EU Competition Chief Tells Apple Not to Use Privacy as a Shield Against Competition

[ArtOfWarfare]

The good stuff for you is right over there ----> at the Play Store and the Internet. See how that works?

Here's a deal you can't pass up. What we, Apple users, decide is best for us will be decided by us. What you, and Android users, decide is best for you will be decided by you. The one caveat, which is already axiomatic, what you think is garbage for iOS apps matters precisely (well rounded to the nearest billionths) is zero.

I'd like to point out that this is MacRumors, not an iOS dedicated website. I've been here since before the iPhone (I think most users have been - you apparently just joined 5 weeks ago, though.)

If the App Store is such a great model, then kindly tell us, what all apps have you purchased from the Mac App Store? What other apps have you added to your Mac, and where'd you get those?

Because I'd be willing to bet that over 80% of the software you added to your Mac (if you even have one) didn't come from the Mac App Store. Further, I'd bet that the software you added to your Mac that wasn't from the store was both cheaper and of higher quality.

The Apple App Store model actively encourages griftware and discourages free quality apps like those you find literally anywhere else. The rise of Facebook at the same time as the iOS App Store was no coincidence - that kind of crap is exactly what Apple's model of "give us $100+/year and 30% of anything from consumers in a race to the bottom!" did.

• The $100+/year means developers won't distribute stuff for free, so they'll have to charge something (unless the app is itself effectively just a company website).
• The restrictions Apple places means developers will always make lousy apps that will never seriously expand your device's capabilities beyond what a website could do.
• The cut of revenue and the race to $0 prices means that developers have to use ads instead to make money.
• Nothing Apple does particularly discourages scammers.

So, there we have it. Apple's rules set the store up to be nothing but a flaming garbage pile from the beginning. It was an experiment - it wasn't clear where it'd lead from the start. But now that we're here, in hindsight, it's easy to see.

For all the people trying to defend the App Store. Please, just go ahead and name one app (there's millions, right?) that you've recommended to a few people. There's so much negativity that people express about all the apps from the App Store - Tik Tok, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Tinder, etc. These are all the garbage that emerged because Apple made the App Store.

You can't say that those apps came about because of the internet, even if some of the groundwork was done before the iPhone. YouTube, Gmail, and Google Maps were the products of the internet - they all existed long before the iPhone and the iOS App Store (see, for example, the fact that Apple preloaded Google Maps and YouTube on the original iPhone... because everyone already recognized them for the successes they were.)

 

[AdonisSMU]

They have a point. Currently you can install on your device hundreds of catfish applications, phishing applications, and data mining applications through Apple's own App Store. If they Apple wants to make this claim they better get their **** together.

It’s unrealistic for Apple to catch everything. Apple is doing its best though. Tech is a moving target.

 

[makitango]

It’s unrealistic for Apple to catch everything. Apple is doing its best though. Tech is a moving target.

They are doing something, yes. Whether it‘s their best or their worst, we can‘t tell.

 

[gregmancuso]

You're right! Something like that would happen, and it would be fantastic! People don't bother sifting through the millions of apps in the app store, because it's 99.99% garbage that you've described.

Add in other means of installing apps, and suddenly it becomes far easier to manage finding the good stuff.

I suspect you're wrong and that the iOS App Store is actually where all the garbage remains - the good stuff all moves to GitHub and other websites that explicitly exist to support developers making quality apps (vs the iOS App Store which exists to benefit Apple at everyone else's expense.)

We are arguing in agreement but with separate conclusions. I foresee many of the apps I would want to use only available from alternatives. Which means I do not have a choice to use these apps. And if they are critical types of apps that would be a problem.

Today I have the option of using any app on iOS as they are all on the App Store.

In your "perfect world" I would have the requirement to allow alternate app stores or side loading in order to have the choice to use any app. That is really not a choice at all. If I want that "choice” I have a platform I can use - Android.

Your ideal of GitHub or vendor sites does not make anything better with regard app discovery. Today I can search the App Store. I can also search any web site on the web to find an app of interest. These sites can (and most do) provide links directly to the app in the App Store. GitHub could just as easily provide said link in lieu of the executable download. Interested users can just as easily download the source from GitHub, compile, and install on their device via Xcode if they wanted - or needed to because the app would never pass app review. You can also side load the .ipa via Xcode, Configurator, Finder, or a slew of "iPhone backup" apps. And none of these require any payment to Apple.

