6 ms·

It's really the most interesting thing I read in this screed, the rest of which seemed to be clueless BS like, "changes to App Store policies that will improve

It's really the most interesting thing I read in this screed, the rest of which seemed to be clueless BS like, "changes to App Store policies that will improve the state of the internet." No. Unlike Google, Meta, and Amazon, Apple is not a gatekeeper to the Internet. They are the gatekeeper to one thing: their own app store. It's tiresome to hear the same anti-"big-tech" hysteria aimed at Apple. They aren't a monopoly, period. But back to this: "The App Store policies hurt privacy" No, they don't. The plaintiff bases this admittedly novel whine on the fact that Google and its ilk make money on things other than their software. So by that logic, every company that doesn't conduct business through its app hurts every company that does. Give us a break.

solarexplorer 1y ago
> They are the gatekeeper to one thing: their own app store. They also control the OS and don't allow side-loading or other app stores (without putting absurd obstacles in the way) So in the end they completely control the devices they sell.
- mvanbaak 1y ago
  The end user is _NOT_ forced to buy into their ecosystem though. There are alternatives, and depending on where on this globe you ask, apple is not even the one with the biggest marketshare. So while I'm not against the general outcry and need for change, it is not just apple. The problem is way way bigger, and it should not be put onto one of the players in my opinion. Create regulation/platform that sets the limits, then put ALL players into the process not just one
  - DANmode 1y ago
    For discussion's sake, They are "forced" if they: 1) want to be cool or 2) don't want to be uncool or 3) don't want to spend effort on a technical decision they think doesn't matter to them
- DidYaWipe 1y ago
  So what? So does every game-console manufacturer. Buy a different one.
  - BlueTemplar 1y ago
    The difference is that we can easily try to pretend that game consoles are not general purpose computers. And doing so is not going to cause issues to the fabric of the society.
    - DidYaWipe 1y ago
      Hahaha, wow, OK. Then we must acknowledge that we're talking about PHONES here, and the applications on it are optional TOYS. The phone could have no app store at all, and still be highly functional and complete. In fact... that's how the iPhone launched. There was no app store for years. Meanwhile, a game system with no games is not functional at all. Might want to reconsider your argument here.
      - BlueTemplar 1y ago
        No, they are general purpose computers that can also work as cellphones. The first iPhone technically wasn't a smartphone (unlike its competitors at the time) because it did not have a way to install third-party programs. This situation only lasted a year though. It did have a pre-installed Google Maps app, very much not a toy... And don't game consoles typically come out bundled with some first party games too ?
        DidYaWipe 1y ago
        "The first iPhone technically wasn't a smartphone (unlike its competitors at the time) because it did not have a way to install third-party programs" What a laughably wrong assertion. The iPhone handled all kinds of PIM data and synced with computers. There was no requirement (or even expectation) that a "smart" phone had third-party applications.
Nevermark 1y ago
Try shipping a web browser not based on Apple’s browser functionality on iOS. See how free of gatekeeping the internet is.
- DANmode 1y ago
  iOS is not the Internet anymore than Jitterbug is telephones.
  - Nevermark 1y ago
    Nobody made such a claim. If you serve web pages, you likely serve many of your users on their Apple devices. And you can’t support features of the web for those users if Apple doesn’t want them to have those features, and prohibits browsers with other engines that do support them on their App Store, and prohibits other sources of web browsers. That’s called “gatekeeping”.
    - DANmode 1y ago
      Apple is not the Internet, stop allowing your friends, family and colleagues to treat it that way.
      - DidYaWipe 1y ago
        Meanwhile, I can't convince my dad that he doesn't need to pay for AOL anymore...
    - DidYaWipe 1y ago
      Yes you did: "Try shipping a web browser not based on Apple’s browser functionality on iOS. See how free of gatekeeping the internet is." And no, it isn't. Not supporting certain browser features does not direct traffic or even deny access. So you obviously don't know what gatekeeping is.
      - Nevermark 1y ago
SkiFire13 1y ago
> They are the gatekeeper to one thing: their own app store Which is also the only allowed way to run software on 58% of US smartphones? > Unlike Google, Meta, and Amazon I could agree with Google, but how are Meta and Amazon gatekeepers of the internet? Especially _more than Apple_
- DidYaWipe 1y ago
  So what? Controlling how many fart apps are available on its platform does not make Apple a gatekeeper to any part of the Internet. Apple does not funnel Web traffic into its properties. Think it through: Amazon dominates shopping-search results. It easily swamps any other shopping portal or indie vendor. So it is a de facto gatekeeper to a huge portion of online shopping. You're citing Apple's alleged 58% of phone-platform share as making it a gatekeeper to the Internet? Amazon is actually an Internet-based entity with huge dominance in its field. Meanwhile Meta (Facebook) IS the Internet for a large (less tech-savvy) portion of the public. Akin to when AOL slapped Internet access onto its platform. Apple controls its app store. Is it douchey as hell to developers? Yep. Has it antagonized governments and flouted legal rulings? Yep. Has it lied about App Store search? Yep. But it is not an Internet gatekeeper or a monopoly.
  - SkiFire13 1y ago
    > So what? Controlling how many fart apps are available on its platform does not make Apple a gatekeeper to any part of the Internet. Controlling what kind of software, including _web browsers_, runs on the main device for the majority of the US population, does not make it a gatekeeper? That doesn't make any sense to me. Want to go to Amazon? You need an app or a browser to access it, both of these are controlled by Apple on its devices. Meta/Facebook? Same.
    - DidYaWipe 1y ago
      No, it does not. Does the cable company's forcing of you to use DOCSIS-compliant modems control what Web sites you access? No. Does WebKit direct you to certain sites or block sites based on their content? Does it capture your search terms and curate the results? Does it aggregate content? Does it funnel your viewing to certain sites preferentially? No. You keep attempting to assert that the viewing tool curates what you view with it. WebKit doesn't. Even if you raise technical points (doesn't support Web MIDI or something), those still don't prevent you from visiting any site you want. Even if a site were totally broken for technical reasons, it doesn't amount to deliberate curation by Apple. Come on.

