The device may be yours but the App Store belongs to Apple. Can you walk into a ...

koyote · on Aug 13, 2020

If I buy a fridge from Walmart I can still put groceries that I bought from another store in it.

pornel · on Aug 13, 2020

The problem is that "my" device is not allowed have non-Apple App Store.

If Apple allowed others to create App Stores, then there would be no problem, but hardware + iOS + App Store are inseparable.

It's like U.S. citizenship forbidding non-Walmart shopping.

fernandotakai · on Aug 13, 2020

can you imagine the same argument but on a computer?

you buy a macbook and now you can't install ANY software that is not on the macOS appstore. oh! and you can't install a different OS.

would you accept that? what's the difference?

ntsplnkv2 · on Aug 13, 2020

This is a slippery slope argument.

I don't get mad at Casio because I can't hack the circuit board and change the time easily to 24hr - I buy a watch that supports it.

This is a free market solvable problem. The issue is people like the app store. The ones mad about this are software companies - because they want more money for themselves.

The use of the consumer is just appeal to emotion - but it's really about Epic ripping off another kid for vbucks and getting more money.

__d · on Aug 13, 2020

The vast majority of people purchasing an iPhone know the rules. If you don't like them, don't buy one.

Buy a Librem5, or a PinePhone, or whatever. It's a free market, after all.

NorwegianDude · on Aug 14, 2020

If you think most people with an iPhone knows anything at all about Apple's app store policy and limitations then you're in need of a reality check.

david-cako · on Aug 13, 2020

True, but there are other places to buy things than Walmart.

The internet is reasonably open and accessible on iOS, but utilizing the full capability of an iOS device requires the App Store.

Stallman spent a ton of time crusading about how some things are appliances, and other things are computers; those things that are computers should offer flexibility (and ideally openness) in terms of what software you can run on them. In this case, the largest manufacturer of computing devices and software wants 30% of every transaction from native software run on their devices.

Epic was basically looking for preferential treatment, but now they're stepping up to the plate and saying the App Store is not market-friendly. It seems like they could be right, seeing as large as Apple is, and what role they actually have in computing.

blkhp19 · on Aug 13, 2020

> The internet is reasonably open and accessible on iOS, but utilizing the full capability of an iOS device requires the App Store.

As it should be. If people want open and crazy, then they can flounder around on the web and try to get it to do what native apps do. That's their problem and Apple shouldn't have to bend over backwards to support that route. Developers get to make a choice - make a web app, or make a native app that gets all the benefits of Apple's curated ecosystem. As a consumer and developer, I'll take the latter any day. Others feel differently, and can choose Android.

david-cako · on Aug 13, 2020

I agree that you gain a lot from having Apple involved in quality control, but I am not sure I agree that 30% of all in app transactions is fair. Especially when they've already started playing fast and loose with Amazon Prime Video.