No one is saying that App Store searches are amazing and let you find every app your heart may desire. But it does provide one more avenue to the developers who are already are (should be) doing some self-advertising.

All your ideal world does is make it harder for 99% of the people using iOS today to be able to have access to all the apps available. This is not an improvement.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

The $100+/year means developers won't distribute stuff for free, so they'll have to charge something (unless the app is itself effectively just a company website).

Isn’t it $100 a year even if you’re not on the App Store? Like, just to be a developer?

 

[grandM]

Isn’t it $100 a year even if you’re not on the App Store? Like, just to be a developer?

You can develop without paying. To put something on the Store you need a paid account. IMHO this should be much lower compensated by the procentual cut on the Store.
He is right though freemium apps are a problem.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

You can develop without paying. To put something on the Store you need a paid account. IMHO this should be much lower compensated by the procentual cut on the Store.
He is right though freemium apps are a problem.

But, doesn’t a developer account, that gets you access to all the stuff on developer.apple.com cost $99? Including all the code samples and examples?

And, I guess, another question would be… is there any developer that wants to deliver code for free but REALLY REALLY wants it on the App Store? They can distribute without the Mac App Store, right? Like, it’s a concern, but is there anyone that cares? Or, maybe I missed the point.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Please, just go ahead and name one app (there's millions, right?) that you've recommended to a few people.

Tumult Hype, ScreenFlow, Art Text, Vectornator

 

[grandM]

But, doesn’t a developer account, that gets you access to all the stuff on developer.apple.com cost $99? Including all the code samples and examples?

And, I guess, another question would be… is there any developer that wants to deliver code for free but REALLY REALLY wants it on the App Store? They can distribute without the Mac App Store, right? Like, it’s a concern, but is there anyone that cares? Or, maybe I missed the point.

A free account already goes a long way. But some things require payment.

Choosing a Membership - Support - Apple Developer

developer.apple.com

If you are an indie developer. Why would anyone trust you? Microsoft could side load but that indie? And no-one would find your app unless you spend a lot of advertising. It's already hard getting noticed in the App Store.

 

[gregmancuso]

Isn’t it $100 a year even if you’re not on the App Store? Like, just to be a developer?

No. Anyone can download Xcode and write an iOS app. And they can deploy it on their own device. All for free.
The $99 gets you the certificate and ability to distribute on the App Store or access to TestFlight.

 

[dk001]

A free account already goes a long way. But some things require payment.

Choosing a Membership - Support - Apple Developer

developer.apple.com

If you are an indie developer. Why would anyone trust you? Microsoft could side load but that indie? And no-one would find your app unless you spend a lot of advertising. It's already hard getting noticed in the App Store.

To find relevant apps (both iOS and Android) I usually do a Google or DDG search.
Easier than in either store and also gives me a number of side load apps for Android.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

To find relevant apps (both iOS and Android) I usually do a Google or DDG search.
Easier than in either store and also gives me a number of side load apps for Android.

I don’t think I’ll ever understand people that say, “It’s hard to find my app on the App Store.” Ok, so is your app great? So great that folks have made youtube videos and posted links to it all over the place because they want to share how great it is? No? Well, is it good enough that people interested specifically in that type of app will suggest the app to their friends and friends of friends? No? Want to try making it at least good? I guarantee if you do folks will find it regardless of store (can’t count the number of times I found out about an interesting app, only to find it’s on Steam, that I don’t use. The point being, of course, that I didn’t have to be ON Steam to find out about a Steam game.)

 

[Unregistered 4U]

A free account already goes a long way. But some things require payment.

Choosing a Membership - Support - Apple Developer

developer.apple.com

If you are an indie developer. Why would anyone trust you? Microsoft could side load but that indie? And no-one would find your app unless you spend a lot of advertising. It's already hard getting noticed in the App Store.

If you are an indie developer, your goal is making money, so chances are, you SHOULD make that $99 back if your app is good. The problem though, is a lot of the apps aren’t good I guess? Are there indie developers that actually want to put that work into an app and then NOT sell it?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

No. Anyone can download Xcode and write an iOS app. And they can deploy it on their own device. All for free.
The $99 gets you the certificate and ability to distribute on the App Store or access to TestFlight.

