3 ms·

Apple markets their offering on its privacy and security. In effect, they act as a bargaining agent on behalf of their users which says no to a lot of the track

Apple markets their offering on its privacy and security. In effect, they act as a bargaining agent on behalf of their users which says no to a lot of the tracking Google, Meta, et al. want to do. Due to Apple's marketshare and the nature of this arrangement (the walled garden), these trackers are forced to bargain with Apple as a unit. The DMA seeks to put an end to this arrangement and allow the trackers to bargain with users individually. So, to answer your question: no, I do not believe it will empower individual users. If we really want to empower individual users we should be looking to inject more competition into the social media markets as well. More "app stores" that do nothing but offer the same apps while bypassing Apple's protections will not benefit users. And if the 30% Apple tax is the real problem then why not legislate against that directly?

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> If we really want to empower individual users we should be looking to inject more competition into the social media markets as well. Sure, but you can do both. > More "app stores" that do nothing but offer the same apps while bypassing Apple's protections will not benefit users. It's not just the same apps though. For example, the license Apple uses for the app store is incompatible with the GPL, so no one can make an iPhone app under the GPL or use existing GPL code in one. That license is one of the things that allows collaborative projects to form and right now that can't happen for iPhones. Likewise, the $100/year fee deters hobbyists from creating apps. And Apple prohibits certain types of content in their store, e.g. adult content or P2P apps, which some users would want. > And if the 30% Apple tax is the real problem then why not legislate against that directly? Price controls are generally a bad idea. The cost of hosting the app installers is generally negligible, but a few apps could be huge, and then it isn't, so how much should it cost? Can they charge a flat percentage of sales or does it have to be per-GB of transfer? What happens when the market price of storage or bandwidth changes over time? What if it's different in different regions? Legislating rules to handle all the edge cases is a fool's errand when competition would handle it for you because anyone who charges too much would lose business to someone who charges less.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> If we really want to empower individual users we should be looking to inject more competition into the social media markets as well. Sure, but you can do both. > More "app stores" that do nothing but offer the same apps while bypassing Apple's protections will not benefit users. It's not just the same apps though. For example, the license Apple uses for the app store is incompatible with the GPL, so no one can make an iPhone app under the GPL or use existing GPL code in one. That license is one of the things that allows collaborative projects to form and right now that can't happen for iPhones. Likewise, the $100/year fee deters hobbyists from creating apps. And Apple prohibits certain types of content in their store, e.g. adult content or P2P apps, which some users would want. > And if the 30% Apple tax is the real problem then why not legislate against that directly? Price controls are generally a bad idea. The cost of hosting the app installers is generally negligible, but a few apps could be huge, and then it isn't, so how much should it cost? Can they charge a flat percentage of sales or does it have to be per-GB of transfer? What happens when the market price of storage or bandwidth changes over time? What if it's different in different regions? Legislating rules to handle all the edge cases is a fool's errand when competition would handle it for you because anyone who charges too much would lose business to someone who charges less.