Thanks for looking at this.
I wonder if the fact Sony is a Japanese (has a US business headquarters) conglomerate would have any affect if this goes against Apple and expands from there?
Maybe that should be a sub thread though…
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.
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Another Antitrust Bill That Would Allow Sideloading on iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thanks for looking at this.
I wonder if the fact Sony is a Japanese (has a US business headquarters) conglomerate would have any affect if this goes against Apple and expands from there?
Maybe that should be a sub thread though…
I don’t understand why this always becomes a discussion about the App Store.
I like the App Store. I think it’s a great resource for iPhone users. It makes it easy to find new apps, which have gone through at least some semblance of an approval process. When I install an App Store app, I know that it’s (extremely likely to be) safe.
It’s just that, sometimes, I’d also like to be able to install apps from outside the store. Choices are good.
No one is getting the App Store taken away from them. It’s how users are used to installing apps, and it would still be the default on every iPhone. There would be tremendous incentives for developers to list their apps in the App Store.
I like the App Store. I think it’s a great resource for iPhone users. It makes it easy to find new apps, which have gone through at least some semblance of an approval process. When I install an App Store app, I know that it’s (extremely likely to be) safe.
It’s just that, sometimes, I’d also like to be able to install apps from outside the store. Choices are good.
No one is getting the App Store taken away from them. It’s how users are used to installing apps, and it would still be the default on every iPhone. There would be tremendous incentives for developers to list their apps in the App Store.
Last edited:
A very well reasoned post.
The issue for many people here seems to be that they think (and Apple is helping them mistakenly think this) it will open the door to iOS suddenly becoming some dangerous malware ridden virus infested hell hole.
Apple is muddying the situation on purpose as they really don't want to lose their iron grip on all iOS App revenue.
The funny thing is, I don’t even think they’d loose significant revenue! 99% of users would still get their apps through the store. Just ask Epic how well Fortnite did on Android before they caved and put it on the Play Store.
If I was Apple, I would enable sideloading tomorrow just to get everyone off of my back. I’d bury the switch deep in Settings and throw up a scary warning message. A government mandate could potentially require the process to be easier than this; better for Apple to get ahead of things and do it on their own terms.
Last edited:
It's kind of a lose-lose preposition for Apple. If sideloading is a total dud, then all the companies screaming "monopoly" will keep on litigating. Most of them don't even have an issue with the Store per se but with Apple's commission. So in that scenario, Apple gives up control and won't even gain any goodwill. Alternatively, sideloading does take off, and Apple's App Store exclusivity ends. That would be a disaster (for Apple's 20%+ YoY services revenue growth).
Maybe, but their legal argument would be weaker.
I mean, Epic is currently suing Google over the Play Store, and the Open App Markets Act targets both Apple and Google, although it would obviously affect Apple more. The thing is that regardless of the theoretical arguments in favor of sideloading (and there are many!), the Coalition for App Fairness and their allies are not fundamentally motivated by some high-minded belief in user control or evading censorship. They're motivated by money. What they actually want is access to the reach of the App Store without having to pay Apple. If they can get that through third party stores, great. If not, they'll just keep arguing that Apple is a monopoly because distributing outside the App Store is non-viable.
Epic does just fine on its own without any "reach" of App Stores
I think they'd be thrilled just by not having to get bent over the barrel by Apple honestly.
I think they'd be thrilled just by not having to get bent over the barrel by Apple honestly.
Anyone can argue whatever they want regardless of what Apple does. Apple’s job is to make it harder for them to sway courts and lawmakers.
Not on Android! They launched on Android as sideload-only, but ultimately had to list on the Play Store because they couldn’t get users to install it otherwise. (Now, of course, they’re sideload-only again due to the whole lawsuit thing, but that’s a calculated loss.)
Last edited:
Those who play for money will always lose to those who play for power. Apple and other digital giants should probably stay out of politics and maybe "the sideloading issue" will magically "go away".
I stand corrected!
Sounds like Apple should get on with it and enable sideloading to me..
I understand that you personally want it, but if it doesn't take off it's not going to help Apple fight monopoly accusations. If it would, why is Google getting in trouble too, when Android has had sideloading since day one?
There are other concessions that Apple could make (stopping anti-steering provisions, for one) that would be far less "extreme" so to speak, and would actually meaningfully improve things for CAF.
Well, while the case against them is weaker, they are being targeted as well. And that's because, as Epic found out, distributing outside Google Play isn't actually a viable method for reaching users. That being the case, if Apple merely opened up iOS to sideloading as an option buried deep in settings for tinkerers, while it would be a welcome addition, it wouldn't fundamentally change their legal situation. They would still have gatekeeping power and would still have developers fighting them over their commission. They have no incentive to do it.
Is the third party app stores not a "thing" on Android?
That would seem like the solution, particularly for someone like Epic who has license to lots of stuff they could market.
There are third party app stores, but they are either:
1) Included by the carrier or OEM and have a subset of apps already available in Google Play
2) Serve some niche audience such as FOSS, or the Chinese app stores
The stores also don't get access to some of the APIs the Play Store does
There is no viable way of mass distribution of commercial software on Android without Google Play. Hence, Google wields nearly as much power is Apple does.
Small developers only pay 15%.
App Store Small Business Program - Apple Developer
Propel your small business forward with the next generation of groundbreaking apps on the App Store and invest more resources into your business.
As I've said before, this whole push is about billion dollar corporations trying to get a piece of a trillion dollar corporation. They're simply framing it as being about the little guy to gain support.
Well, duh. Epic et al would argue that Google has deliberately crippled them in some way. Therefore, we need to understand that CAF doesn’t want sideloading in the pro-consumer sense of “oh, now I can download an emulator“. They want sideloading as a full-blown alternative to the App Store, to the point where content currently in the store could choose to leave. And any bill that mandates sideloading will likely have mechanisms to try and make alternative stores more viable, so it can’t necessarily be compared to the situation on Android today.
They could however depending on what version of Android and what OEM defines if you already have an alternate store. Adding another store is not customer friendly.
However once you do, many stores are simple to use and work really well.
App store expectations based on Apple and Google design.
Even Amazon, a simple one is not simple and easy.
And the Supreme Court has the right to hear and rule cases. That’s well established also.
Oof - Careful there hoss
Not sure the current (very politicized) Supreme Court will go in the direction you might want on something involving Apple