Physical products and services do not need to utilize Apples payment system.
Interesting position considering the bill was written and heavily lobbied for by epic lobbyists. Ironic huh? Epic lobbying to control someone else’s platform they have made billions off of is good, Apple and Google lobbying to protect their right to make a fair profit on their own platforms that they paid billions to build and maintain is bad.
You seem to miss that is exactly what the companies and organizations are saying. They are also reminding the representatives who votes, they say: we represent XXX voters in your district and they feel this way. This is exactly how the system is supposed to work. You statement: “reach out to your representatives” is doing exactly the same thing, but reversed. People who already share a viewpoint join an organization to represent them.
Which side are you describing as “you have wealth”? Apple and Google? What about Microsoft, Epic, Facebook, Spotify?
You are much more likely to influence legislation by joining an organization whose views you share and helping them influence legislation.
Nah, most things that happen at the federal level start at the state level. From school standards to marijuana legalization these things rarely start at the top and work their way down.
And malware on macOS is on the rise.....People need to stop comparing iOS to desktop operating systems. The desktop OS is NOT WORKING for security. We are STILL in a Windows environment in a time where one bad email and someone falling for it can take down an entire company until backups are restored.
Imagine that you lived in a town where there was only one source for high speed internet access, from one company. That company has nothing but problems, over charges, and silently increases your bill until you complain.
Your analogy is flawed because people know in advance what Android and Apple offer and it’s far easier to simply buy the phone that does what you want compared to moving to a new town. Those of us who prefer Apples approach and what it offers would be harmed by you forcing Apple to change it, we PREFER that model. If you don’t that’s ok, you can choose Android, you have always had that option. And if you want to try and convince Apple to change their mind, go for it. But forcing them to do so is wrong.
You live in a house in a town and every one to three years you move into a different house. All your stuff is transferred automatically by movers when you move. In the town you currently live there is only one grocery store and there are only a very small set of house designs built by the one company that also runs the grocery store. That same company also provides police protection, television service, a gym, a bank, messaging, mapping, news, games, and other services, all tightly integrated.
Whenever people say there should be more grocery stores, you point out that they moved into that house, knowing there was only one grocery store, and that one of the reasons they wanted to be there was that the grocery store was better then the many grocery stores in the town next door. However, if they no longer feel that way, they can move when they normally would (when their house expires in 1-3 years), to one of the much larger variety of houses in the other town, and take advantage of all the various services, developers and companies that the other town offers. It will be super easy, as you move into a new house on a regular basis anyway.
You argue that the planned community with the tight policy protection and tightly integrated services should be an option for those who want it.
Yup, there are many such towns in the U.S. They really do exist. They are planned communities, retirement/assisted living communities, and single developer housing developments.
Yes, very normal. Often, just like iOS, people pay a lot more to live in this style of development. Gated communities are often the most expensive places in which to live.
Not if by having multiple stores, I have to create accounts in many different stores, sharing my information at all of them. Not if I have to give up the level of integration as that would be prohibited by the same system. Not if it would mean that I would have to give up my privacy (as you can be sure that those who want to sell my information will only be available in the other, less scrupulous stores).
You understand that macOS has about 7% of the market and so is not really a substantial target for malware, viruses, and other issues, and yet even there, negatives are on the rise, right? You also understand that macOS has orders of magnitude more issues than iOS despite the market share differences, right?
Neither does digital product/service. I utilize a test taking app that I pay for outside of apple's store.
So long as you don't advertise paid functionality or link to an external payment from within the App.
Isn't this easy to prove though? iOS isn't some small town, a better comparison might be one of the largest mega-cities on Earth. Other publishers wouldn't look at a market that size and think "it [can't] support more than one newspaper." It absolutely can. The reason there aren't more is because Apple prevents there from being more than one.
Honestly, I'd love to. In my defense though, I think people have been focusing on this for a lot longer and with much more effort than they've been focusing on changing iOS. There are only 2 options where I live, and that's more than most.
That is why analogies are not particularly helpful beyond explaining a concept.
Even there it is not “just a fact”. Apple limits access to its store front, but one can still develop PWAs that can be used to deliver a very wide variety (if not most) apps.
It is probably hard because it is not a separate market. The smallest reasonable market is smart phones, but based on the Peoplesoft case, the market might include all computers (or at least laptops). An Android device serves the same purpose as an iPhone. That is not to say that every application has to be available in both ecosystems for them to be the same, just that one would be a reasonable replacement for the functions offered by the other.
This. Lobbying is on both sides of any bill.
Apple’s in-app purchases for anything that end up on your phone. Any method the developer likes _except Apple’s in-app purchase_ for anything in the real world.
For physical goods if they want to support an Apple payment system that has the same ease of use and maintains privacy like the App Store, they can use Apple Pay (completely optional)
But ApplePay works as an option.
No ApplePay here.
