So, how should Apple be rewarded for the marketplace that they created? Every proposal that I’ve seen is trying is to prevent Apple from profiting from their innovation.
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.
New U.S. Antitrust Bill Would Require Apple and Google to Allow Third-Party App Stores and Sideloading
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As they are now? I bet share value will still grow as the engine of its growth are fundamentally the devices and their operating systems. Apple Car, Apple Glass … so on and so forth … Apple usually makes a great job on that with the exception when they try keep the devs out of it … leading to discontinued products case in case the latest HomsPod.
Than we have devs that will keep on offering their products on the App Store and Customer that will not buy a thing if not certified by the App Store.
Don’t see that changing in the “how”. Do you?
Last edited:
That doesn’t answer the question posed. “Competition” through regulations in traditional lightly regulated industry rarely benefits the consumer - imo. And in this specific instance is a lose/lose all around.
So you are rephrasing the question of your colleague? You did not like the question or the answer?
Can you just make the question that it’s on your mind instead of letting me to figure out what the question was through some nonsense … there is no competition through regulation just regulated competition.
I believe in thin regulation … not in the absence of it. There are new phenomena’s on the market that have never been here before.
Last edited:
Just read the complete Senate Bill. The purpose is, "To promote competition and reduce gatekeeper power in the app economy, increase choice, improve quality, and reduce costs for consumers."
It is obvious that the primary purpose is to "reduce the gatekeeper power." I'm not sure how this bill would increase choice (except for porn apps), improve quality or reduce costs for consumers. Further, with the push to allow 3rd party payment systems, those "free with in app purchase" apps will be able to profit from an app stores hosting, marketing, and support without ever paying for it. (the current $99 annual dev fee is likely insufficient)
I understand the point that many are making about the current app system. I guess it just seems unfair that one business (devs) feels like they should be able to take advantage of another businesses products and services (Google/Apple) without paying for it.
And I suspect this bill will likely not have the effect that the drafter's suspect it will. Albeit, there is no guarantee that it will ever be law. But there seems to be momentum for it.
It is obvious that the primary purpose is to "reduce the gatekeeper power." I'm not sure how this bill would increase choice (except for porn apps), improve quality or reduce costs for consumers. Further, with the push to allow 3rd party payment systems, those "free with in app purchase" apps will be able to profit from an app stores hosting, marketing, and support without ever paying for it. (the current $99 annual dev fee is likely insufficient)
I understand the point that many are making about the current app system. I guess it just seems unfair that one business (devs) feels like they should be able to take advantage of another businesses products and services (Google/Apple) without paying for it.
And I suspect this bill will likely not have the effect that the drafter's suspect it will. Albeit, there is no guarantee that it will ever be law. But there seems to be momentum for it.
It depends how abstract and intemporal you wanna be I guess. I believe our conversation would be endless.
Correct…endless. Nothing has fundamentally changed since 2008. So going from little in 2008 to huge revenues in 2021 is a nod to the success. The government hates success…ask ATT.
In a free market one or a small group of companies cannot have 99% of the market, meaning controlling the market resources, and play by the the same rules has other companies … simply put with that kind of power these make the rules. How they got there is irrelevant to the diagnostic.
Things are always changing.
PS: I understand that you feel that companies should take the place of governments but that I think it’s outside the scope of the conversation … historically the evolution of human organization have been there … it gave place to dynasties … in the beginning there was only competition for resources. We have evolved …
Last edited:
I remember a local bar/restaurant in my former tourist town that refused to use credit cards because they took a small percentage, maybe 3 or 4% based on volume. What he didn't realize was the simple act of putting the Visa/MC decal on his front door would have increased his business by 10 times that amount, especially for tourists. App "Store" is the same way, it provides a safe, reliable, and vetted place for developers to sell their products. The same goes for us, as users, I believe Apple earns their profits by providing the developers the tools and showcase for their apps. User ratings reveal any bugs or lack of usability. I am not interested in getting an App from an unsecured vender.
Ya, I wasn't under the illusion that my phone was secure, Pegasus I guess has demonstrated that to everybody, but there's an endless collection of 0-day exploits for sale to the highest bidders which do same. Now that Apple has caved in, cut whatever deal they made with the US government, it doesn't even matter at this point. Big Brother and invasive on device scanning are inside my phone, the company that makes "my" phone has sold out to them or been pressured to Make a Deal, the h4x0rs who have always had access to it can get inside my phone anytime they want, the walled garden is a marketing illusion anyway and there is no safety or privacy except for not putting anything on your phone that you're uncomfortable with sharing with anybody.
