4 ms·

> Simply don't install other app stores. This won’t be an option for many people. Once there’s an Adobe App Store you’re going to have to get on board with the

> Simply don't install other app stores. This won’t be an option for many people. Once there’s an Adobe App Store you’re going to have to get on board with their bullshit to use the software. Look at the Windows game stores situation.

_aavaa_ 2y ago
> Adobe App Store You’re describing a website with a purchase button, the exact situation we have on all non-mobile devices. > Look at the Windows game stores situation. Yes and look at their competition: GoG, Steam, Humble Bundle, Epic Games, Origin, etc. Don’t like Windows game stores, no problem just use a competitor.
- lolinder 2y ago
  > GoG, Steam, Humble Bundle, Epic Games, Origin, etc. Don’t like Windows game stores, no problem just use a competitor. This is literally their point. Windows gaming is a convoluted mess of stores that you have to juggle, a far cry from the experience Apple has been trying to offer to consumers.
  - _aavaa_ 2y ago
    Having to click, once, between different stores if you really care about a game is not some convoluted process. And analogies to streaming services don’t hold up for a few reasons: 1. There’s no ongoing cost to have an account at the each, purchases are one time. 2. Games do not leave services the way shows leave streaming sites.
    - joeblubaugh 2y ago
      > Games do not leave services the way shows leave streaming sites This already isn’t accurate, and it’s getting less so all the time.
      - _aavaa_ 2y ago
        I guess I’d like to see some examples of games being pulled from stores and also from the libraries of paid customers.
  - jncfhnb 2y ago
    It’s not convoluted. There’s just multiple stores. You can get 99.9% of the games you want on steam.
- joeblubaugh 2y ago
  You now have different terms of service for these stores, including rules about data collection. Software will be exclusively available on these stores, so it’s not like you’ll actually have a choice about whether to use a given store. Just like those “competitive” windows game stores.
  - _aavaa_ 2y ago
    The horror of having different companies allowed to set their own rules for how they interact with people. This scenario is how websites and the web as a whole work, it’s how macOS and windows work. And if you have concerns about privacy or shady business practices (I do too) remember that Facebook, TikTok, and Twitter are allowed on the App Store and get preferential treatment. The third party I want protecting me from sharing practices isn’t Apple (who is whole unaccountable) it’s the government.
stale2002 2y ago
> This won’t be an option for many people. Yes it will be. Do what you do with every other product. Don't install it if you don't like it. But let other people decide what they want to do with their own phones.
- lolinder 2y ago
  Exactly, you should let other people decide what they do with their phones. The majority of Apple users chose phones for the tightly curated, easy to navigate Apple ecosystem. You don't have a right to upend that by forcing Apple to change the product they bought to more closely resemble a product that's already on the market. If you want an open ecosystem get an Android phone already, don't try to dictate what other people are allowed to buy. (Writing as a happy Android user who chose it for F-Droid!)
  - thecrash 2y ago
    It seems you're saying that since there's a choice on one level (phone architecture, Android vs. iOS), it doesn't matter if choice is denied on all other levels. Your reasoning seems to be that if anyone is unhappy with being prevented from doing something with their phone, they can resolve it by buying a different phone. This notion of freedom is compelling in its elegance, but it's not how freedom is generally understood in contexts where most people have pre-existing commitments and investments which constrain their exercise of a particular high-level choice. For example while it's true that people who live in an authoritarian state generally do have the ability to leave, we don't consider that option to absolve the authoritarian state of its responsibility to grant rights to its citizens. The reason is that it's very hard for most people to switch countries: it requires learning a new language, re-buying all the possessions and property that can't be relocated, and losing all the connections and efficiencies people depend on to make their lives work well. Because of the high switching cost, people who had the misfortune to settle in a state which turned authoritarian are likely to submit to conditions which they don't actually agree with or like. We don't consider such people to be free, despite the nominal first-order freedom of choice they do have.
  - stale2002 2y ago

_aavaa_ 2y ago

> Adobe App Store You’re describing a website with a purchase button, the exact situation we have on all non-mobile devices. > Look at the Windows game stores situation. Yes and look at their competition: GoG, Steam, Humble Bundle, Epic Games, Origin, etc. Don’t like Windows game stores, no problem just use a competitor.

lolinder 2y ago
> GoG, Steam, Humble Bundle, Epic Games, Origin, etc. Don’t like Windows game stores, no problem just use a competitor. This is literally their point. Windows gaming is a convoluted mess of stores that you have to juggle, a far cry from the experience Apple has been trying to offer to consumers.
- _aavaa_ 2y ago
  Having to click, once, between different stores if you really care about a game is not some convoluted process. And analogies to streaming services don’t hold up for a few reasons: 1. There’s no ongoing cost to have an account at the each, purchases are one time. 2. Games do not leave services the way shows leave streaming sites.
  - joeblubaugh 2y ago
    > Games do not leave services the way shows leave streaming sites This already isn’t accurate, and it’s getting less so all the time.
    - _aavaa_ 2y ago
      I guess I’d like to see some examples of games being pulled from stores and also from the libraries of paid customers.
- jncfhnb 2y ago
  It’s not convoluted. There’s just multiple stores. You can get 99.9% of the games you want on steam.
joeblubaugh 2y ago
You now have different terms of service for these stores, including rules about data collection. Software will be exclusively available on these stores, so it’s not like you’ll actually have a choice about whether to use a given store. Just like those “competitive” windows game stores.
- _aavaa_ 2y ago
  The horror of having different companies allowed to set their own rules for how they interact with people. This scenario is how websites and the web as a whole work, it’s how macOS and windows work. And if you have concerns about privacy or shady business practices (I do too) remember that Facebook, TikTok, and Twitter are allowed on the App Store and get preferential treatment. The third party I want protecting me from sharing practices isn’t Apple (who is whole unaccountable) it’s the government.

stale2002 2y ago

> This won’t be an option for many people. Yes it will be. Do what you do with every other product. Don't install it if you don't like it. But let other people decide what they want to do with their own phones.

lolinder 2y ago
Exactly, you should let other people decide what they do with their phones. The majority of Apple users chose phones for the tightly curated, easy to navigate Apple ecosystem. You don't have a right to upend that by forcing Apple to change the product they bought to more closely resemble a product that's already on the market. If you want an open ecosystem get an Android phone already, don't try to dictate what other people are allowed to buy. (Writing as a happy Android user who chose it for F-Droid!)
- thecrash 2y ago
  It seems you're saying that since there's a choice on one level (phone architecture, Android vs. iOS), it doesn't matter if choice is denied on all other levels. Your reasoning seems to be that if anyone is unhappy with being prevented from doing something with their phone, they can resolve it by buying a different phone. This notion of freedom is compelling in its elegance, but it's not how freedom is generally understood in contexts where most people have pre-existing commitments and investments which constrain their exercise of a particular high-level choice. For example while it's true that people who live in an authoritarian state generally do have the ability to leave, we don't consider that option to absolve the authoritarian state of its responsibility to grant rights to its citizens. The reason is that it's very hard for most people to switch countries: it requires learning a new language, re-buying all the possessions and property that can't be relocated, and losing all the connections and efficiencies people depend on to make their lives work well. Because of the high switching cost, people who had the misfortune to settle in a state which turned authoritarian are likely to submit to conditions which they don't actually agree with or like. We don't consider such people to be free, despite the nominal first-order freedom of choice they do have.
- stale2002 2y ago