It's difficult for an iPhone user to notice that apps they might want aren't available (unless they search the web and find references to an Android-only app that does what they want), but, even more so, it's very expensive for users to buy a new Android phone just to use that one app.
Equally, when someone is considering buying a phone, they are unlikely to compare the lists of apps available for each platform when making their decision, just as car buyers don't look at the levels of tailpipe emissions when comparing possible cars. In such situations we accept that the government can intervene to prevent socially negative outcomes, even if it means increasing the costs (or decreasing the profit margins) for companies.
In any case, the problem isn't just the switching costs for users who discover their platform is limiting their app choices (or increasing their app charges), it's that companies trying to sell apps to users can't choose to simply "Don't use an iPhone", as Apple is preventing commerce between iPhone users and those companies, which is again not socially beneficial.
Similar logic can be applied when comparing app stores. Users aren't going to compare Company XYZ app store with Apple's app store line-by-line to see how they're missing out on having their data hoovered up for ads or other purposes. App Stores have high switching costs too. Apps won't be available on different stores, that would defeat the entire purpose of having the third-party store for the company wanting to escape Apple's rules.
What if, and hear me out, what if there was a technology which allows two or more App stores side-by-side as to minimize the undue burden to switch between them. If only we were so advanced in technology. If only...
- You can download Facebook and WhatsApp from the Meta Store
- You can get Google software from the Google Store, except Gmail and Maps which are available in the Apple App Store too, but YouTube is a Google Store exclusive. Or and Authenticator is only available on the Google App Store with a valid company login. So you'll have to switch accounts depending on if you are logging in as a user for yourself or your company.
- You can get Netflix from the App Store, Google Store, or Facebook store but each requires that you log in to the respective store with an account before logging in to your Netflix account and the pricing is different depending on the cut each of the stores takes. Google is interested in finding what Netflix shows you are watching so they can adjust your YouTube algorithms.
- You can download Twitter from the Apple App Store and Google, but not Facebook.
And you can download the MLB App if you have a Prime subscription because of a new partnership, but only if you have the Amazon Prime App.
YOU live in America, Apple operates worldwide. And the USA has plenty of bills in the pipeline targeting the same issues. Apple won't have their cake and eat it too.
I think you missed the point, which was I don't care if Apple left the EU market over this, because I live in America where (at least for now) things will be how I prefer them. So saying "good, leave the EU" or similar doesn't really bother me...
You're right that there are other bills in the pipeline. I think the user experience will be worse off because of them and we'll lose lots of ground on privacy and convenience, but it's inevitable because small, vocal minorities usually win even when they make everything worse for everyone else.
It'll be interesting to see the fallout though. It won't take long for others to connect the dots and start filing lawsuits for any store or platform with any sort of standards. Obvious first targets are companies like Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft for consoles. But other non-obvious targets will start being platforms. Take Chrome - why can I only use (and maybe I can't and I don't know) Google's Chrome Store to install third-party software? Or rather, why can't I install another "App Store" on Chrome and replace Google's? Maybe you can (and I'd argue it has to be identical in terms of convenience and ease of use to qualify) but there will definitely be other, similar targets for lawsuits.
1. User experience is already bed. No access to game streaming services and many valid open source apps not available on iOS
2. User experience is not be the only matrix that matters. What about poor indie developer whose app is banned due to opaque App store rules. What about having control over device you bought with your own money
Why not just buy a different product with different features then? Mobile phones have a lot of different features. Some have better cameras than others. Some have longer battery life, can fold, or come in different colors. Some have different operating systems. App stores/software isn't any different. The user experience on the Nintendo Switch is terrible. I can't play World of Warcraft of Halo on it at all! And why can't I watch Netflix shows through the Hulu app? Why does Netflix get to buy content and keep it on their Netflix store? At least the Apple App Store is free. I don't have to pay for access to apps.
> What about poor indie developer whose app is banned due to opaque App store rules
They'll just have the opportunity to get banned from more than one store I guess. Then once this indie developer decides its profitable to scam their customers they'll create their own app store and just install their software that way, bypassing any legitimate bans too.
reply