We don't have to guess. Android app store is clear example that gives power users choice, while at the same time being able to hold onto most of the users.
>When Fortnite launched on mobile in 2018, Epic Games very notably sidestepped the Google Play Store and pushed users to download the title directly from their website, an effort made to avoid the substantial revenue cuts that Google takes from in-app purchases of Play Store downloads. At the time, the move was understandable for Epic, which was sitting on the hottest free-to-play game of the year that was pulling in substantial revenues from in-app purchases.
Google proceeded to try to scare users away from sideloading Epic's app, and Epic sued.
>“Google puts software downloadable outside of Google Play at a disadvantage, through technical and business measures such as scary, repetitive security pop-ups for downloaded and updated software, restrictive manufacturer and carrier agreements and dealings, Google public relations characterizing third party software sources as malware, and new efforts such as Google Play Protect to outright block software obtained outside the Google Play store,” an Epic Games spokesperson said in a statement. “Because of this, we’ve launched Fortnite for Android on the Google Play Store.”
>> A sibling argument is saying that if side-loading were opt in, major apps would move to require it from users.
>> This has never happened on Android.
> When Fortnite launched on mobile in 2018, Epic Games very notably sidestepped the Google Play Store and pushed users to download the title directly from their website...
Though that's the exception that proves the rule. Besides Fortnite, who else has pushed users into side-loading? It's not at all common, which weighs strongly against the scare-mongering that it would somehow cause their platform security to collapse if Apple allowed it.
It also seems like it would be the case if your app is big enough to get people to side-load it, it's probably also big enough to get some security/privacy of its own to keep its practices in check.
WeChat won’t start on Android if you didn’t give access to your contact list, this is not the case on iPhone as Apple wouldn’t allow that crippled user experience. Android already allows shenanigans so the incentives for more stores aren’t that big. I had Samsung store on my last Android phone also.
We know from discovery in the various Google antitrust cases that Google has a pattern of behavior where they place barriers against others who attempted to offer their own app store. They talk a good game about allowing it, but their conduct is a different story.
>The lawsuit is effectively claiming that this openness is a facade, because while customers technically have the choice of where to get their apps from, Google’s business practices have prevented a viable app store competitor from emerging.
>Google has struck at least 24 deals with big app developers to stop them from competing with its Play Store, including an agreement to pay Activision Blizzard Inc about $360 million over three years
>Epic reached an agreement with OnePlus to preload Epic Games on the company’s smartphones. As part of the agreement, Epic says it developed a version of Fortnite specifically for OnePlus devices to take advantage of the OnePlus phones’ high-refresh-rate screens...
Google demanded OnePlus not implement the agreement outside of India, where the company allowed OnePlus to move forward with the deal.
OnePlus reportedly informed Epic that Google was “concerned that the Epic Games app would have the ability to potentially install and update multiple games with a silent install bypassing the Google Play Store.”
For me, it's not about companies right but individuals rights. If I paid money for a device and if I am willing to let go of warranty and updates, I should be free to do whatever I wish with it. I don't think this statement should be as controversial as people make it to be.
Epic's enormously popular game Fortnite was removed from the Google Play store in 2020 for violating their in-app purchase policies, so they publish it in their own sideloaded app store.[0]
Facebook claims to have lost $10 billion due to a single iOS prompt giving users the option of blocking tracking. If side-loading were allowed on iOS, Facebook would have 10 billion reasons to push users to side-load their app, a pressure that doesn't exist at all on Android, which is tracking-happy.
Since Google lets most apps do what they want in most ways, there's not much motivation for bypassing the App Store--unless you're greedy like Epic. Since Apple restricts apps more with each passing year, the motivation is much higher, in addition to the identical 30% fees.
