8 ms·

The US desperately needs some DMA-like legislation, one company shouldn't be able to hold 60%+ of US users hostage when it comes to installing the apps they wan

The US desperately needs some DMA-like legislation, one company shouldn't be able to hold 60%+ of US users hostage when it comes to installing the apps they want to use. Similarly, two companies, Apple and Google, shouldn't be able to keep 15% to 30% of all revenue generated in the entire mobile app market.

kelnos 2y ago
I agree with you, but I don't see how this is relevant to the article.
- 23B1 2y ago
  because the incentives OP describes are why you have this opaque, misaligned, user/developer-hostile ecosystem.
rand_r 2y ago
I’m not a fan of the control, but this is the free market at work. Nothing stops you or any other company from creating a competing phone with its own app ecosystem. It’s really not for the government to dictate to companies how their products can work. It’s up to consumers to choose the products they want to use.
- j45 2y ago
  I'm not sure if it's a free market when it's a private control. Life before app stores was a free market. And there was choice between app stores, and not. Not so much anymore. Convenience of an app store did bring an audience.
  - Angostura 2y ago
    Before app stores you couldn’t put apps on your phone
    - Timon3 2y ago
      Of course you could put apps on phones before app stores. Distribution etc. was harder, and most applications were much more limited (especially due to worse performance, network connection, and limited input methods), but a whole industry existed - there were even communities around "jailbreaking" and so on.
      - Angostura 2y ago
        and you can still jailbreak now if you want to. But even with a jailbreak, I’m not sure there apps, as opposed to tweaks that you could put on the iPhone.
        Timon3 2y ago
        > and you can still jailbreak now if you want to. I can currently only jailbreak an iPhone due to mistakes made by Apple. It's conceivable that it won't be possible at some future point - though I'm not sure how this is relevant towards your earlier point? > But even with a jailbreak, I’m not sure there apps, as opposed to tweaks that you could put on the iPhone. There have been very limited workarounds on iPhones to enable sideloading, e.g. AltStore. These repositories are exactly the kind of apps you're looking for. But again, not sure how this is relevant towards your earlier point?
  - rand_r 2y ago
    It’s a free market because buying an iPhone is a choice. It happens to be an incredible product, so may not feel like a choice, but the experience was designed by one company and put into the market as an offering. Apple has no control over your bank account and you have no control over Apple. You are both free to engage with each other or not.
    - j45 2y ago
      iPhone is a choice. Smartphones or digital literacy increasingly are not optional when it comes to accessing services in society including government. Apple will have a bank account one day. If X becomes the super app it’s aiming to be, it will be interesting to see how that plays out in North America.
- lyu07282 2y ago
  we are ruled by people that share the same infantile and delusional faith in free markets, let that sink in
bruce511 2y ago
I agree with your position statement. However I think your point of view is developer centric, not user centric. Firstly the 60% have chosen iOS. They are not "hostage" they can leave. And this is not new behavior- it has existed since the iPhone shipped. Consumers are voting for this. [1]. Secondly Google doesn't control what you install, so by definition doesn't keep a potion of "all revenue". And most value from mobile apps comes from elsewhere [2], so even the Apple number isn't accurate. As -developers- of course we want unfettered access to users devices to run any code we like. Unfortunately some proportion of developers want that access for reasons unhealthy to the consumer. So yes developers game the system. And your honest app gets rejected. But it's worth understanding that users -want- this curated access, and are voting For it not Against it. [1] you can argue about messenger, but that's about messenger not apps. [2] most all apps I install are free. The company that makes them gets revenue from some other part of the system. We have a "free app" that integrates with our product (which people pay for).
- j45 2y ago
  Maybe some people don't know, or have forgotten that Apple was dead set against an App Store, or third party apps when the iPhone came out. It only relented after it was jailbroken so many times. Apple's view was it would be a closed phone of apps how they said so. Perhaps some of that mindset moved to the respective App Stores. User's don't have as much choice as people think. The new App Stores being regulated in the EU are interesting for that reason. Still reading about phones like WebOS on Palm that was maybe a year too late, could be a different world if we had a phone running JS as front end and for apps like it did. Getting a walled garden up as quickly as possible was critically important.
  - Angostura 2y ago
    I also remember the cover and commentary when the iphoneOS AppStore first came out. Most of it concerned what good value 30% represented to handle hosting, billing and marketing for the developer
    - setopt 2y ago
isodev 2y ago
