Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 125 posts

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

#111

Post by PlanckMeasure80 »

latexr wrote: post #105
olliej wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> the majority of apps don’t pay apple a cent Every app in Apple’s App Stores makes them a minimum of 99USD/year, the cost of an Apple Developer account.

But you can publish multiple apps with one account

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

#112

Post by olliej »

LegitShady wrote: post #109
olliej wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

apple is free to charge what they wish for the app store, and support phones for as long as they wish, so long as alternatives are possible.

So you do support the Samsung model? Where the only way to get security updates is through buying a new phone?

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

#113

Post by LegitShady »

olliej wrote: post #112
LegitShady wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

apple is free to charge what they wish for the app store, and support phones for as long as they wish, so long as alternatives are possible.

So you do support the Samsung model? Where the only way to get security updates is through buying a new phone?

you're offering a false equivalence that isnt required for my argument to be true, so I'm going to say 'i never said that, you did,and you never managed to make a logical argument out of it yet'.

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

#114

Post by johnwalkr »

throwmeariver1 wrote: post #52
tqkxzugoaupvwqr wrote: post #50

“Sideloading” is the perfect word to frame the behavior of downloading apps in a negative light or as an illicit activity. No-one has ever talked of sideloading an app on macOS – because sideloading is simply downloading an app from the Internet as we have known it from the very beginning of the Internet. I still cannot believe most people adopted this word as part of this discussion and keep using it, helping Apple’…

sideloading was never a term used in any official documentation or communication the term was coined by the android community. we have to pick our own nose for that one.

It’s older than that, I remember using it to describe loading mp3s to iPods without using iTunes.

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

#115

Post by spacexsucks »

IshKebab wrote: post #107
spacexsucks wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That's like saying "the answer is not to use Android or Apple". Pretty naive.

I dont use android and apple. There are alternatives.

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

#116

Post by marviio »

I'm principally for allowing side-loading, but in this era of surveillance capitalism it might be a net negative for non-tech savvy iOS users. Facebook will leave the Appstore to circumvent Apple's privacy policies. God knows what they will do to users installing Facebook or Instagram.

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

#117

Post by yywwbbn »

olliej wrote: post #97
yywwbbn wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think Apple still makes Macs? According to your argument it should be a net loss for them.

People often complain about the markup on Macs, so it seems reasonable to interpret that as a higher margin being used to compensate for the lack of ongoing revenue. Higher margins are the obvious (only?) alternative to ongoing commission revenue - that obviously puts Apple at a disadvantage compared to * Google, who makes money by harvesting information from every android user; or * Samsung, etc who don't pay the co…

Are margins on Macs higher than on iPhones? I’d assume at least with Intel they were lower than for iOS devices.

Also basically all Apple’s direct competitors both in the PC and smartphone businesses operate on paltry margins in comparison to Apple. They usually sell a mix of low/high margin products though, e.g. most premium Dell or Lenovo laptops are priced at similar levels to Macbooks (of course their real price might significantly lower due to infinitely better customizability and reparability options). And almost none of them have significant additional revenue streams (not to a degree comparable to Apple). Yet they are still in business.

Apple would be able not to only to survive but to still thrive if they significantly cut their margins and the app store tax. Of course it would not be fair or sensible to expect any company to leave free money on the table. This is why we get ads in Windows, seem like most users dont’t really mind them too much (to be fair I’m not sure I have actually seen one, maybe it’s a windows edition and/or country thing.

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

#118

Post by xazo »

justinclift wrote: post #106
olliej wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is none of the third party app stores pay for any of the platform development, so why should they get to benefit from them?

> The point is none of the third party app stores pay for any of the platform development ... Isn't that because Apple doesn't allow for third party repos/stores/etc? If that changes after all (I'm personally hoping it does), then it would make sense that the new alternative store(s) would have their own overheads (development, running costs, etc) and would have their own fees. That seems sensible, yeah?

The other stores wouldn't be paying for the ongoing development and maintenance of the iOS, UIKit, OpenGL/Metal, etc. That stuff is NOT cheap to develop and maintain. The final app that you see is trivial compared to the mountain of libraries and frameworks that Apple provides.

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

#119

Post by xazo »

latexr wrote: post #105
olliej wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> the majority of apps don’t pay apple a cent Every app in Apple’s App Stores makes them a minimum of 99USD/year, the cost of an Apple Developer account.

That's a trivial amount to enable Apple to provide documentation and tooling support for developers. I doubt it comes anywhere close to paying for all the libraries and frameworks they develop and maintain.

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

#120

Post by xazo »

Tozen wrote: post #61
paxys wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android has an explicit opt-in for allowing sideloading, and a whopping 0.06% of users currently utilize it. I really don't know why this issue is causing such a big fuss in the iOS ecosystem.

Looks to be about Apple's fear of losing control and allowing free choice.

I never understand people who make this argument. Everyone has choice, go buy an Android phone and install/customize whatever you want. Apple has chosen what parts of their OS and user experience they control versus what part they let the user control. Personally I'm very happy with it because it gives me higher quality apps and some reasonable protection versus the alternative. If your issue is that you don't like where that line is split, fine, then choose a different platform like Android. Now if Android didn't exist, then your argument would hold more water for me.
Post reply on HN