Oh, so, if someone wanted to release a free game for whatever reason, only the $99 tier would allow them to email that app .zipped up to a friend OR post it on their site for download?

 

[grandM]

I don’t think I’ll ever understand people that say, “It’s hard to find my app on the App Store.” Ok, so is your app great? So great that folks have made youtube videos and posted links to it all over the place because they want to share how great it is? No? Well, is it good enough that people interested specifically in that type of app will suggest the app to their friends and friends of friends? No? Want to try making it at least good? I guarantee if you do folks will find it regardless of store (can’t count the number of times I found out about an interesting app, only to find it’s on Steam, that I don’t use. The point being, of course, that I didn’t have to be ON Steam to find out about a Steam game.)

On Google the one paying most will get noticed. That works in favor of corporations with huge budgets. Most will not seek long.

 

[grandM]

If you are an indie developer, your goal is making money, so chances are, you SHOULD make that $99 back if your app is good. The problem though, is a lot of the apps aren’t good I guess? Are there indie developers that actually want to put that work into an app and then NOT sell it?

A lot of developers struggle to get by. People have this strange notion software should be free.

 

[dk001]

I don’t think I’ll ever understand people that say, “It’s hard to find my app on the App Store.” Ok, so is your app great? So great that folks have made youtube videos and posted links to it all over the place because they want to share how great it is? No? Well, is it good enough that people interested specifically in that type of app will suggest the app to their friends and friends of friends? No? Want to try making it at least good? I guarantee if you do folks will find it regardless of store (can’t count the number of times I found out about an interesting app, only to find it’s on Steam, that I don’t use. The point being, of course, that I didn’t have to be ON Steam to find out about a Steam game.)

I find it easier to find an app that fits a want / need and not knowing the name via Google.
Over the years there have been great apps I have discovered that way. The search in the App Store is from my experience either great or piss poor.

Usually the apps I find for Android that are not in the Google Play Store are recommendations that Google picked up from publications and forums. Some are refered by friends or peers. I also find App Store apps in a similar fashion.

It works for me.

 

[grandM]

Here you go

Indie game makers open up about the money they actually make

A dozen creators get candid about cash.

www.theverge.com

 

[Ubuntu]

There will be apps that will force you to sideload if the option is available. Don't be ignorant in thinking that there aren't a handful of popular apps that will jump at the chance to be outside of Apple's control if given the option. If sideloading is made to be an allowable option it will be impossible to stick exclusively to the App Store unless you are someone who barely uses your phone for anything.

I'd rather Android lovers not ruin my choice to run a phone OS that protects my privacy and security by not allowing sideloading.

Sideloading on iOS is the death of true freedom of choice.

No one is forced to use or develop for iOS. They do so knowing full well of Apple's requirements and restrictions. If they don't like it then they can go to Android or not develop for iOS.

What's wrong with competition? If those apps decide to only allow for side loading then Apple will be forced to make the App Store more appealing (and then maybe those apps will come back to the App Store).

Also, the App Store is not the bastion for security you think it is. It's still possible to have side loading with many of the security benefits we enjoy today. And it's not just Android lovers who want this. It's also worth looking at the Mac, which is doing OK given it's using the model people are terrified about.

I don't buy your point about the "true freedom of choice" because the current situation works for you, and frankly there's no logical way that a closed system is more free than an open one in this situation.

Ah yes, the classic "no one is forced to use or develop for iOS" argument. I like this one, because it ignores the fact that iOS has gone beyond a mere mobile OS and has become an integral part of society. I could go develop for Android but then I'd lose out on a major market (and making an app for just Android is not a good idea).

Side loading could turn out to be a bad idea, but the current situation just isn't healthy and I'm glad someone called Apple out on it.

 

[gregmancuso]

Oh, so, if someone wanted to release a free game for whatever reason, only the $99 tier would allow them to email that app .zipped up to a friend OR post it on their site for download?

what?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

what?

You said, “Anyone can download Xcode and write an iOS app. And they can deploy it on their own device. All for free.” So, they can’t just .zip up the app, send it to a friend and have them use it on their computer?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I find it easier to find an app that fits a want / need and not knowing the name via Google.

I think that’s true for more people than developers think. Once a person has used a search engine to find an app that fits a want/need, they’ll find the name of an interesting app via Google or DDG. Once they have the name, they’d go to the App Store (or find a link directly to the App) and download it.

