Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
App Store May Violate Japanese Antitrust Law
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The iPhone existed without those devs. Those same devs weren't making a penny off iOS without Apple. None ever have. None ever will.or sales that wouldn't happen in the first place without the developer
man you must not know very much about what it's actually like in China
so you say people will have a choice. Thats all we want. The Chicken Littles can continue to huddle in the AppStore. Everyone will be happy.
This article focuses on alternative payments systems but the Japanese Fair Trade Commission report is also recommending/seeking to also allow things like third party app stores, sideloading, etc.
But there are other ways to easily get games for those devices including numerous third party stores, websites, etc. By comparison, the ability to get apps for iOS is far more restricted by Apple.
One difference is that there are several ways to get and pay for games for Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Switch, etc. By comparison, Apple is far more restrictive with the iPhone/iOS.
the iPhone was nothing without the devs and the jb community. just an expensive gadget. literally from steve jobs and tim cooks own quotes. try again.
My point is still correct. The iPhone exists without the devs, the devs don't exist without Apple. Like it or not, it's a fact.
your point means absolutely nothing in the context of this discussion. it's like saying the sky is blue.
You can purchase physical copies, however there is still a licensing fee paid to the console maker. Only specified manufacturers can produce them. When you purchase a digital code, fulfillment is through the console maker's store. Either way, the console maker gets their cut. What I can't do is purchase a console game from Steam, GOG, EGS, et al. It would be like Apple giving developers the ability to generate codes that could be redeemed through the App Store. You buy your app from WalMart, GameStop, or wherever, but then go to the App Store, enter your code, and the app downloads to your device. Console makers also approve every game that runs on their platform. I can't download any apps to my Xbox that haven't been blessed my MS.
If Apple is forced to allow third-party stores where they don't get to set rules or take a commission, then the same should apply to consoles. Steam, or another store should be able to set up shop on Xbox, PS, and Switch and sell games that can run on those consoles. If Apple is forced to allow sideloading so devs can sell apps directly to customers (or at least choose their own middlemen), then I should be able to go directly to a game developer's site and download a game that I can run on my console - without going through the manufacturer, or giving them a cut of the revenue.
And to head off the "generalized computing device" argument, the only things that keep a PS or Xbox from being a full-fledged computer are the software lockouts. Either is fully capable of running Windows or Linux and being used for other purposes.
I am not sure you realize that man Steam games actually require you to download other clients and then login to them at least one time. After that it will do a pass through authentication. A few examples, BF 2042 bought from Steam, will require you to have a minimal EA client and login into EA through Steam. Same for Rainbow Six siege and the UBI soft, uplay client. IMHO that is the very worst setup. If I know a Steam game will run 100% from Steam I get it from Steam. If does client chaining, then I buy it vendor's client and cut out Steam.
Some of this stuff is so bad, like a UBI Soft or EA game, that when from Steam, you get the Steam gaming overlays, the Ubisoft Overlays and if you have the full on AMD or NVIDIA clients those overlays....as in game keyboard combinations to chat with friends or take a screen shot or turn of a FPS counter. Oh and add on the Windows Xbox Gaming bar BS on top of that.
I would love to see your gaming collection, from Steam that is compatible with Mac, Linux and Windows. I know for sure probably 90% of mine can not run fully on Linux or Mac. Some may kind of work, single player only, with some odd issues beyond that.
I am fine with it. Open it up and choose what you will.
I think it absolutely sucks that governments get to tell a business how to run, especially when we are talking the likes of Apple. Nothing they make is needed by anyone, none of it is life essential and you have other choices. It is not like the government funded them or anything. Let the market decide. I bet over 90% of Apple customers are perfectly happy about how their Apple world works and will never even know there are alternative stores or payment methods if it comes to that.
This is about alternative payment systems, alternative app stores, etc. and there are several ways for developers, retailers, and consumers to buy or sell and pay for games for Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Switch, etc. Apple, by comparison, is far more restrictive in how they allow iOS apps to be sold/distributed and paid for.
No one is saying Apple can't still have rules, technical requirements, etc. for iOS apps. The model regulators seem to be looking for with iOS is something more like macOS.
Well, yes, of course not all my games are Mac compatible, but there is a Mac Steam client, and if the developer has made a Mac version, that is included.
I haven’t tried Steam on Linux recently, but my understanding is that Valve has done as lot of work on making games Linux compatible, especially with the introduction of their Steam Deck.
I can’t think of any of my Steam games that require a separate client, but I don’t play any of the super-competitive online games like you mentioned, and I tend to lean more towards the indie side of gaming.
I do have one game on the Epic client that also requires a Ubisoft client, and that one is a bit of a mess because it uses a yearly subscription, which I purchased from Epic, but now I can’t see any way to renew through Epic. I’ve only bought like five games through Epic, and that was only because I was able to get them super cheap with their coupons, which are no longer as generous. I now only use them to collect the free weekly games they give out.
Games and apps on iOS can still require third party accounts.
By far, my biggest frustration with PC gaming is gamepad support, though that’s partly my fault for using PlayStation controllers instead of just XBox controllers. There are several different ways that controllers can be detected, so I have to use a different workaround for each one. If I just stuck to Steam that wouldn’t be an issue, but I’ve got a ton of great free games through Epic and Amazon Prime, and from cheap itch.io and Humble Bundles.
But again, if I wanted that single source, easy to use experience, I could just stick to Steam and still have access to a bigger library than any console.
I started PC gaming in the 90’s, and it was way more difficult back then. You used to have to go to some random website to download patches for games. Multiplayer and voice support required crappy third party software. And, of course, most games we’re only available on physical media.
