https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/app-store-to-be-split-i...
Someone has enough knowledge of human brain to explain this form of life way of thinking?
Someone has enough knowledge of human brain to explain this form of life way of thinking?
The generation of my parents (60s+) is generally not hugely tech savvy. They remember the days of windows XP well - endless viruses, trojans and expensive security software. One of the reasons iPhones are so popular with this group is they let them use the web without fear of dealing with that again.
>They will be effectively forced to download apps like WhatsApp and Instagram from wherever Meta puts them
So, what's the connect? You've started with big scary viruses and ended up with WhatsApp?
For them it is a major feature of the iPhone that you can download any app with complete impunity. No need for $150/year antivirus (for those big scary viruses windows used to get absolutely riddled with). No need to worry it's going to change your default search engine or start mining bitcoin. You know when you download something from the App Store it has been through some level of vetting. I'm not sure why so many people here are wilfully blind to this use case.
Also, the reason I specifically bring up WhatsApp is that we know Facebook will take ridiculous liberties given the chance - remember Onavo?
So you think to improve the security is to make the problem even worse by having more installable unchecked ransomware on the iPhone.
Really can’t wait for the flood of sideloaded malware and ransomware that made Android phones the insecure toxic hellstew that it still is today; on the iPhone. /s
You're not describing an honest "use case", so there is nothing to be willfully blind about
It did not happen on Android.
and there's where the wheels fell off the bus with your argument. so many non-adults are using devices and downloading content. if their friends are using a non-Apple store and all using an app from there, they will follow. we'll see what kind of parental controls any 3rd party app store provide. teens will absolutely look for ways to skirt anything their parents are using to limit them. it's just part of being a teen.
When I helped him out, he had 3 different SMS apps installed.
You are essentially assuming everyone has the same level of survival skills to survive the technological wilderness as yourself.
Most of humanity would just end up as prey.
The walled garden keeps predatory behavior out.
Your average person does not have “computers” as a hobby.
In the same vein, I’m not going to give you shit that you don’t know how to change your spark plugs off your head even though it’s so basic.
This is a strange argument, given that Windows XP is more than 20 years old, and the problem already went mostly away 20 years ago, when Service Pack 2 came out.
In any case, the problem has long been a thing from the past. Moreover, I don't see anyone complaining about modern Windows or MacOS computers which aren't locked to an app store. So your explanation doesn't make sense.
I think the correct explanation is much simpler: These people are Apple fans, and fans will, occasionally, be irrationally loyal. Like PlayStation or Nintendo fans.
"Others apps will stay outside to avoid Apple review process. Bugs and deliberate surveillance will run rampant. "
Yup, exactly, but...only to people that choose to actively use these other app stores. If these secondary app stores do not attempt to verify and defend against malicious apps, then they will hopefully be branded as such. For those that choose to continue using them, I have a very tiny violin here ready to play a song of sympathy.
> The threat to competition that is claimed to be posed by AT&T in this industry is that, through the use of cross-subsidization and customer discrimination, it will use its power in the interexchange market to disadvantage competing electronic publishers. While the possibility of cross-subsidization is as remote here as it is with respect to other subjects considered herein, there is a real danger that AT&T will use its control of the interexchange network to undermine competing publishing ventures.
Sounds familiar, I wonder how things ended for Ma Bell?
For a while, they were broken up into the baby bells. Then, one baby bell started buying up all of the other baby bells and renamed itself ATT. Clearly, that's a totally different company than AT&T. So, ultimately, nothing.
The new comglomerate of "baby bells" isn't even the biggest Telco provider in the USA, let alone the biggest company in the USA... let alone the biggest in the world.
On the other hand, if consumers want Apple involved, they wouldn't leave the app store, they wouldn't download the app, and the app will fail when there's no users.
Someone who loves Zuck products and finds them indispensable, but still underhanded and despicable in terms of user abuse (surveillance, manipulative feeds, no socially healthy ad-free no-tracking neutral-feed for-pay option …), has reason to dislike Mr. Meta.
Unfortunately, reality is rarely as a la carte as we all might wish.
So don't. It's your choice. The benefit is that those who don't mind, will also be able to exercise their choice.
Why do you think you will be unable to download FB, IG & WA from the App Store?
Now imagine those companies paying a percentage off the top for app store in-app purchases when there is an alternative that doesn’t involve that percentage.
Facebook and Amazon have both tried (and failed) to make their own phones. That’s how much they want to control the entire UX. Of course they would funnel people to their own app stores.
Hell, app stores themselves are places to sell ads and other apps, Apple has proven that.
So why wouldn’t a company with the developer resources and monetization potential of Meta or Amazon create their own app store?
Sure, Meta could demand that people install their super-extra-spyware version of Instagram from the META STORE instead of Google Play. But, what they'd likely find out is the same thing Epic found out when it tried to found its own store: most users just don't care enough to install stuff from third-party stores, and generally won't bother.
Maybe, maybe not. Android didn't attempt to destroy their business though, whereas Apple did (and then turned around and introduced their own, non ATT compliant ad system).
(Actually, they're one of the few people that could make a store like that work, dunno if they'd want the distraction but it might be worthwhile for the ads business).
Because that is an incredibly excessive alternative. Instead of just duplicating their app to a third-party app store run by someone else, you're assuming that Meta will go to the effort to create an entire ecosystem that they then have to manage. They would have to ensure that each app on the store is on the up-and-up and hire an immense amount of staffing for that sort of thing - moderation, development, backend support, customer support, yadda yadda. Not only do they already struggle to control the narrative around content moderation on their platforms, but now they've gotta work on preventing malware from being installed on folks phones, too?
It's way too extra, when the much more affordable option is to drop a Meta-preferred alternative onto a third-party app store that already exists. Yet they haven't even bothered doing that with something like f-droid, so I'm expected to believe that they're just going to jump to the more cumbersome option of opening their own store? When the average end user will just use the default store that comes installed on their phone?
I don't buy it. And I say this as someone who is very much in the "Fuck Zuck"/"Meta is trash" camp.
They still do since, you know, they make the OS on which those apps would run.
#9
I bought an iPhone, in large part, for the security and convenience of all apps coming from a single verifying source.
Now it’s going to become the same Balkanized nonsense that Android is.
Thanks, Europe.
like this person feels like they are being force fed this thing?
Do you honestly believe they wouldn't? If so, I have a bridge for sale
I seriously doubt that the EU would allow such behavior.
Before US took a stance on App Store, they also wanted Apple to lobby the US Goverment to sanction any country that threatens Apple. Including pulling out of NATO.
A lot of these only died down ( a bit ) once the US Government took an official stance against App Store monopoly.
What does this "stance" amount to, given that the App Store monopoly continues to be perfectly legal in the US?
The same mindset that appreciates the "simplicity" of removing all the connection ports from a device.