• OrangeCorvus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    123
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reading the comments from that article is a prime example of how a cult functions.

    In reality this will have a 0,002% impact. Most phone users are tech-illiterate and have no idea how to use their devices. You expect these people to go to a different store? On Android you can have other app stores, why don’t you have? Because Play Store is default and all app developers want to be where most users are, not on a 3-4% user share store.

    It will most likely be background noise in the first months and everyone will go back to the App Store. The only people that will use an alternate store will most likely be the same ones that use F-droid, so 0,002% of the users.

    But hey, it’s better to scream how this whole thing is making their devices less secure, because Apple told them so.

    • btaf45@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      On Android you can have other app stores, why don’t you have?

      I do I have a Samsung store. Beyond that, the ability to sideload apps is a huge reason I use Android and IOS sucks. I also have apps I’ve loaded off of web sites and my own LAN.

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      This will have impact, on Apple’s revenue, which is really what they only care about.

        • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          If there’s another place to buy iPhone apps, that means any purchase there is purchase which doesn’t give Apple money.

          • nbafantest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not really, it’s possible those purchases might never have happened at all.

            If possibility of a 3rd party app store steals customers from Android, it’s possible this raises the App stores revenue.

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Tech illiterate Windows users seem to have no problems removing replacing Edge/Bing with Chrome/Google (which, if you’ve ever tried recently, is quite a painful process - though I suspect it’s a lot less painful in the EU where the dark patterns would land them in hot water).

      I think the App Store will only be able to maintain it’s dominance in Europe if it’s a better experience, for both users and developers, than any of the alternatives.

      The improvements Apple will make to the store to protect their dominant position will be significant.

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Are users actually replacing with Chrome on desktop? As often as you’re implying?

        I’ve assumed the vast majority of the significant Edge market share has been due to cases where it’s shipped as the default (or Windows pestering users to make it the default). And the majority of Chrome market share the last 5+ years coming from Google deals with OEMs making Chrome the default. Not due to the majority of people seeking out the browser theyve determined is best (or are familiar with). And due to corporate mandates, for business PCs. I don’t have data to back this up, though.

        Obviously, people do intentionally switch to either browser for various reasons, but I’d be amazed if it was more than like 10% of the cases at this point.

      • OrangeCorvus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Look at more practical example. Steam, is so big that other publishers said, no we won’t put our games in your store anymore. We don’t want to pay you 30%, we will make our own stores. Few years later guess where they came crawling back. I mean really big publishers like EA and Ubisoft, on Windows where you can have a store at the snap of your fingers, you don’t need Steam. But because Steam is so big and all people buy from Steam, you need to sell there.

        In case of Apple it will be even worse, who will dare to not publish in their App Store and leave 99% revenue on the table? Yeah.

    • firadin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it has such a small effect, why is Apple so hell-bent on stopping it?

      • Prethoryn Overmind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because purchases not made in the App Store are purchases Apple isn’t making revenue from.

        Mac already can side load and Windows can side load these days as well. Hell my fucking Chromebook that is going on, 7 years old can side load Linux software and Android applications and not any single damn one of my machines have I had a security concern with an app.

        Most people don’t even know what side loading is. Apple was hellbent on stopping it because it stops revenue.

        • uranibaba@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Isn’t it more about branding and control? Apple sells a package deal, an experience. Allowing a third party in could hurt their image.

    • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Many Android manufacturers actually have either their own store, or an app that acts as an interface to the Google Play Store. These are installed by default, and subtly pushed over the vanilla Play Store. So I’m guessing millions of users do end up using them.

  • TheMurphy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This would actually be a big step for many Android users wanting to try out another OS.

    I know for myself that sideloading apps is a must for me on my phone, and if an iPhone could do that, it’s at least one step closer for consideration.

  • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Splitting store in two won’t get them around the regulation though if both stores have same parent company. Perhaps it will delay EU from punishing them, but they won’t get around the issue. EU is not forcing multiple stores without reason. Competition if always good for end users and results in overall better quality of product. Apple doesn’t want that because they want to be able to charge whatever they want and you can take it or leave it. Also it has absolutely nothing to do with security or privacy or whatever the excuse people are coming up with. It’s just money, the only thing Apple still cares about.

    • Khanzarate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not what the article said they meant.

      An EU split that can comply, and a rest of the world split that continues to monopolize the iPhone.

    • maness300@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Competition if always good for end users and results in overall better quality of product.

      Except in the case of ports…

      I think instead of leaning on absolutes, you should just acknowledge that more options are good in this case. From a practical perspective, end-users do not benefit from Apple restricting the app stores allowed on their phone.

  • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would rather have a “all users must have root access to their devices” or all software must be user replaceable integrated into the law. We let Apple do their own thing, but adventurous users could try installing android and such on the iPhone (similar to how the asahi project is making Linux on M series macs a reality)

    • JTheDoc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The never ending cascade of problems Brexit still drags us slowly through.

  • cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have no idea why so many of those commenters are anti consumer rights. Android proves that it’s not a security issue. Why are they so brain broken that they are actively against opening up their walled garden, like it compromise their apple product purchases in some way.

    • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      except it is a security issue for those not tech savvy I had to enable parental controls on some family members phones cause they enabled side loading somehow and managed to royally fuck up their phone

    • evlogii@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m an anti-Apple advocate and an Android user. And I’m against this law. What good does it bring? These are Apple’s devices; let them do whatever they want with them. Don’t like how Apple does business? Buy another brand. Advocate against Apple. Suggest alternatives. But do not force them to do things how you like. It’s just toxic. I believe that the most anti-consumer thing is when governments try to decide what customers want or need. I hate it when they take me for an idiot (I might often be, but let me make my mistakes and learn from them).

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      For me, security is really the only question here. If you want to, you can find a way to sideload things. But once you have an entire app store out there, suddenly a whole new avenue of attack has appeared that didn’t exist prior.

      • cum@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Android already has had this for many years and it is not an issue. We don’t need to deal with hypotheticals here, Android has put these things into practice for a long time already, and it’s a non issue.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          LOL this is not a hypothetical. there are already bad apps in the regular app store. now you have two.

          also Android has nothing on the security posture of Apple.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            So you admit having a walled garden doesn’t protect you from malicious apps, but you still want on to…protect you from malicious apps?

            • stoly@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I just want you to envision a moment where the opportunity for two bad things happening is worse than one.

              Honestly I really don’t get the anger here except that everyone has decided that opening the floodgates is the only way forward.