Apple/Google's position also seems rather conflicted. On one hand, they appoint themselves as bouncers for their respective stores - both claiming to keep end users safe. On another hand, they both allows themselves flexibility in selectively applying the rules when the app in question is lucrative or somehow related to their numerous other product categories. Who is watching the watchers?
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  Mhm. Apple the morality police, "You can't distribute apps around legal porn. You can distribute apps around legal gambling." Hmm. Gambling. Money. I see now why Apple allows gambling apps. Such moral finery in effect.
dash2 2y ago
Have you read the article? It’s about Uber bypassing review so that it can track users against Apple’s rules, and against their will. Or other apps doing it so they can spread pirated software.
- sneak 2y ago
  It’s not pirated software. It’s software for pirating videos. I should be able to install video download tools on my purchased device.
  - dash2 2y ago
    Apple's app store should not be in the business of distributing software for pirating videos.
    - isodev 2y ago
      And that’s why we need a healthy story for installing apps found outside the App Store.
    - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
      is downloading videos always pirating them?
    - sneak 2y ago
      Wrong. You can pirate videos using only Apple first party apps like Final Cut/iMovie/Camera/Safari. They are tools. Apple should not be in the business of policing what you do with tools. That’s like saying GM shouldn’t sell cars that can drive over the speed limit.
BodyCulture 2y ago
To make your argument more impactful it would help to add some ideas about how to protect users from bad software. What are your plans about this?
- deutschepost 2y ago
  How does windows protect their users? This question makes it seem like every OS has control over all installed apps, when this wasn’t the case until iOS. Also Android doesn’t have this problem. If you don’t want bad software don’t install it.
  - g15jv2dp 2y ago
    > How does windows protect their users? Microsoft Defender, SmartScreen...
    - deutschepost 2y ago
      I heard crowdstrike also makes some great anti virus software…
  - sneak 2y ago
    Android malware absolutely is a huge problem.
    - Zak 2y ago
      The only time I've seen malware on an Android device in person, it came from the Play store. I don't know if Apple is significantly better than Google at app review, but the methods described in the article would probably work for both.
  - uptown 2y ago
    CrowdStrike, apparently.
- Lvl999Noob 2y ago
  The question is about who has the control and who has the responsibility. There are users who want (or need) a curated, trustworthy experience. For them, an app store that heavily reviews all apps allowed on there and puts lots of restrictions on what they are allowed to do is ideal. There are also users who want to take the responsibility on themselves. They want the ability to host their own apps for free (or lower costs), faster update cycles, and just overall freedom. Those people don't want a highly curated app store (or rather, they want a co-existing alternative to the highly curated app store). Perhaps the ideal situation would be that device comes with one default app store. That app store is highly curated and selective but it also allows other app stores on it. Those app stores can be reviewed in terms of their own quality but not on the quality of the apps they allow installing. The default app store can have huge warnings that these other store-like apps are not like the other apps and should be used carefully.
Hnrobert42 2y ago
I used to use Android, run cyanogenmod, sideload apps, and I switched to an iPhone. I am not held hostage. I feel fine with the app store the way it is.
ushiroda80 2y ago
What kind of software are the masses being denied? What is the malware risk associated with said software?
- ben_w 2y ago
  Facebook seemed to be rather upset at being told they couldn't track users; by my (IANAL) reading, the rules Apple had that Facebook were objecting to were also the law in several places (CCPA and GDPR): https://hbr.org/2021/02/facebooks-misleading-campaign-against-apples-privacy-policy https://hbr.org/2021/02/facebooks-misleading-campaign-agains...
amelius 2y ago
Yes, governments typically have Separation of Powers. It's crazy that we don't have this kind of thing with digital platforms. Basically the platform owner is legislator and judge at the same time. Let me say it again, if you hate government regulation then you haven't seen a company regulate a market.
- jrvarela56 2y ago
  Reminds of similar separations in other industries: - Newspapers: editorial and advertising (avoid that companies who pay for ads influence opinions) - Banks: ‘origination’ and wealth management (avoid selling financial products created by bank to customers that trust the bank with managing their money) Not sure if these dynamics are enforced by law, but pretty clear that there’s a need for the separation.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
jiggawatts 2y ago
This is the same as companies wanting healthy, educated workers, law & order, reliable electricity, and good roads… but pay no taxes. The Apple app market exists only because users trust it. They don’t trust you, and with good reason. You pay Apple a tax to gain the benefits of that trust.

kelnos 2y ago

I agree with you, but I don't see how this is relevant to the article.