The only real question here is will the illusion sustain itself, or do I start dumping stock ... and, the market will tell me the answer to that, not discussions on an Apple forum ;-)
Hi, my name is Vlad, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your question ... I'd like to share with you about my childhood in Bulgaria...
The fact these companies got successful legally, through hard work and innovation is the relevant part of this. That the Monday morning quarterbacks (government) want to increase competition through anti-competitive measures will be, imo, a lose for all.
Companies shouldn’t take the place of government. Government should stay out of micro-regulations.
Being successful legally is not something unique to these companies so its actually irrelevant in this context. Nothing of that is in question, neither is the discussion between legal success and ilegal
Are you stating that letting digital services communicate freely and legally, with no repercussions dictated by whoever within their properties with their customers … case in case in THEIR Apps/Software … as they see fit is anti-competitive? Why?
This seams to be the aim of regulators regardless if the App runs on iOS, Android … or whatever. … and precisely what Apple and Google are against for others but for themselves in these OSs used by over 95% of Americans. This is a new phenomena.
PS: For me this is the thing that needs to be fixed. Multiple App Stores, side loading etc is irrelevant. The moment devs can put a link in their Apps to their services whatever they are much like Apple does, like any other regular business can do in a Free Market, analog or digital, without fear of seeing their property damaged by anyone else, other solutions will be found while respective this market freedom.
Last edited:
What’s unique is this “Monday morning quarterback stance.”
The App Store has been managed essentially the same way since its inception. It’s Apple’s property the same way the newspapers manage their editorial pages.
Yep, Monday morning quarterbacks.
The App Store is Apples property, same as editorial pages of a newspaper. They should manage it as they are fit. Especially since the App Store is 13 years old and has been managed essentially the same way since then.
I simply called off your violins.
It may come as a shock but if the premise for a regulation or a law is entities doing prior illegal things there would be none. This is a fact. nothing to do with ones prior successes.
Yes. But the Apps are not theirs neither are the devices a lot of other things required for the system of control to function. Also a fact. Things work in network of multiple properties … nodes if you will … competing for value.
The workings of cars, planes, office construction … are regulated for instance. Nothing new.
You seam to be repeating your self. The App Store is not a newspaper …
Anyway, playing such a game you seam to be arguing something in line with freedom of expression now … App Store and Google Play being a vehicle for their expression. But the “articles” aren’t theirs neither are the devices required to read them. This is why probably Polittitians seam to be talking about regulating the OSs to support multiple “newspapers” and sideloading “articles” so that Freedom of Expression is saved for all within these market dominated by private OSs, as they should be after all. Much like “seat belts” were introduced in cars, or data privacy handling regulations are introduced to the way personal data is handled by these organizations. Nothing weird or anti competitive about that is it?
It’s funny how recurrently the argument for reducing freedoms in any space is Security. Never Empowerment and Competition which seam to be the stance of some politicians at the moment against others that seam to want to stand on the shoulder of Security has long as it fits narrative of control.
Cheers
Last edited:
The government hates legal success though.I simply called off your violins.
It may come as a shock but if the premise for a regulation or a law is entities doing prior illegal things there would be none. This is a fact. nothing to do with ones prior successes.
Correct. And when a dev signs up they agree to the terms of service. It's basically the same TOS now for 13 years.
Correct. There are emissions standards etc. But the government is coming and tell Honda it must sell new Toyota's in their Honda showroom.
The point bears repeating digital goods, physical goods they are goods and there are other businesses that sell a mix outside products.
Correct, that is why I am using the term Monday morning quarterbacks.
Yep, because in my opinion, this bill (although most likely not be passed), is an example of bad legislation for many of the reasons discussed previously...across many posts and threads. (Because a bill was proposed, it doesn't make the bill good, right or needed)
This sounds more like an anti government statement … it’s a bit out of topic.
With a premise like this the rest undebatable.
PS: Haven’t seen the reasons put forward why it is bad. Just prose around fear, either from Security & Privacy stand point or ultimate chaos in the digital space as a consequence … up to Apple products and services being out in ultimate jeopardy. None of it makes sense to me considering how market agents operate.