Make it good enough for people to talk about, and the search engines will do your job for you. But, in a lot of cases, they KNOW it’s a good app, people just aren’t using it for some reason!!

 

[WiseAJ]

What's wrong with competition? If those apps decide to only allow for side loading then Apple will be forced to make the App Store more appealing (and then maybe those apps will come back to the App Store).

Also, the App Store is not the bastion for security you think it is. It's still possible to have side loading with many of the security benefits we enjoy today. And it's not just Android lovers who want this. It's also worth looking at the Mac, which is doing OK given it's using the model people are terrified about.

I don't buy your point about the "true freedom of choice" because the current situation works for you, and frankly there's no logical way that a closed system is more free than an open one in this situation.

Ah yes, the classic "no one is forced to use or develop for iOS" argument. I like this one, because it ignores the fact that iOS has gone beyond a mere mobile OS and has become an integral part of society. I could go develop for Android but then I'd lose out on a major market (and making an app for just Android is not a good idea).

Side loading could turn out to be a bad idea, but the current situation just isn't healthy and I'm glad someone called Apple out on it.

The true freedom of choice is the closed iOS system vs the open Android one. Destroying the closed nature of iOS by forcing sideloading onto it decimates that choice. It ignores the choice that a significant number of people have made.

Yes, iOS is an integral part of society, but it is made up of a majority people that chose the closed system. No one is entitled to those customers and if you want them you need to respect their wishes and follow the rules of the closed system.

The Mac is doing ok with its model but it also isn't in over a billion peoples pockets tracking everywhere they go and everything they do. The iPhone has to be more secure and locked down to protect people's privacy and sensitive data. The iPhone is becoming more and more than just a phone so it needs to keep every edge it has on security to prevent bad people from ruining people's lives. Enabling sideloading will just make it far easier for someone to get malware onto your phone and know where you are, how much money you have, who your family members are and where they are if they are in "Find My", control of your car, etc. People entire lives are on their phone. It needs to be protected as such.

The current "Situation" is just the vocal minority of users and greedy developers who all of a sudden have an issue with a 13 year model that hasn't negatively changed in that time. It wasn't a "situation" back in 2008 (It was welcomed as a god send), it isn't one now.

 

[dk001]

The true freedom of choice is the closed iOS system vs the open Android one. Destroying the closed nature of iOS by forcing sideloading onto it decimates that choice. It ignores the choice that a significant number of people have made.

Yes, iOS is an integral part of society, but it is made up of a majority people that chose the closed system. No one is entitled to those customers and if you want them you need to respect their wishes and follow the rules of the closed system.

The Mac is doing ok with its model but it also isn't in over a billion peoples pockets tracking everywhere they go and everything they do. The iPhone has to be more secure and locked down to protect people's privacy and sensitive data. The iPhone is becoming more and more than just a phone so it needs to keep every edge it has on security to prevent bad people from ruining people's lives. Enabling sideloading will just make it far easier for someone to get malware onto your phone and know where you are, how much money you have, who your family members are and where they are if they are in "Find My", control of your car, etc. People entire lives are on their phone. It needs to be protected as such.

The current "Situation" is just the vocal minority of users and greedy developers who all of a sudden have an issue with a 13 year model that hasn't negatively changed in that time. It wasn't a "situation" back in 2008 (It was welcomed as a god send), it isn't one now.

Nice post but why so black/white?
My other half uses Android and for her it is a closed system The ability to side load is turned off (by default).
I use Android and have side loading turned on. For me it is an open system.
We both also have iPads, and I have an iPhone.
She likes closed. I prefer open.

Why can we not have the ability to choose either open or closed AND either Android or iOS?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Nice post but why so black/white?
My other half uses Android and for her it is a closed system The ability to side load is turned off (by default).
I use Android and have side loading turned on. For me it is an open system.
We both also have iPads, and I have an iPhone.
She likes closed. I prefer open.

Why can we not have the ability to choose either open or closed AND either Android or iOS?

It’s not a closed system for her, though. It’s an open system just like a Mac. And, just like a Mac you can decide to use it in a way that simulates a closed system. Those that want the option to use an open system in a way that simulates a closed system can make one choice, those that want a truly closed system can make another choice.