They'll just instruct them to download the APK on their phones instead, just like Epic games did for Fortnite.
Even so, I think it will only get worse. They'll also move to encrypted chat apps instead. So when will Signal and Telegram be targeted and banned from the App Store or Google Play Store?
I mean, they could always just open their phone's browser and go to parler.com. Apps might be gone but it's not like they're unreachable.
Or should they ask Siri and look it up on safari?
Regardless, the same could be said for Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Amazon, Gmail, and countless other apps.
But nobody would be cause that's just being facetious.
They won't.
Because neither is promoting the use of its platforms for illegal behaviour. Or refusing to take responsibility if such behaviour is found.
Parler CEO said "I don't feel responsible for any of this and neither should the platform".
They won't. The question is why Twitter is allowed on these platforms but not Parler or Gab or whatever other Twitter-competitor.
Parler does not. There are numerous accounts on Parler calling for the killing of Pelosi, Biden, Pence, Chief Justice Roberts, assorted judges that ruled against Trump's lawsuits, state and local election officials, Republican governors and legislators who are not fighting hard enough for Trump, and numerous others. There were numerous accounts their calling for storming the Capital on January 6th and stopping the electoral vote counting using any force necessary to achieve this.
In short, Twitter is not banned because Twitter tries to comply with Apple's and Google's requirements to moderate user content and remove threats of violence, and Parler is getting banned because they do not.
The mentioned platforms also moderate user content, they just have different guidelines. Both claim to follow the law in that they take down content which violates it. Both claim that only illegal content is taken down. That is, as far as I can see, in line with the expectations for a platform to be considered a "common carrier" and as such be freed from liability for its users' content. Platforms which go beyond this by moderating on different grounds run the risk of being considered publishers and as such to be held responsible for their users' content. If Apple and Google put further demands on those platforms the question becomes who eventually is responsible for user content, this might end up being Apple and Google. That, in turn, should make developers think twice whether they benefit from being on those platforms. The alternative is to deploy to the web without any "native" apps (which often are not much more than rehashed web apps to begin with) which opens their product to a wider user base without needing to bend to the will of third parties.
This would be a good thing in my opinion. The time for "native" apps has come and gone, the time for the web has been there for a long time but this might just be the push needed to convince developers to make it their prime focus. This goes especially for communications-focused products since those derive their usefulness from being connected to the 'net anyway. There is still a place for native apps - offline mapping, offline media players, hardware-interfacing apps like Wifi-scanners, step counters etc - but those tend not to be the ones which end up in hot water anyway.
Twitter's content policy explicitly bans several things that are not illegal [1] [2] [3].
[1] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-condu...
[2] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/glorification...
[3] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/medical-misin...