I still wonder how is this legal.
[1]: https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/16/apples-app-store-revenue-n...
If "browsers" were a market at the time of the Microsoft anti trust ruling, a $70B app store space is very much a market according to prevailing economic theory.
You just don't like the truth about Apple, which is understandable, as they're a loved brand. But evil
I moved into an apartment.
The title also claims other time-tracking apps were removed, so was is the reason?
UPD. I see the title was edited, and they have retracted the others apps claim now. The first question still stands though.
This similar to how they ban apps that do cryptocurrency mining in the background.
With the exception of a few specific Apple apps (Mail is actually the only one I know of now, and I believe it is more that the Mail app is a renderer of the system mail process) and apps which use particular API (such as VOIP and navigation-related location), you cannot have your app run persistently in the background to preserve power and resources. Using these API has always required you actually be an app in these categories.
Independent of draining battery and tying up the CPU/memory - it sounds like the primary purpose of this app (tracking your phone usage) broke if you didn't consent to a secondary feature (reporting where you were when you used your phone). Which means the app was fundamentally broken. Which isn't a surprise, because the API doesn't let you make this sort of app.
Apple has dozens of daemons that run continuously that handle everything from push notifications to fetching calendars to performing backups.
Apple has chosen to position itself as the only way to install apps, which I feel is generally fine, but as Apple's customer, I have every right to complain to them when they harm my experience with their product by denying me a product I want based purely on business decisions and that don't protect me.
Apple does not remove apps from your device, it stops you from downloading them. So this is still like a store refusing to sell something rather than a storeowner coming to your house and taking things.
Just because they've never done it doesn't mean they can't.
> So this is still like a store refusing to sell something rather than a storeowner coming to your house and taking things.
You conveniently ignoring the fact they've still gone and left trash on my device is noticed.
What type of content will Apple be allowed to ban on its store? Do you want the government telling Apple what they have to allow third parties to access on thier OS? Should the government tell them that every developer should have root access? Access to the Secure Enclave?
And do you want to set up a “government app review board” to decide on a case by case basis when Apple is denying an app for “competitive reasons”?
PS: We really need a community-backed hackernews.org
They’re the only taco store on this block! I demand the government force them to lower their prices so I don’t have to walk more than 50 feet!
If you don’t like it, switch to Android. But of course, the real problem is that people don’t want to switch to Android. They want to have their cake and eat it to, but that’s unfair and illogical, so they start slicing down the market to where they can cry monopoly and ask the government to force the business to give them what they want.
Android apps and Iphone simply aren't substitutable goods, so they are different markets.
But people who care about “freedom” and “openness” and not being in Apple’s “walled garden” can easily by an Android.
But how aren’t the two substitutable?
[1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM... [2] https://www.jstor.org/stable/1072648