solarexplorer 1y ago

> They are the gatekeeper to one thing: their own app store. They also control the OS and don't allow side-loading or other app stores (without putting absurd obstacles in the way) So in the end they completely control the devices they sell.

mvanbaak 1y ago
The end user is _NOT_ forced to buy into their ecosystem though. There are alternatives, and depending on where on this globe you ask, apple is not even the one with the biggest marketshare. So while I'm not against the general outcry and need for change, it is not just apple. The problem is way way bigger, and it should not be put onto one of the players in my opinion. Create regulation/platform that sets the limits, then put ALL players into the process not just one
- DANmode 1y ago
  For discussion's sake, They are "forced" if they: 1) want to be cool or 2) don't want to be uncool or 3) don't want to spend effort on a technical decision they think doesn't matter to them
DidYaWipe 1y ago
So what? So does every game-console manufacturer. Buy a different one.
- BlueTemplar 1y ago
  The difference is that we can easily try to pretend that game consoles are not general purpose computers. And doing so is not going to cause issues to the fabric of the society.
  - DidYaWipe 1y ago
    Hahaha, wow, OK. Then we must acknowledge that we're talking about PHONES here, and the applications on it are optional TOYS. The phone could have no app store at all, and still be highly functional and complete. In fact... that's how the iPhone launched. There was no app store for years. Meanwhile, a game system with no games is not functional at all. Might want to reconsider your argument here.
    - BlueTemplar 1y ago
      No, they are general purpose computers that can also work as cellphones. The first iPhone technically wasn't a smartphone (unlike its competitors at the time) because it did not have a way to install third-party programs. This situation only lasted a year though. It did have a pre-installed Google Maps app, very much not a toy... And don't game consoles typically come out bundled with some first party games too ?
      - DidYaWipe 1y ago
        "The first iPhone technically wasn't a smartphone (unlike its competitors at the time) because it did not have a way to install third-party programs" What a laughably wrong assertion. The iPhone handled all kinds of PIM data and synced with computers. There was no requirement (or even expectation) that a "smart" phone had third-party applications.

Nevermark 1y ago

Try shipping a web browser not based on Apple’s browser functionality on iOS. See how free of gatekeeping the internet is.

DANmode 1y ago
iOS is not the Internet anymore than Jitterbug is telephones.
- Nevermark 1y ago
  Nobody made such a claim. If you serve web pages, you likely serve many of your users on their Apple devices. And you can’t support features of the web for those users if Apple doesn’t want them to have those features, and prohibits browsers with other engines that do support them on their App Store, and prohibits other sources of web browsers. That’s called “gatekeeping”.
  - DANmode 1y ago
    Apple is not the Internet, stop allowing your friends, family and colleagues to treat it that way.
    - DidYaWipe 1y ago
      Meanwhile, I can't convince my dad that he doesn't need to pay for AOL anymore...
  - DidYaWipe 1y ago
    Yes you did: "Try shipping a web browser not based on Apple’s browser functionality on iOS. See how free of gatekeeping the internet is." And no, it isn't. Not supporting certain browser features does not direct traffic or even deny access. So you obviously don't know what gatekeeping is.
    - Nevermark 1y ago

SkiFire13 1y ago

> They are the gatekeeper to one thing: their own app store Which is also the only allowed way to run software on 58% of US smartphones? > Unlike Google, Meta, and Amazon I could agree with Google, but how are Meta and Amazon gatekeepers of the internet? Especially _more than Apple_

DidYaWipe 1y ago
So what? Controlling how many fart apps are available on its platform does not make Apple a gatekeeper to any part of the Internet. Apple does not funnel Web traffic into its properties. Think it through: Amazon dominates shopping-search results. It easily swamps any other shopping portal or indie vendor. So it is a de facto gatekeeper to a huge portion of online shopping. You're citing Apple's alleged 58% of phone-platform share as making it a gatekeeper to the Internet? Amazon is actually an Internet-based entity with huge dominance in its field. Meanwhile Meta (Facebook) IS the Internet for a large (less tech-savvy) portion of the public. Akin to when AOL slapped Internet access onto its platform. Apple controls its app store. Is it douchey as hell to developers? Yep. Has it antagonized governments and flouted legal rulings? Yep. Has it lied about App Store search? Yep. But it is not an Internet gatekeeper or a monopoly.
- SkiFire13 1y ago
  > So what? Controlling how many fart apps are available on its platform does not make Apple a gatekeeper to any part of the Internet. Controlling what kind of software, including _web browsers_, runs on the main device for the majority of the US population, does not make it a gatekeeper? That doesn't make any sense to me. Want to go to Amazon? You need an app or a browser to access it, both of these are controlled by Apple on its devices. Meta/Facebook? Same.
  - DidYaWipe 1y ago
    No, it does not. Does the cable company's forcing of you to use DOCSIS-compliant modems control what Web sites you access? No. Does WebKit direct you to certain sites or block sites based on their content? Does it capture your search terms and curate the results? Does it aggregate content? Does it funnel your viewing to certain sites preferentially? No. You keep attempting to assert that the viewing tool curates what you view with it. WebKit doesn't. Even if you raise technical points (doesn't support Web MIDI or something), those still don't prevent you from visiting any site you want. Even if a site were totally broken for technical reasons, it doesn't amount to deliberate curation by Apple. Come on.