Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

Post by spacemanmatt » Sun, Mar 27, 2022, 1:05 PM UTC

olliej wrote: post #83

aaomidi wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more they try to block this, the heavier the regulations are going to be on them. At some point Apple might see itself being split apart because of its constant and well documented abuse of it's status in the market.

What market abuse? And what do you split up? Apple is a hardware company, all the software they write is purely to make the hardware they sell attractive to consumers.

Post by emptysongglass » Sun, Mar 27, 2022, 2:21 PM UTC

olliej wrote: post #83

aaomidi wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more they try to block this, the heavier the regulations are going to be on them. At some point Apple might see itself being split apart because of its constant and well documented abuse of it's status in the market.

What market abuse? And what do you split up? Apple is a hardware company, all the software they write is purely to make the hardware they sell attractive to consumers.

Post by latexr » Sun, Mar 27, 2022, 2:26 PM UTC

olliej wrote: post #81

vlovich123 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finally found something [1]. > When setting your wholesale price, first multiply your cost of goods by two. This will ensure your wholesale profit margin is at least 50%. Profit margin is the gross profit a retailer earns when an item is sold. Apparel retail brands typically aim for a 30% to 50% wholesale profit margin, while direct-to-consumer retailers aim for a profit margin of 55% to 65%. (A margin is sometimes a…

The argument that 30% is excessive and a product of their monopoly is bullshit. 1) the majority of apps don’t pay apple a cent because they make their money off selling user information 2) of those that remain most likely aren’t reaching the income point where it stops being 15% 3) 30% matches the payments of every other store, except those stores that don’t pay for any of the platform development. It’s super easy to…

Post by IshKebab » Sun, Mar 27, 2022, 3:44 PM UTC

spacexsucks wrote: post #104

danielscrubs wrote: post #85

I’m not as optimistic as you guys. What I think we will get is a fragmented mess, with the app store that allows the most stealing of data winning. WeChat is a good example where on Android they require access to your whole contact list to even start but on iOS this is not the case because Apple don’t allow it. Competition is going to make this things worse not better. Once you have competition that uses dark pattern…

The answer is not to use wechat. Not to force everyone else in a restricted liberties situation.

Post by LegitShady » Sun, Mar 27, 2022, 4:39 PM UTC

olliej wrote: post #89

LegitShady wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the platform development comes with sale of the platform - which is to say the customer has already paid to have it developed by buying the phone. Many developers don't want to have apple be their gatekeeper for apps. They should be able to have alternatives. Apple's rent seeking behaviour is to take platform development in the cost of the device and again to distribute apps without any alternative.

So you think the Samsung model is correct? That is, devices shouldn’t receive any updates after the initial purchase? I will accept the argument that apple’s gatekeeping is ridiculous, a lot of that is the bizarre prudishness of the US, but saying that apple should not be compensated at a rate that is generally below the market - the majority of apps on the AppStore are freemium from which apple makes nothing, the re…