I’ve experienced frustrations on the console side as well. I can’t play older games because I can no longer buy controllers for older systems, or they don’t connect well to modern TV’s. My PS3 takes forever applying system and game patches every time I turn it on, and its wireless speed is pitiful.
A few years back I worked part time at a Honda dealer. Their parts department sold strictly Honda replacement parts. Although third party vendors made and sold parts as well, only Honda parts were allowed to maintain factory warranties. Is this a ‘monopoly’? I don’t care if third party app vendors sell apps for iPhones, I don’t want Apple to be forced to sell them in their App store. I rely on Apple’s expertise to authenticate the apps sold.
If this supposed to be more than just general government bashing, it doesn't make any sense to me. Please explain how mandating that Apple allow sideloading or alternative would increase revenues for governments in developed countries like Japan, the U.S., the U.K. or Europe?
How is all sales of iOS apps, in-app purchases and subscriptions going through one single entity (Apple, in this case) not actually great for these governments' tax collection? Because Apple operate an entity that collects sales/VAT taxes in these jurisdictions. And thought they're legally minimising their tax burden, they won't outright cheat the taxman. Unlike some web shop in China or a random banana republic and/or tax haven that doesn't even cooperate with charging sales taxes.
Fearmongering about evil hackers shouldn't dictate governments' policies and laws with regards to digital gatekeepers.
As a matter of observable fact, Playstations and Xboxs are bought for playing games.
Generalised computing devices like smartphones and PCs for much more than that.
The fact remains that I can't purchase Xbox games from Steam. There are no alternative app stores for consoles. You can purchase codes from other stores. You can purchase physical game copies from other stores. Ultimately all games and apps are approved by the console maker, and the console maker gets a cut. This is no less restrictive than how Apple runs their store. Actually, there are fewer barriers to distributing on the App Store or Play Store than there are for consoles.
I can purchase games for my Mac using Steam, Origin, EGS, or another store. There are few restrictions as to content. This is not the case for the App Store, nor for consoles. I can also download apps directly on my Mac, I can't do that on my consoles.
If we are going to break open closed ecosystems, then it needs to be across the board. If Apple and Google are compelled to allow alternative stores and sideloading, then the same needs to be applied to Sony, MS, and Nintendo. I should be able to run any compatible game I want without interference
Consoles are also marketed for media consumption as well. However the fact remains that the limitations are strictly software limitations. An Xbox could run Windows just fine and be a PC. Consoles are also artificially limited when it comes to distribution, solely so that the console maker can control content, quality, and make money on the licensing.
A lot of contortions are required to justify carving out exceptions for consoles, while calling for opening up mobile platforms. If I can buy iOS apps directly from the developer or through another store, I still fail to see the reasons why that shouldn't be the case for console games.
Through fines and fees for compliance and consultations. Have you ever tried running your own business? There are a lot of cost involved to be in compliant with regulations, especially when new ones are enacted.
About gaming consoles: the argument is about allowing sideloading and alternative App Store for a majority player in the market. Playing games or not is irrelevant, Sony and Nintendo are major marketshares in the market, yet they have walled gardens. Walled gardens are not illegal. Discussions about this is a red herring. What the Japanese regulators are looking here is allowing alternative payment method, not about sideloading or alternative app stores.
No. There are tens of thousands of dealerships and stores that sell auto parts. One dealer would have an insignificant portion of the auto parts market, and this particular Honda dealer would even have an insignificant portion of the Honda parts market as there are many other dealers and stores that sell Honda parts.
Apple's dominance comes from its significant share of the overall mobile OS market.
This is not about Apple having to sell particular apps in their App Store. It's about seeking to require Apple to allow sideloading, alternative app stores, alternative payment systems, etc. on iOS given its dominance in the mobile OS market.
The point is that the market and payment options for Sony PlayStation, Nintendo Switch, etc. games is/are much more open (or much less restrictive) than that for iOS apps. It's Apple's dominance in mobile OS combined with their anticompetitive behavior (significant restrictions) that are at issue.
I agree that antitrust laws and regulations should be across the board when situations are comparable but I just don't find the Apple, Sony, Nintendo, etc. situations comparable for reasons I've mentioned.
Simple you decide if you trust the developer or not. No one is forcing you. In fact, if no one side-loads, the developer will be forced back to the App Store. Problems solved. Capitalism at its finest.
Being in the App Store does not in any way, outside of Apple marketing, make it significantly safer.
As a developer, I know multiple ways to fool Apple. We all know the about the Apps that Apple let though the review process and were bogus from day 1. These developers were stupid. There are Apps in the Apple App store that are stealing your data today and Apple has not caught them.
And, I know this has been said before, but side loading seems to work for macOS and has for decades. Much fear mongering, few facts.
Naw, as a developer I know the reality that the Apple App Store does not and cannot detect determined developers from stealing your data in spite of Apple marketing.
If you don't trust an App developed by your bank, then you cannot trust your bank. Simple as that. The banks business is ruined if their App results in customers losing money.
You are also forgetting that companies like banks want a good customer experience. Side loading will never be as good as the Apple App Store for customer service. Also Apple is trendy. Developers like trendy.
Also don't you know that side loading has worked for decades on macOS.
Much fear, few facts.
Yep, I am just not in that 90%.. I quit buying iOS apps a couple of years ago and I definitely do not use that macOS App Store. I won't be using any other AppStores either.. I want to install my ipas just like my .apps ... I will accept no less even if it means I never purchase another iOS app.