6 ms·

If Apple had any competitive ground to stand on, it would not bother banning other app stores. Customers would love to pay the 30% Apple tax for security and t

If Apple had any competitive ground to stand on, it would not bother banning other app stores. Customers would love to pay the 30% Apple tax for security and the great selection of apps.

mrbigbob 2y ago
i dont think apple is too concerned with the end user using a 3rd party store but the large companies having the ability to host their app on a 3rd party store sidestepping apples fee entirely. thats what truely scares them.
grishka 2y ago
MacOS is a great example of what happens when that competitive ground does exist. Most Mac apps are distributed outside of the app store, some aren't even notarized.
- mgrandl 2y ago
  Yes because developers don’t want to pay $100 to then go through a super annoying notarization process to distribute their FOSS app.
- burnerthrow008 2y ago
  Yes, it is! Look at how much smaller MacOS market share is compared to iOS in their respective markets. Stated preference vs. revealed preference.
  - grishka 2y ago
    US and Japan are the two unusual countries where iOS has more market share than Android. In the rest of the world, iOS is maybe 20%. For computers the situation is exacerbated by the fact that many people own one mostly for gaming, which means it's going to be Windows. Whereas an iPhone is considered a status symbol.
    - rmbyrro 2y ago
      > In the rest of the world, iOS is maybe 20% If you count the number of devices. By app store sales, the figure is maybe 50%, probably higher.
  - detourdog 2y ago
    MacOS also isn’t connected to a cellular network.
    - grishka 2y ago
      And what difference does that make with regard to software distribution models? It can easily be connected to a cellular network using one of those USB modem sticks btw.
      - detourdog 2y ago
        Being connected to a cellular network puts different responsibilities on the platform vendor due to the global reach of a software problem.
        grishka 2y ago
        What "software problem" are you talking about?
        detourdog 2y ago
        I’m talking about the carrier network requiring protections. The carrier like to verify devices on their network. There was a time when booking up a fax was illegal. Apple is responsible for the activity of the devices they create on the carrier network.
        grishka 2y ago
        > Apple is responsible for the activity of the devices they create on the carrier network. Where did you get this idea? You are responsible for what your device does on the network. It's in your contract with your carrier. If you interfere with others' ability to use their phones on the same network, that has a good chance of the communications authority getting involved. But we're talking about apps. The worst thing an app can do is DDoS something. That would just make you run out of data very quickly. Or auto-dial numbers (Android allows that, with a permission for which the app has to ask you), you'll just rack up an enormous bill and will learn to never make this mistake again. Or spam SMS, same thing.
  - hot_gril 2y ago
    Are you implying that macOS has a smaller market share because of the lack of restrictions? Cause its competition, Windows, is less restricted if anything.
- YetAnotherNick 2y ago
  Android is the more closer to iOS example though. They have alt store and you can also download app through chrome, yet most users only use Google's play store.
  - wongarsu 2y ago
    * Most users only use Google's play store, except for apps not available there Certain categories of apps aren't deemed acceptable by Google (e.g. apps with adult content, apps that circumvent copyright, some "hacking" apps, etc). If you want any of those they are easy enough to find and sideload. There is also a big community pirating legitimate Android apps. According to some for every one purchase ten people use a pirated version.
    - hot_gril 2y ago
      Also, Fortnite isn't available on Google's store. Which is what that Epic case was about.
      - grishka 2y ago
        Also, there are many apps from sanctioned Russian companies that can't be published on Google Play, so they only exist in alternative app stores like RuStore and/or as self-updating apks. On iOS, they just can't "legally" have an app any more, period. Some made their apps PWAs, some say "just use the website", and some (Tinkoff/T-Bank in particular) keep trying to get into the app store with those double-bottom apps and also distribute them signed with enterprise certificates.
- kube-system 2y ago
  The desktop is kind of a different space, though. Most of the paid apps I've ever used on MacOS are well-known and cross-platform -- the kind of thing where you'd go to the developers website directly by name. So, of course the developer is going to guide those people down a path where they get all the revenue. And the users of FOSS apps are overwhelmingly the people who will download a DMG from GitHub releases, and change their security settings to install it -- so why bother? But for everyone else -- the $4.99 apps that aren't household names -- the App Store is probably where these are most often purchased. Although I doubt this market is very large on the desktop -- most people just use a browser and maybe some well known software that would have come in a box 20 years ago.
bigdubs 2y ago
People assuming this is a competitive posture exclusively are missing the point. The app store isn't just about making more money, it's about enforcing privacy and security guidelines for apps through the review process and through checks for unauthorized api usage. Apple's product is privacy; they view privacy as a premium feature worth paying for, and 3rd party app stores that are the wild west for privacy are antithetical to this.
- luyu_wu 2y ago
  Said customers who care about privacy would therefore continue to use the App Store.
  - detourdog 2y ago
    Why should Apple divert resources creating a secondary environment?
    - asadotzler 2y ago
      Because it's the law in a region Apple wants to do business. Simple.
      - detourdog 2y ago
        Apple did what they thought was best. The EU said no and the next step is the court system. When that result is known Apple can decide what markets to operate in. When Apple Kerberos all their services they essentially made it possible to granularly manage service availability by user, device, and region. The EU fining schedule is so out of proportion that it creates a real business risk to Apple that may be greater than the EU market size. I don’t think the EU efforts are as detailed or grounded in reality as the EU considers them. As a spectator I can’t wait to follow the ups and downs of this.
  - slashdave 2y ago
    Except important products will be pulled from the App Store because they will become exclusives in 3rd party stores.