In particular Apple will keep on prospering as it did sustained in device and services innovation as it always did. Apple Car seams to be coming … VR … glasses … so on and so forth. Not believing in this it’s just an admission that services like Apple Music, TV+ and others would not come fruit with active protection of the App Store. But I don’t believe in that.
Last edited:
Because a bill was proprosed, doesn't make the bill good or right or in the end will even have the desired consequences. I haven't seen one reason why this a good bill. Saying this bill, if it gets ratified, will free the masses from the shackles of Apple doesn't say anything more than this bill, if ratified, will be the downfall of the Apple ecosystem due to loss of developer incentive, piracy, privacy rights and competition.
Is the glass half full or half empty. I don't see any upside to this bill and only downside. (And I am not in control, but am putting my $.02 before the universe)
What? Now you bring the orchestra.
Apple late success was as I’ve said was down to the iPhone and iOS. The App Store is just a fraction of Apple revenue … give us a break.
Loss of developer incentive? Are
seriously making the claim that making a developer share 30% of revenue with not other option if they want to serve their customers in the devices of their choice, value they have created, is the incentive that makes them come back? Or is the basic fact that iPhone and hopefully iPad and macOS will be attracting even more users due to increase in iPhones, iPads and Mac sales.
Are you also claiming that the ability of a dev to support multiple payment options in their app, maybe even including Apple Pay, even if distributed by the App Store, including links to their services suddenly put Privacy and Security in jeopardy in Android and iOS?
Are also claiming that by the same virtues will be the downfall of Apple? Honestely, multiple payment options that probably a lot of devs will not go for and opt for App Store billing is it?
Hehehe, what a dystopia.
Are these the so called reasons why this bill is bad?
Humm maybe I should not buy macOS. Heck maybe I should just cancel the Apple Display XDR order right now and dish Homekit …
Now, on a more serious note … if this bill is passed … competition should … watch out. With the App Store revenue stream facing for the first time ever direct competition … the company will look for others more decisively as ever backed by an amount of cash that and organization no one else has ever seen. Heck maybe even get Siri right as users have been waiting for years instead of being distracted building Palaces in city centers … sorry investing in real state. Maybe an actual game console with true gamers level graphics power that both devs and user seam to have been waiting for … who knows …
But that was just a question of time anyway, with bill or no bill. The new Apple innovation wave might just come earlier than later … that is good for people … competition will be even more “bloody”.
Last edited:
That’s been the swan song all along.
Give who a break?
As an ex-dev I’m claiming the App Store has value to most developers. Some large developers who have made millions want to use apples infrastructure for free.
I’m claiming multiple payment options is worse for consumers.
I’m claiming what this bill aims for is the downfall of the iOS ecosystem.
Imo, yes…the bill is a bad bill. And I would vote these people out of office the first chance I get.
Do what you feel is necessary
Basically imo if the bill is passed the App Store would be a free for all. Leading to a worse experience for consumers.
The bill may be good for a select few but imo not for the majority.
As an xdev why is the value diminished with multiple payment options and third party App Stores?
A lot of small devs have been distributing Apps in macOS both in the App Store and out of the App Store … there seams to be no technical difficulties today for self ”publishing” … believe me is not really expensive … as expensive as having a good website online … such as this one. You can also just opt for simply go though the App Store …
Big companies, should pay for hosting their apps in the App Store, not have them there for free. Yes, I’m thinking of Facebook, Pinterest, Amazon, Twitter, Youtube, Netflix, Spotify, …. … … gosh so so many. Why aren’t they paying for app review, distribution and updates meanwhile Apple is going after small devs businesses? Whose actually banking who really in this model? I would say its the small ones banking the App distribution of companies with a billion of revenue and still give Apple profit … aren’t all devs building on top of iOS …
What about the proliferation of forms of “loot boxes” in apps? Its not difficult to fins apps charging for lots of money for basically nothing … wallpaper apps of sorts … stuff full of Ads and pop-ops … charging crazy money to get rid of them.
Anyway, waiting for the answer …
People don’t share the same concern as you regarding on this matter. Especially the ones mentioned.
Why?
Why?
I would buy iPhones the same way. I buy because I think their are superior devices … Continuity is great (should get better faster) … I also like the simplicity of the device operation. If there was other App Stores, other payment options or even if I was able to pay directly to the dev … most of the time I would still probably buy from the App Store like often do in macOS … it’s nice to have our catalogue of licenses centralized … some sort of wallet of licenses.
Last edited: