5 ms·

It's not a scrapeability problem; it's a freedom problem. The article mentions this. Why should the app stores decide what can and cannot be on our phones, and

by msvan 13y ago

It's not a scrapeability problem; it's a freedom problem. The article mentions this. Why should the app stores decide what can and cannot be on our phones, and why should they add a 30% tax on everything that is published on mobile? There are a lot of claims that the tech industry is disrupting the big music and books businesses, for the benefit of consumers, but these new players are acting like the middlemen they are replacing. The web reduces the distance between content consumers and producers, cutting out the middleman. It's not a perfect solution. Standards are greatly influenced by commercial interests. But it's better than a locked-down app store oligopoly.

gitah 13y ago
Apple and Google gets to act as middle men because their app store provides value to the end user. Users are free to use the mobile browser on their phones but most of the time native apps are a better experience. And guess who develops the framework and tools to create these value-adding native apps. This is the free market at work.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  >This is the free market at work The free market sometimes leads to a not-so-free market, which is ultimately bad for consumers. This is the entire reason there is anti-trust law.
  - exelius 13y ago
    But there's not an anti-trust situation with app stores: Apple, Microsoft and Google all maintain their own app stores. No, they don't let anyone else operate an app store on their mobile platform, but other companies are free to create their own mobile platforms if they don't like that. Apple and Google aren't doing anything illegal to stop other mobile platforms from existing; it's just that users really don't want another platform right now.
    - unclebucknasty 13y ago
      >But there's not an anti-trust situation with app stores I am not saying that there are current or even future anti-trust issues with app stores. I was simply using that analogy to illustrate that the "free market" can move in a direction that is less free to an extent that is negative for consumers. This can happen because consumers are free to choose. In other words, that anti-trust laws exist and have been employed to combat this is simply offered as evidence that the great-grandparent post above overlooks the fact that the free market can lead to reduced choice for consumers.
    - sologoub 13y ago
      Amazon operates a fork of android, not sure if you count that in.
rimantas 13y ago
How about letting me to decide what I want on my phone? And if I prefer apps to the ad-ridden, third-party-tracking-code infested web pages, so be it?
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  >And if I prefer apps to the ad-ridden, third-party-tracking-code infested web pages, so be it Cool. And now, I'd like to introduce you to the world of ad-ridden, third-party-tracking-code infested apps.
- gopher1 13y ago
  Just so you know, apps are also using any number of third party tracking services, and many are also ad-ridden. Not to mention that apps usually have more/deeper access to your personal information.
- Zigurd 13y ago
  Some apps are at least as evil. And, like Web pages, most of the evil comes from ad support in the apps. Google could go quite far to fix this by enabling users to selectively turn off permissions, and requiring developers to handle SecurityException.
josu 13y ago
>Why should the app stores decide what can and cannot be on our phones This is not a freedom problem. You have the freedom to buy an Android device, and you have the freedom to install any apk you want without ever even opening the Google app store. Moreover, Google even allows 3rd party app stores on their devices. And of course these new players are acting as middlemen, but you are forgetting the fundamental difference, and this is what has changed the game. Anybody can publish their app, virtually for free. There are no gatekeepers, who decide what gets published and what doesn't, anymore.
- Phlarp 13y ago
  >There are no gatekeepers, who decide what gets published and what doesn't, anymore. Except Apple.
- outside1234 13y ago
  All of that is patently false: You can't publish any App on the Apple AppStore but only those that are kid-friendly. You can't publish a shopping app on Apple's AppStore for free - you have to hand over all of your margin to Apple. Apple is a gatekeeper. They decide what gets published and what doesn't. What am I missing?
- mikegioia 13y ago
  There are no gatekeepers, who decide what gets published and what doesn't, anymore. Apple routinely rejects applications to their App store. Have you not read any of the numerous stories where app devs get denied? This is not a freedom problem. You have the freedom to buy an Android device, and you have the freedom to install any apk you want without ever even opening the Google app store. The freedom to do something like "install any app via .apk" may exist, but it is still a "freedom problem" when there's a large barrier to installing an .apk on your device. I'm speculating of course, but real world anecdotes would lead me to believe that a very small % of the population even knows what an APK is.
  - josu 13y ago
    >Apple routinely rejects applications to their App store. Have you not read any of the numerous stories where app devs get denied? Yes, I am aware. And yes, you are right. But the gatekeeping on the app stores has nothing to do with the music, movie or even book industry. Could they be more lenient? Yes, but you can't denied that the game has indeed changed. >I'm speculating of course, but real world anecdotes would lead me to believe that a very small % of the population even knows what an APK is. I would say that you are right again. And you are also right, maybe this is a debate about freedom, but personally, I don't consider having to go to settings, security and checking a box, a large barrier to freedom. If you actually seek freedom, it's only a few (acceptable) steps away.
zdean 13y ago
Actually, it's more like a 43% tax (assuming a 30/70 split).