23B1 2y ago
because the incentives OP describes are why you have this opaque, misaligned, user/developer-hostile ecosystem.

rand_r 2y ago

I’m not a fan of the control, but this is the free market at work. Nothing stops you or any other company from creating a competing phone with its own app ecosystem. It’s really not for the government to dictate to companies how their products can work. It’s up to consumers to choose the products they want to use.

j45 2y ago
I'm not sure if it's a free market when it's a private control. Life before app stores was a free market. And there was choice between app stores, and not. Not so much anymore. Convenience of an app store did bring an audience.
- Angostura 2y ago
  Before app stores you couldn’t put apps on your phone
  - Timon3 2y ago
    Of course you could put apps on phones before app stores. Distribution etc. was harder, and most applications were much more limited (especially due to worse performance, network connection, and limited input methods), but a whole industry existed - there were even communities around "jailbreaking" and so on.
    - Angostura 2y ago
      and you can still jailbreak now if you want to. But even with a jailbreak, I’m not sure there apps, as opposed to tweaks that you could put on the iPhone.
      - Timon3 2y ago
        > and you can still jailbreak now if you want to. I can currently only jailbreak an iPhone due to mistakes made by Apple. It's conceivable that it won't be possible at some future point - though I'm not sure how this is relevant towards your earlier point? > But even with a jailbreak, I’m not sure there apps, as opposed to tweaks that you could put on the iPhone. There have been very limited workarounds on iPhones to enable sideloading, e.g. AltStore. These repositories are exactly the kind of apps you're looking for. But again, not sure how this is relevant towards your earlier point?
- rand_r 2y ago
  It’s a free market because buying an iPhone is a choice. It happens to be an incredible product, so may not feel like a choice, but the experience was designed by one company and put into the market as an offering. Apple has no control over your bank account and you have no control over Apple. You are both free to engage with each other or not.
  - j45 2y ago
    iPhone is a choice. Smartphones or digital literacy increasingly are not optional when it comes to accessing services in society including government. Apple will have a bank account one day. If X becomes the super app it’s aiming to be, it will be interesting to see how that plays out in North America.
lyu07282 2y ago
we are ruled by people that share the same infantile and delusional faith in free markets, let that sink in

bruce511 2y ago

I agree with your position statement. However I think your point of view is developer centric, not user centric. Firstly the 60% have chosen iOS. They are not "hostage" they can leave. And this is not new behavior- it has existed since the iPhone shipped. Consumers are voting for this. [1]. Secondly Google doesn't control what you install, so by definition doesn't keep a potion of "all revenue". And most value from mobile apps comes from elsewhere [2], so even the Apple number isn't accurate. As -developers- of course we want unfettered access to users devices to run any code we like. Unfortunately some proportion of developers want that access for reasons unhealthy to the consumer. So yes developers game the system. And your honest app gets rejected. But it's worth understanding that users -want- this curated access, and are voting For it not Against it. [1] you can argue about messenger, but that's about messenger not apps. [2] most all apps I install are free. The company that makes them gets revenue from some other part of the system. We have a "free app" that integrates with our product (which people pay for).

j45 2y ago
Maybe some people don't know, or have forgotten that Apple was dead set against an App Store, or third party apps when the iPhone came out. It only relented after it was jailbroken so many times. Apple's view was it would be a closed phone of apps how they said so. Perhaps some of that mindset moved to the respective App Stores. User's don't have as much choice as people think. The new App Stores being regulated in the EU are interesting for that reason. Still reading about phones like WebOS on Palm that was maybe a year too late, could be a different world if we had a phone running JS as front end and for apps like it did. Getting a walled garden up as quickly as possible was critically important.
- Angostura 2y ago
  I also remember the cover and commentary when the iphoneOS AppStore first came out. Most of it concerned what good value 30% represented to handle hosting, billing and marketing for the developer
  - setopt 2y ago

isodev 2y ago

Apple/Google's position also seems rather conflicted. On one hand, they appoint themselves as bouncers for their respective stores - both claiming to keep end users safe. On another hand, they both allows themselves flexibility in selectively applying the rules when the app in question is lucrative or somehow related to their numerous other product categories. Who is watching the watchers?

