Please don't post irritable overgeneralizations about "this forum". The community has an entire spectrum of responses. Singling out the segment that you most dislike while failing to notice the rest is something that many readers do*, but it leads to low-quality comments and lame discussion.
I absolutely do NOT want to download/sideload anything from a third party. You are absolutely correct there. Not even from companies I trust (e.g. I wouldn't want to download the Netflix app from Netflix)
- I DO want apple to spend as much money and effort as they do now on vetting
apps.
- I DO realize that means they must grab some money, somwhere.
- I DO NOT want apple to take a cut out of subscriptions for services.
It's as simple as that. There is zero way in hell that apple should have a cut out of subscription services. I should be able to pay any way I want for e.g. podcasts, and Apple should just suck it up and charge $25 from the distributor, once, for reviewing the podcast app.
Basically: Apple needs to just give up their golden egg, run the app store at minium profit, and I hope the EU breaks their kneecaps if they don't swiftly agree to do so.
If the app you downloaded has an update, does the app not need to be revised again? Why would the revision fee not happen with every update?
Would that not mean developers that update more and get better value for their customers are penalised?
Subscription cuts strikes a happy medium, where apple gets paid when the company gets paid, so if they deliver more features they are not penalised but they are also not allowed to update for free forever (potentially adding malicious code without anyone checking due to only being checked the first time they paid).
Your rant seems misguided, given you're talking about "downloads". The GP wasn't talking about downloading apps from outside the App Store, it was about Apple's anti-steering rules within the App Store
But in either case, if the user sentiment is as strong as you claim, Apple has nothing to lose in following the laws. The users will continue to demand installs and payments go via the App Store, and developers will have to continue providing that option or lose customers. Why do you feel so threatened by these laws? It sounds like you don't really have the confidence in 95% of the users agreeing with you.
If users don't want to go to other websites, then developers should notice they're losing sales and be incentivised to offer a more convenient option!
Maybe over time more integrated options could emergy that's as convenient, offers more features, and could be cheaper. Imagine if there was competition!
Ok, fair. Then allow app developers to explain this in the app and provide a link to the external website and let the user decide what they prefer.
The issue is that you can't publish an app unless you hide this information from the user and as a consequence most users aren't even aware that alternatives exists.
Let the user freely decide and you can't charge how much you want for the convenience of your service, even more than 30%, nobody would care.
> This forum will never understand is that 95% of Apple users DO NOT want to go to a random website and download to save a few bucks
Who said they will download from a random website, or that the only advantage is to save a few bucks?
The advantage might be to get software that is not allowed on the app store, or to use a source that you trust more than Apple, or an otherwise better curated source - I would guess a high proportion of F-Droid users trust the software installed from there or find it easier to get what they want than in the Play Store. Why can someone not similarly improve on Apple's store?
> before Apple everything was download, pay and pray.
Your opinion of what users supposedly want is irrelevant. What matters is that the law mandates these options and Apple refuses to comply.
And no - I prefer iOS, for various reasons (such as smooth integration with macOS, better UI), and wanting to download apps from the Apple app store is not the reason.
If 95% users don't want it, then Apple should be happy to provide it as an option since nobody will use it and it will have no impact on Apple's business, right?
> This forum will never understand is that 95% of Apple users DO NOT want to go to a random website and download to save a few bucks.
Almost everyone uses Google's store on Android. The average person doesn't know what 3rd party stores are, they don't go to websites to make payments. I'm a more advanced user and never had to go to a website and download and app, unless I absolutely wanted to.
Not sure why you think it would be different on iOS.
Please don't generalise. My partner still uses IPhone 7 today, and they are certainly interested in saving a few bucks. There are countries poorer than the US and not every Apple user is rich.
Maybe so, but I bet more than 5% of Apple users would appreciate the economic effects of a world in which people can go to a random website and save a few bucks.
Competition is good for markets even if you continue to buy from the incumbent.
Well that sounds like complete nonsense. As an Apple user id definitely take advantage of cheaper ways to purchase the exact same product.
Furthermore - No one is forcing anyone to click the "get this cheaper here" link ... But I'd bet you'd be surprised how many Apple users would click it if it was there. The user and developer both win in that situation.
Considering the glut of scammy, ad-filled garbage on the official App Store, I'm not convinced we haven't ended up exactly where you claim we haven't. That being said, I do agree with you that the vast majority of users probably don't care about alternative app marketplaces (but for the small majority of us who do, I'll continue to champion the EU's efforts here).
Also, for the love of god open up the Apple Messages API please...
Only power users / devs really understand what Apple does in terms of vetting apps.
Regular people just want to be able to install what they want.