If Apple had any competitive ground to stand on, it would not bother banning other app stores. Customers would love to pay the 30% Apple tax for security and the great selection of apps.

mrbigbob 2y ago

i dont think apple is too concerned with the end user using a 3rd party store but the large companies having the ability to host their app on a 3rd party store sidestepping apples fee entirely. thats what truely scares them.

grishka 2y ago

MacOS is a great example of what happens when that competitive ground does exist. Most Mac apps are distributed outside of the app store, some aren't even notarized.

mgrandl 2y ago
Yes because developers don’t want to pay $100 to then go through a super annoying notarization process to distribute their FOSS app.
burnerthrow008 2y ago
Yes, it is! Look at how much smaller MacOS market share is compared to iOS in their respective markets. Stated preference vs. revealed preference.
- grishka 2y ago
  US and Japan are the two unusual countries where iOS has more market share than Android. In the rest of the world, iOS is maybe 20%. For computers the situation is exacerbated by the fact that many people own one mostly for gaming, which means it's going to be Windows. Whereas an iPhone is considered a status symbol.
  - rmbyrro 2y ago
    > In the rest of the world, iOS is maybe 20% If you count the number of devices. By app store sales, the figure is maybe 50%, probably higher.
- detourdog 2y ago
  MacOS also isn’t connected to a cellular network.
  - grishka 2y ago
    And what difference does that make with regard to software distribution models? It can easily be connected to a cellular network using one of those USB modem sticks btw.
    - detourdog 2y ago
      Being connected to a cellular network puts different responsibilities on the platform vendor due to the global reach of a software problem.
      - grishka 2y ago
        What "software problem" are you talking about?
        detourdog 2y ago
        I’m talking about the carrier network requiring protections. The carrier like to verify devices on their network. There was a time when booking up a fax was illegal. Apple is responsible for the activity of the devices they create on the carrier network.
        grishka 2y ago
        > Apple is responsible for the activity of the devices they create on the carrier network. Where did you get this idea? You are responsible for what your device does on the network. It's in your contract with your carrier. If you interfere with others' ability to use their phones on the same network, that has a good chance of the communications authority getting involved. But we're talking about apps. The worst thing an app can do is DDoS something. That would just make you run out of data very quickly. Or auto-dial numbers (Android allows that, with a permission for which the app has to ask you), you'll just rack up an enormous bill and will learn to never make this mistake again. Or spam SMS, same thing.
- hot_gril 2y ago
  Are you implying that macOS has a smaller market share because of the lack of restrictions? Cause its competition, Windows, is less restricted if anything.
YetAnotherNick 2y ago
Android is the more closer to iOS example though. They have alt store and you can also download app through chrome, yet most users only use Google's play store.
- wongarsu 2y ago
  * Most users only use Google's play store, except for apps not available there Certain categories of apps aren't deemed acceptable by Google (e.g. apps with adult content, apps that circumvent copyright, some "hacking" apps, etc). If you want any of those they are easy enough to find and sideload. There is also a big community pirating legitimate Android apps. According to some for every one purchase ten people use a pirated version.
  - hot_gril 2y ago
    Also, Fortnite isn't available on Google's store. Which is what that Epic case was about.
    - grishka 2y ago
      Also, there are many apps from sanctioned Russian companies that can't be published on Google Play, so they only exist in alternative app stores like RuStore and/or as self-updating apks. On iOS, they just can't "legally" have an app any more, period. Some made their apps PWAs, some say "just use the website", and some (Tinkoff/T-Bank in particular) keep trying to get into the app store with those double-bottom apps and also distribute them signed with enterprise certificates.
kube-system 2y ago
The desktop is kind of a different space, though. Most of the paid apps I've ever used on MacOS are well-known and cross-platform -- the kind of thing where you'd go to the developers website directly by name. So, of course the developer is going to guide those people down a path where they get all the revenue. And the users of FOSS apps are overwhelmingly the people who will download a DMG from GitHub releases, and change their security settings to install it -- so why bother? But for everyone else -- the $4.99 apps that aren't household names -- the App Store is probably where these are most often purchased. Although I doubt this market is very large on the desktop -- most people just use a browser and maybe some well known software that would have come in a box 20 years ago.

bigdubs 2y ago

People assuming this is a competitive posture exclusively are missing the point. The app store isn't just about making more money, it's about enforcing privacy and security guidelines for apps through the review process and through checks for unauthorized api usage. Apple's product is privacy; they view privacy as a premium feature worth paying for, and 3rd party app stores that are the wild west for privacy are antithetical to this.

luyu_wu 2y ago
Said customers who care about privacy would therefore continue to use the App Store.
- detourdog 2y ago
  Why should Apple divert resources creating a secondary environment?
  - asadotzler 2y ago
    Because it's the law in a region Apple wants to do business. Simple.
    - detourdog 2y ago
      Apple did what they thought was best. The EU said no and the next step is the court system. When that result is known Apple can decide what markets to operate in. When Apple Kerberos all their services they essentially made it possible to granularly manage service availability by user, device, and region. The EU fining schedule is so out of proportion that it creates a real business risk to Apple that may be greater than the EU market size. I don’t think the EU efforts are as detailed or grounded in reality as the EU considers them. As a spectator I can’t wait to follow the ups and downs of this.
- slashdave 2y ago
  Except important products will be pulled from the App Store because they will become exclusives in 3rd party stores.