FireBeyond 2y ago
Mhm. Apple the morality police, "You can't distribute apps around legal porn. You can distribute apps around legal gambling." Hmm. Gambling. Money. I see now why Apple allows gambling apps. Such moral finery in effect.

dash2 2y ago

Have you read the article? It’s about Uber bypassing review so that it can track users against Apple’s rules, and against their will. Or other apps doing it so they can spread pirated software.

sneak 2y ago
It’s not pirated software. It’s software for pirating videos. I should be able to install video download tools on my purchased device.
- dash2 2y ago
  Apple's app store should not be in the business of distributing software for pirating videos.
  - isodev 2y ago
    And that’s why we need a healthy story for installing apps found outside the App Store.
  - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
    is downloading videos always pirating them?
  - sneak 2y ago
    Wrong. You can pirate videos using only Apple first party apps like Final Cut/iMovie/Camera/Safari. They are tools. Apple should not be in the business of policing what you do with tools. That’s like saying GM shouldn’t sell cars that can drive over the speed limit.

BodyCulture 2y ago

To make your argument more impactful it would help to add some ideas about how to protect users from bad software. What are your plans about this?

deutschepost 2y ago
How does windows protect their users? This question makes it seem like every OS has control over all installed apps, when this wasn’t the case until iOS. Also Android doesn’t have this problem. If you don’t want bad software don’t install it.
- g15jv2dp 2y ago
  > How does windows protect their users? Microsoft Defender, SmartScreen...
  - deutschepost 2y ago
    I heard crowdstrike also makes some great anti virus software…
- sneak 2y ago
  Android malware absolutely is a huge problem.
  - Zak 2y ago
    The only time I've seen malware on an Android device in person, it came from the Play store. I don't know if Apple is significantly better than Google at app review, but the methods described in the article would probably work for both.
- uptown 2y ago
  CrowdStrike, apparently.
Lvl999Noob 2y ago
The question is about who has the control and who has the responsibility. There are users who want (or need) a curated, trustworthy experience. For them, an app store that heavily reviews all apps allowed on there and puts lots of restrictions on what they are allowed to do is ideal. There are also users who want to take the responsibility on themselves. They want the ability to host their own apps for free (or lower costs), faster update cycles, and just overall freedom. Those people don't want a highly curated app store (or rather, they want a co-existing alternative to the highly curated app store). Perhaps the ideal situation would be that device comes with one default app store. That app store is highly curated and selective but it also allows other app stores on it. Those app stores can be reviewed in terms of their own quality but not on the quality of the apps they allow installing. The default app store can have huge warnings that these other store-like apps are not like the other apps and should be used carefully.

Hnrobert42 2y ago

I used to use Android, run cyanogenmod, sideload apps, and I switched to an iPhone. I am not held hostage. I feel fine with the app store the way it is.

ushiroda80 2y ago

What kind of software are the masses being denied? What is the malware risk associated with said software?

ben_w 2y ago
Facebook seemed to be rather upset at being told they couldn't track users; by my (IANAL) reading, the rules Apple had that Facebook were objecting to were also the law in several places (CCPA and GDPR): https://hbr.org/2021/02/facebooks-misleading-campaign-against-apples-privacy-policy https://hbr.org/2021/02/facebooks-misleading-campaign-agains...

amelius 2y ago

Yes, governments typically have Separation of Powers. It's crazy that we don't have this kind of thing with digital platforms. Basically the platform owner is legislator and judge at the same time. Let me say it again, if you hate government regulation then you haven't seen a company regulate a market.

jrvarela56 2y ago
Reminds of similar separations in other industries: - Newspapers: editorial and advertising (avoid that companies who pay for ads influence opinions) - Banks: ‘origination’ and wealth management (avoid selling financial products created by bank to customers that trust the bank with managing their money) Not sure if these dynamics are enforced by law, but pretty clear that there’s a need for the separation.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

jiggawatts 2y ago

This is the same as companies wanting healthy, educated workers, law & order, reliable electricity, and good roads… but pay no taxes. The Apple app market exists only because users trust it. They don’t trust you, and with good reason. You pay Apple a tax to gain the benefits of that trust.