As a dev who has to deal with the Apple App store (and someone who is completely bought into the Apple ecosystem, owning an iPhone, Macbook Pro, Vision Pro, Apple Watch, and iPad...), I'd like to just be able to push out an app or update without involving Apple. They require us to do a lot of work that I don't think is necessary and the app approval process is a significant time waster for us.
dang|1 year ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
* https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
wordofx|1 year ago
alkonaut|1 year ago
- I DO want apple to spend as much money and effort as they do now on vetting apps.
- I DO realize that means they must grab some money, somwhere.
- I DO NOT want apple to take a cut out of subscriptions for services.
It's as simple as that. There is zero way in hell that apple should have a cut out of subscription services. I should be able to pay any way I want for e.g. podcasts, and Apple should just suck it up and charge $25 from the distributor, once, for reviewing the podcast app.
Basically: Apple needs to just give up their golden egg, run the app store at minium profit, and I hope the EU breaks their kneecaps if they don't swiftly agree to do so.
Arkhaine_kupo|1 year ago
Would that not mean developers that update more and get better value for their customers are penalised?
Subscription cuts strikes a happy medium, where apple gets paid when the company gets paid, so if they deliver more features they are not penalised but they are also not allowed to update for free forever (potentially adding malicious code without anyone checking due to only being checked the first time they paid).
threeseed|1 year ago
From Apple's perspective it includes the ongoing cost of providing all of the SDKs i.e. CTF.
jsnell|1 year ago
But in either case, if the user sentiment is as strong as you claim, Apple has nothing to lose in following the laws. The users will continue to demand installs and payments go via the App Store, and developers will have to continue providing that option or lose customers. Why do you feel so threatened by these laws? It sounds like you don't really have the confidence in 95% of the users agreeing with you.
tikkabhuna|1 year ago
If 95%, like you say, are happy to pay extra, then it should be no problem for Apple to allow developers to communicate the Apple fees.
madeofpalk|1 year ago
Maybe over time more integrated options could emergy that's as convenient, offers more features, and could be cheaper. Imagine if there was competition!
gbalduzzi|1 year ago
The issue is that you can't publish an app unless you hide this information from the user and as a consequence most users aren't even aware that alternatives exists.
Let the user freely decide and you can't charge how much you want for the convenience of your service, even more than 30%, nobody would care.
graemep|1 year ago
Who said they will download from a random website, or that the only advantage is to save a few bucks?
The advantage might be to get software that is not allowed on the app store, or to use a source that you trust more than Apple, or an otherwise better curated source - I would guess a high proportion of F-Droid users trust the software installed from there or find it easier to get what they want than in the Play Store. Why can someone not similarly improve on Apple's store?
> before Apple everything was download, pay and pray.
never had many problems myself.
quonn|1 year ago
And no - I prefer iOS, for various reasons (such as smooth integration with macOS, better UI), and wanting to download apps from the Apple app store is not the reason.
stetrain|1 year ago
luuurker|1 year ago
Almost everyone uses Google's store on Android. The average person doesn't know what 3rd party stores are, they don't go to websites to make payments. I'm a more advanced user and never had to go to a website and download and app, unless I absolutely wanted to.
Not sure why you think it would be different on iOS.
socksy|1 year ago
threeseed|1 year ago
There is not a single argument or point that hasn't been made many times over.
have_faith|1 year ago
hifromwork|1 year ago
lxgr|1 year ago
Competition is good for markets even if you continue to buy from the incumbent.
sureglymop|1 year ago
It's not about you, It's about other companies wanting to distribute their software without giving 30% of their sales to Apple.
Whether you agree that it's unfair or not, the EU decided that it is.
blackoil|1 year ago
noitpmeder|1 year ago
Furthermore - No one is forcing anyone to click the "get this cheaper here" link ... But I'd bet you'd be surprised how many Apple users would click it if it was there. The user and developer both win in that situation.
madeofpalk|1 year ago
ClassyJacket|1 year ago
skeaker|1 year ago
kaishiro|1 year ago
Also, for the love of god open up the Apple Messages API please...
grumple|1 year ago
Regular people just want to be able to install what they want.
As a dev who has to deal with the Apple App store (and someone who is completely bought into the Apple ecosystem, owning an iPhone, Macbook Pro, Vision Pro, Apple Watch, and iPad...), I'd like to just be able to push out an app or update without involving Apple. They require us to do a lot of work that I don't think is necessary and the app approval process is a significant time waster for us.
epolanski|1 year ago
That's complete nonsense. That's not even true on computers, let alone in an Android/iPhone where applications are de facto sandboxed.
Also, none of these changes impact prevents you and the 95% to keep using the app store exclusively.
malermeister|1 year ago
tjpnz|1 year ago
bee_rider|1 year ago