How much of a fee do you think you should pay to install applications on your computer? The same amount as that.
Or provide alternative ways to install software.
This is a problem of their own creation.
Or provide alternative ways to install software.
This is a problem of their own creation.
How do you solve that problem for side-loaded apps?
I have vivid memories of loads of relatives in the Windows XP era with browsers laden with toolbars that spy on everything they do and slow the computer to a crawl. Those users see something like the iPhone as a massive breath of fresh air. Nothing you install on the App Store can inject adware into the rest of the operating system like that.
That has literally fuck all to do with the app store. That's called sandboxing - the app store has nothing to do with sandboxing. They are different things.
Why are we being dishonest.
If they ignore the warnings and get scammed because they are unable to identify reputable software from disreputable software, they learn a life lesson. Life goes on. There should be no societal expectation that everyone is prevented from ever taking an action that could bring themselves harm, by preventing them from taking actions at all.
This shows that younger kids aren’t using traditional PCs, at least not to the same degree. They just use phones and tablets. At best they may play games on their PC by installing via Steam. Very few of them are becoming proper technologists (able to install and use any software, script the computer, or write their own software).
The phenomenon you're talking about now is so completely in another universe that it's insane you would conflate the two. I actually can't finish typing this response properly because it's hurting my head every second I continue to think about your argument. To sum it up really shortly: smartphones universal, required to even participate in society, people now given smartphones from early age, multi-functional as phones, cameras, etc, they fit in your pocket, more than sufficient for normie use cases and in fact more suitable for many use cases that don't entail sitting at a desk at home, computers are specialised tools for specialised functionality that many people have no need for. There are 100000000 reasons why smartphone usage displaces PC usage that aren't because they explicitly abandoned PCs for the crime of allowing them to choose what software to install, which was your claim. Not even having mentioned that globally, 75% of smartphone usage is Android which doesn't lock its users in the cage (for the time being).
Now you have a multibillion-dollar supranational corporation playing judge jury and executioner for any of your choices.
E.g. App Store prohibits adult content (which is not illegal). Prohibits emulators (which are not illegal) [1]. Prohibits or hinders the use of better alternatives to pre-installed apps (Photos, Camera, Maps, Siri) [1]. Removes any and all apps if there's a hint of displeasure from wannabe dictators.
Basically, you don't have your range of choices. You have Apple's range of choices.
[1] Some of these choices are now better on iOS precisely due to Apple losing the fight against governments. They finally allowed emulators after they lost a battle against alternative app stores. They finally gave options to change some default apps (but not all, and not in all countries, see e.g. https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/03/14/dma-compliance-default-ma...)
Edit: It's also telling that you need to go back to XP to make your case. It's 2025. Security practices have improved a ton to give people more protection from themselves without outright taking away their freedom to make choices.
Also, let's again re-iterate that Android usage outnumbers iOS by three-to-one, so it is clear in practice that people are in fact willing to adopt a phone that allows them to make mistakes (if they try very hard to).
That’s how fine PC’s have been doing software.
Search for your preferred PC brand and list of CVEs.
I’ve had Windows / malware roll back a BIOS update to a previous version that had a know (published CVE) remote code execution vulnerability complete with published proof of concept.
Which actually makes the case for "Apple cannot control what people install on their devices or demand that apps pay them and can't even use other payment providers"
Having a single way to pay, subscribe, cancel, browse apps, beta test versions, and update apps, proved to be a huge game changer for making software accessible while also minting millionaires around the world in terms of small development teams.
Incidentally, while looking this up, I discovered that 2/3rds of that $522b in app revenue comes from in-app advertisements. And here somebody was trying to mock Windows for being adware friendly circa 2005. Good lord.
What percentage is consumer vs corporate spend in each category? How much of that 373b is SaaS revenue vs local installed apps?
> And here somebody was trying to mock Windows for being adware friendly circa 2005.
The adware in 2005 was actively hostile and infested entire systems. It replaced browsers, search engines, and even injected itself onto every webpage you viewed. In contrast mobile ads are interstitials during game play.
Just by companies listed on the stock market who got that data "legally" in our current walled and "safe" garden.
I appreciate a lockdown for kids and elders, but let's not pretend our data is locked safely away in this walled garden.
It would be a total disaster!
2. Apps are actively encouraged by Apple and Google to be spyware.
3. An app store cannot prevent spyware.
4. Sandboxing is unrelated to an app store.
5. Most source code is not available on the app store, and Apple and Google are actively hostile to open source apps.
6. There is zero source auditing done on the app store.
If there's any benevolent gatekeeping, I'm not seeing it.
They do not review source code. There is malware on the Apple app store, because they do not review apps for malware. Because they do not review source code.
Any other opinion is just not true.