this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)
Apple
67 readers
2 users here now
A place for Apple news, rumors, and discussions.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If apps are offered on both App Store and 3rd party app store, I see no problem.
It’s only when developers start pulling their apps out of the App Store and exclusively into their own app stores that it begins to crack. Hear me out.
Sideloading is a niche setting for the technologically literate. The average consumer downloads apps from either the App Store or the Play Store, because this is the most convenient and easiest to understand.
We don’t have a Meta Store on Android because there’s no incentive for Zuck to build one. Why? Because only Android allows sideloading, they have to go through the App Store on iOS. It will be a terrible user experience on Android if they pull their apps from the Play Store and onto the Meta Store exclusively, and probably push some people to buy iPhones instead.
But if we start allowing 3rd party app stores on iPhone, there’s now a huge incentive. They can make a Meta Store and put FB, Insta, WhatsApp, Oculus app, etc. on it, and pull it out of both App Store and Play Store.
Now, Meta can say, whichever phone you buy, you’ll still need to download the Meta Store.
I still don't see how Apple won't force a smaller fee through 3rd party app stores, as they did in [the Belgium ruling] (https://9to5mac.com/2022/02/04/apple-will-charge-27-commission-for-purchases-made-using-alternative-payment-systems-in-the-netherlands/) where 3rd party apps using their own payment processor had to pay Apple 27% fee.
Oh god, i would hate that.
Except every single phone from a major manufacturer comes bundled with Facebook, Instagram and Messenger pre-installed.
They will absolutely never trade that for making their own store.
Literally not what happened in my Samsung, Xiaomi, Realme, Pixel, Asus and Vivo. (yes I have phones from all of those vendors lol).
Technically, they could do that now already. It would just be a single "Meta app" available in all stores, which has in-app purchases for extra features, such as FB, Insta, WhatsApp, Oculus, etc.
They didn't do it in the last 5 years, so there isn't really a reason to think that sidloading is the one thing that is preventing them from doing it now.
The way you explained it sounds like you open the “Meta app” and inside, you have tabs for each service? And then these services open within the same app? I might be wrong but doesn’t this violate App Guidelines?
Even the Microsoft 365 app shows you Outlook or Teams in the “Apps” section, but launching them from there still opens the individual apps for Outlook or Teams.
This might be the first legitimate reason I’ve heard to be against side loading. Something like this seems incredibly plausible.
exactly this. To all the folks saying "tHen jUsT dOn'T SiDELoAd" the whole point is that it's not just allowing the users who want to sideload today, it's opening the door for side loading to become THE way that major companies push folks to access their apps.
Regardless of what OS team you're on, the "freedom" of the android and side loading is that it also requires a much higher degree of knowledge, decision making, and active self protection by the users - that inherently means more security/malware/support issues.
If you want or need all that, you're probably gonna fucking hate a lot of things about iOS across the entire experience anyway, so you go Android. If you have zero understanding or desire to add that level of responsibility to your digital life, then maybe you aren't married to Android and the iPhone simplifies this for you.
I think it's a dumb pointless move to force side loading on iOS.
TL;DR Some people want to drive stick shift, others want an automatic, others want all electric - this like saying all car models need to legally be made in all three versions or it can't be made at all.
I agree. I think what most people don’t realize is that it’s very likely that the first adopters would be companies who can actually afford to do their own hosting, marketing, and distribution. No indie developer will decide to make their first app as an app store for the app they’re really trying to build.
Take Adobe, for example. They have 28 apps on the App Store right now. Assume I’m a person whose workflow relies critically on Adobe Acrobat Sign, and at the same time I’m the person who keeps getting told “then don’t sideload if you don’t want to.”
Adobe then decides to put all their apps on the Adobe App Store exclusively. Well, might as well throw that “Allow sideloading” toggle out the window because I don’t have a choice but to turn it on so I can continue to use Adobe Acrobat Sign, or leave it off and settle with a crappy experience in a browser or wherever.
But still, the keyword here is “exclusively”. If they make 3rd party app store apps equally available on the App Store, then we’re going to be okay, and I can leave my “Allow sideloading” toggle off.
For now.
How about just having lower fees on the app store and its in app purchases to not incentivize people to flee from it like it's the plague? That's what itch.io and Valve are doing and it sure seems to be working fine.
I'm honestly baffled by this community and it makes me feel like if the MS IE antitrust case happened today, most of this thread's commenters would side with Microsoft or just be paid to say so.
Yes, that is the point, software switches are easily added whereas transmission systems less so. The EU is forcing more social and commercial innovation into Apple than the whole 3 past years' worth of work from their own departmens.
yeah lower fees would also 100% be a simple solution here too. When it was innovative and the only legit app store on the market, site maybe it was easier to get away with, but nowadays that lead has closed so it's pretty wild they still take 30%