Hacker News Reader

Comment by ThatPlayer | Hacker News Reader

Apple only loses power to force policies if developers AND users move off the Apple App Store. If you believe that people want to stay on Apple's App Store with all that it entails, then anything not on Apple's App Store will be irrelevant right?

Otherwise if you're saying that users WILL move off the App Store, then that's how Apple's monopoly is anti-consumer and anti-competitive.

If users choose to continue to use Apple App Store only, then Apple can continue to enforce policies while also not being (as) anti-competitive since they wouldn't be actively stifling competition.

View on HN

I want to continue using Apple’s App Store, but most people are less aware of things like location harvesting, and are less privacy-sensitive than I am. Today, Apple can set policies that benefit users without those users having to be aware of those policies or understand why those policies benefit them. In a world where Apple’s policies can be sidestepped simply by asking the user to sideload the app, many, even most users will likely agree to do so without any awareness of what they’re giving up. The shady app developer certainly won’t tell them!

Users unambiguously benefit from most of Apple’s App Store policies (the payment rules less so, but even then there are benefits such as mandatory subscription cancellation support), but often in ways they can’t or don’t see. Apple’s policies are obviously negative for app developers, but I don’t care and nobody should care that Apple chooses to benefit its consumers at the expense of its third-party corporate partners. That’s just normal business behavior.

I don't disagree with the benefits, but there are also negatives to me as a consumer with Apple's App Store policies that do nothing but benefit Apple. And as long there's no competition, Apple have no incentive to change that because it benefits them.

Look at Fortnite's removal, all because they added an additional payment method that bypassed Apple's. You could still use Apple's method if you wanted to for all those benefits, but Apple want their cut. Apps like YouTube increase prices to make up for Apple's cut. Others like Netflix and Spotify not only do not allow you to pay for it via the app, but also aren't allowed to tell you how to pay for it, making a worse user experience.

Or how about the blocking of streaming gaming apps like Stadia and Xbox Cloud Gaming? Who benefits from that? Only Apple.

>In a world where Apple’s policies can be sidestepped simply by asking the user to sideload the app, many, even most users will likely agree to do so without any awareness of what they’re giving up.

This doesn't happen with any kind of frequency on Android so I'm curious as to why it would happen on iOS. Do you have ideas on what it would be like? Why would it be so different than android or windows?

Facebook tried successfully to do this in 2019 by misusing their internal corporate app certificate, and only stopped because Apple noticed and revoked their certificate. So we already have proof that in the absence of Apple’s ability to punish and ban companies for asking users to sideload to bypass tracking restrictions, they will ask and users will accept.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/30/18203551/apple-facebook-b...

As for Android, many Android app stores (especially ones in China) impose no restrictions or barely any at all. The only one that imposes meaningful restrictions is Google’s Play Store, and the restrictions are much less than in Apple’s App Store, so the incentive to bother circumventing them is much lower. For example, unnecessarily harvesting user location is not a blocker for access to the Play Store.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com