_casm_expert_identi... More generally, your argument doesn't really hold up. Apple's never owned slaves. Apple's never killed coal miners. Apple's never put humans into concentration camps. The United States Government has done all of these things. Why should anyone trust it?
      - AlphaCerium 3y ago
        I trust a company that stands to only gain a profit from me using their products just as little as the state I reside in, if not less.
      - realusername 3y ago
        Except we know about PRISM and how Apple is collaborating to the surveillance system.
  - dns_snek 3y ago
    You're not supposed to say the quiet part out loud. Suggesting that we should rely on a for-profit corporation to "save us" from democratically-elected officials is such an extreme idea I'm surprised it's being voiced so openly. I say this as someone who strongly opposed any kind of mandatory apps.
  - Eisenstein 3y ago
    Your local government is staffed by people accountable to you, and it is easy enough to call them, and to get everyone you know to call them, and tell them if they do this they will be out of a job next election.
tomxor 3y ago
> a future where there’s an app that requires me to install their store [...] I’m simply not buying that app. Why is it so hard to understand that market pressure will affect you indirectly. Monopolies are harmful to even those who will never step outside Apple's walled garden... The mere threat from the EU, and anti-trust hearings in the US has already benefitted you by reducing the commission from 30% to 17% for apps with revenue under $1M.
- pbh101 3y ago
  This applies in the other direction too: in this DMA world, at some point perhaps an app I will want will only be available in Meta’s Store and I’ll have to either accept their (maybe ickier) terms or forgo the app, whereas without the DMA I’d have the option to download from Apple’s Store.
  - tomxor 3y ago
    You're assuming a developer would have bothered submitting such an app to Apple's store in the first place or hasn't tried to already. The reality right now is that many people just give up because of either Apple arbitrarily banning things for opaque reasons, Apple banning things because they compete with Apple, or because it's not economical enough to be worth the effort (the other effect of high commission rates, not only do users end up paying more for apps that are available, but it causes some apps to never exist). This also assumes that Apple won't make their store more friendly to developers once they have competition... i.e that app that would have never existed could now exist in Apple's store because they are forced to actually compete. As I said - indirect benefits.
- dwaite 3y ago
  > The mere threat from the EU, and anti-trust hearings in the US has already benefitted you by reducing the commission from 30% to 17% for apps with revenue under $1M. The old terms had it at 15% (small business program).
HumblyTossed 3y ago
That’s great. And that’s the way it should be.

hayst4ck 3y ago

> Apple feels like treating its customers like cattle. How do you feel apple is treating their customers like cattle?

huytersd 3y ago

We’ll see. I feel like it’s going to be a good Petri dish to see how shitty the third party stuff makes the Apple ecosystem.

HumblyTossed 3y ago
Weird. How would it? You don’t have to buy anything except from the Apple Store if you don’t want to.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  The idea is that, if for example some "evil company" you really depend on decides to do things that Apple is protecting you against they can be like "you have to install our app from outside the App Store". That "evil company" can be Facebook, Epic Games, your bank, your government etc.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Well both Facebook and Google have already convinced consumers in the past to install certificates that were only meant for internally distributed iOS apps so they could spy on end users.
- hayst4ck 3y ago
  Imagine if Apple tried to implement privacy labels in a multi app store world. Rather than complying with an action that benefits the consumer, Google and Facebook could work together to create an app store that doesn't require privacy labels and then only publish GMail and WhatsApp/FBMessenger to their app store, forcing me to download and use their app store or not use my e-mail or standard means of communicating with my friends. It becomes a race to the bottom, where rather than the app stores competing for consumers by improving features, the app stores compete for companies with apps at the cost of the consumer. You can see this pattern emerge across many marketplaces. Look at AirBNB, terrible customer experience because they are competing for hosts. Amazon turned one of the worlds largest stores into a co-mingled flea market. Because apple has a captive audience, apps have a choice to have access to apple customers or not. Apple does not have to have to make concessions to business interests they would if they had to compete with other app stores to attract apps.

seanmcdirmid 3y ago

Or a worse experience? I mean android phones and tablets are already something you can buy, people still buy Apple products despite that. > It's not my intention to poison the well, but Apple feels like treating its customers like cattle A lot of remember how the computing world was before, the Wild West that the EU is trying to make the only option. We aren’t eager to return to that, and would make different platform purchasing decisions if we did. The EU is simply taking away choice, not adding to it. I get it, Apple has an unfair advantage because they lock down their platform, and the EU making it suck as much as the other platforms, Apple will compete with the other platforms more fairly.

jchw 3y ago
The reason iPad is good is not because you're not allowed to choose what browser engine to use. It's, largely, because the hardware is simply better than anything else on the market. I think it is amusing that there is a contingent of Apple fans that actually believe the platform will get significantly worse because people are allowed to sideload and install browsers that have their own browser engines. I think this is a truly ridiculous line of argument. I don't like the other line of argument, which goes somewhere along the lines of "We should tolerate Microsoft-esque anti-competitive behavior because otherwise Google Chrome's anti-competitive behavior might win", but that is literally a better argument, to be fair.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  We know it will because we remember what life was like before. Sucky platforms that were never good enough, always some weird piece of software that you thought was benign gunking up your system. It really did suck. And then…most of the problems were gone and things just worked. I’m ok if this is actually all optional, but I don’t think the anti-Apple crowd is going to be content until iOS is just another Windows. That somehow it won’t just be an unlock that we have buy into and know what we’re are getting into.
  - ChrisLTD 3y ago
    Why can’t iOS be more like MacOS instead of going all the way to being like Windows?

chii 3y ago

It's called a cash cow for a reason. And this isn't referring to the product, but the customer!

bdcravens 3y ago

Choice is good, though I can't help but wonder what % of European customers will start getting their applications from third-parties. In 12 or so years of on-again, off-again usage of Android (usually as a secondary phone), I've sideloaded one app: a pre-release game that I happily pulled down from the official channel once it went "official"

realusername 3y ago
Side loading on Android is just a legal argument in courts, its made too complicated for normal users to use it.
- MatekCopatek 3y ago
  What? Are we thinking of the same sideloading? You literally download an app (.apk) like any other file and then open it to start the installation. OK, and the first time you do it, you get a warning and you have to enable loading apps from 3rd party sources.
  - realusername 3y ago
    You can't just open the apk directly, you have to enable installations for the browser and also go to deep in the settings and go past the scary warnings. That's not possible for the average user, not everybody is a developer. That's not a viable distribution channel at scale and that's intended.
    - AlphaCerium 3y ago
      When I open an .apk file from a new application for the first time, I get a popup that asks me if I want to allow installations from unknown sources for this app, with a button that directly takes me to the setting to toggle this, and then immediately allows me to install the application.
  - miohtama 3y ago
    I think he must be talking about the US users (:

hhh 3y ago

I have a feeling I am going to dislike a lot of the changes coming down the pipe. I like things as they are.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
Good thing the greater good is more important than what you personally like or dislike. There are people who like to smoke indoors, but thankfully that's also not allowed (everywhere). Also, nobody is forcing you out of Apple's ranch. You are free to stay locked in if that's what you like. It's the other people who now have an alternative.

d0mine 3y ago

To distract/exhaust people, pseudo-solutions analogous to cookie pop-ups (do not improve privacy), recommending shorter shower to battle a drought (malicious/idiotic), etc may be suggested. People interests appear to be used as a rhetoric device, while the actual solutions are harmful to EU business (latest example: AI regulations). Nothing to be jealous of.