by msvan 13y ago

gitah 13y ago

Apple and Google gets to act as middle men because their app store provides value to the end user. Users are free to use the mobile browser on their phones but most of the time native apps are a better experience. And guess who develops the framework and tools to create these value-adding native apps. This is the free market at work.

unclebucknasty 13y ago
>This is the free market at work The free market sometimes leads to a not-so-free market, which is ultimately bad for consumers. This is the entire reason there is anti-trust law.
- exelius 13y ago
  But there's not an anti-trust situation with app stores: Apple, Microsoft and Google all maintain their own app stores. No, they don't let anyone else operate an app store on their mobile platform, but other companies are free to create their own mobile platforms if they don't like that. Apple and Google aren't doing anything illegal to stop other mobile platforms from existing; it's just that users really don't want another platform right now.
  - unclebucknasty 13y ago
    >But there's not an anti-trust situation with app stores I am not saying that there are current or even future anti-trust issues with app stores. I was simply using that analogy to illustrate that the "free market" can move in a direction that is less free to an extent that is negative for consumers. This can happen because consumers are free to choose. In other words, that anti-trust laws exist and have been employed to combat this is simply offered as evidence that the great-grandparent post above overlooks the fact that the free market can lead to reduced choice for consumers.
  - sologoub 13y ago
    Amazon operates a fork of android, not sure if you count that in.

rimantas 13y ago

How about letting me to decide what I want on my phone? And if I prefer apps to the ad-ridden, third-party-tracking-code infested web pages, so be it?

unclebucknasty 13y ago
>And if I prefer apps to the ad-ridden, third-party-tracking-code infested web pages, so be it Cool. And now, I'd like to introduce you to the world of ad-ridden, third-party-tracking-code infested apps.
gopher1 13y ago
Just so you know, apps are also using any number of third party tracking services, and many are also ad-ridden. Not to mention that apps usually have more/deeper access to your personal information.
Zigurd 13y ago
Some apps are at least as evil. And, like Web pages, most of the evil comes from ad support in the apps. Google could go quite far to fix this by enabling users to selectively turn off permissions, and requiring developers to handle SecurityException.

josu 13y ago

>Why should the app stores decide what can and cannot be on our phones This is not a freedom problem. You have the freedom to buy an Android device, and you have the freedom to install any apk you want without ever even opening the Google app store. Moreover, Google even allows 3rd party app stores on their devices. And of course these new players are acting as middlemen, but you are forgetting the fundamental difference, and this is what has changed the game. Anybody can publish their app, virtually for free. There are no gatekeepers, who decide what gets published and what doesn't, anymore.

Phlarp 13y ago
>There are no gatekeepers, who decide what gets published and what doesn't, anymore. Except Apple.
outside1234 13y ago
All of that is patently false: You can't publish any App on the Apple AppStore but only those that are kid-friendly. You can't publish a shopping app on Apple's AppStore for free - you have to hand over all of your margin to Apple. Apple is a gatekeeper. They decide what gets published and what doesn't. What am I missing?
mikegioia 13y ago
There are no gatekeepers, who decide what gets published and what doesn't, anymore. Apple routinely rejects applications to their App store. Have you not read any of the numerous stories where app devs get denied? This is not a freedom problem. You have the freedom to buy an Android device, and you have the freedom to install any apk you want without ever even opening the Google app store. The freedom to do something like "install any app via .apk" may exist, but it is still a "freedom problem" when there's a large barrier to installing an .apk on your device. I'm speculating of course, but real world anecdotes would lead me to believe that a very small % of the population even knows what an APK is.
- josu 13y ago
  >Apple routinely rejects applications to their App store. Have you not read any of the numerous stories where app devs get denied? Yes, I am aware. And yes, you are right. But the gatekeeping on the app stores has nothing to do with the music, movie or even book industry. Could they be more lenient? Yes, but you can't denied that the game has indeed changed. >I'm speculating of course, but real world anecdotes would lead me to believe that a very small % of the population even knows what an APK is. I would say that you are right again. And you are also right, maybe this is a debate about freedom, but personally, I don't consider having to go to settings, security and checking a box, a large barrier to freedom. If you actually seek freedom, it's only a few (acceptable) steps away.

zdean 13y ago

Actually, it's more like a 43% tax (assuming a 30/70 split).