App Store to Be 'Split in Two' Ahead of EU iPhone Sideloading Deadline

[Sophisticatednut]

But innovation is not yours, it’s apples. I never said they were harming innovation, I’m saying the app store is apples proprietary ip, that will soon be a public utility.

So I will take it you think this is a bad thing? That EU is making facebook forcefully separate their services in regards to user data and privacy?

Meta now lets EU users unlink their Facebook, Messenger and Instagram accounts

Meta's new changes give EU users more control over how they use data on Facebook and Instagram. A new option allows users to separate or keep Instagram and Facebook accounts connected.

www.neowin.net

Meta to let EU users deny cross-site tracking as Digital Markets Act bites | TechCrunch

Meta has provided new details of how it plans to respond to incoming competition rules in the European Union that aim to tackle abusive behaviors by Big Tech.

techcrunch.com

Facebook Messenger can choose to create a stand-alone new Messenger account.

Facebook Marketplace can choose between a Marketplace experience that uses their Facebook information or not

 

[SanderEvers]

Yes, it does give choice.
It provides the choice of where you want to download/buy your apps (or in-app services) from.
Apple - or the developer directly. Or a third-party store, possibly.

No it doesn't. It gives the developer the choice where to sell their App. Not the consumer. Which means a developer could make an 'App Store' without any regard for the user's privacy or security (if they want) and then force the user to switch to their 'App Store'. That is my issue. The law does not require developers to release every app on every store or on any store (including the platform's main store)

 

[mrochester]

No it doesn't. It gives the developer the choice where to sell their App. Not the consumer. Which means a developer could make an 'App Store' without any regard for the user's privacy or security (if they want) and then force the user to switch to their 'App Store'. That is my issue. The law does not require developers to release every app on every store or on any store (including the platform's main store)

Yeah some people seem to miss this very obvious caveat. None of this regulation is about consumer choice or making things better for consumers. It’s all about giving more control (and money) to developers.

 

[I7guy]

So I will take it you think this is a bad thing? That EU is making facebook forcefully separate their services in regards to user data and privacy?

Meta now lets EU users unlink their Facebook, Messenger and Instagram accounts

Meta's new changes give EU users more control over how they use data on Facebook and Instagram. A new option allows users to separate or keep Instagram and Facebook accounts connected.

www.neowin.net

Meta to let EU users deny cross-site tracking as Digital Markets Act bites | TechCrunch

Meta has provided new details of how it plans to respond to incoming competition rules in the European Union that aim to tackle abusive behaviors by Big Tech.

techcrunch.com

Facebook Messenger can choose to create a stand-alone new Messenger account.

Facebook Marketplace can choose between a Marketplace experience that uses their Facebook information or not

Privacy is not the core App Store issue. Nor is the above innovative.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Privacy is not the core App Store issue. Nor is the above innovative.

I think you misunderstood the point here.

Meta, the private company who owns instagram and Facebook that include messenger and marketplace services as part of Facebook.

DMA is forcing Meta to separate the services and not collect private information. Facebook, instagram, messenger and market.

It’s not the market itself doing it but a government institution forcing them to.

Yeah some people seem to miss this very obvious caveat. None of this regulation is about consumer choice or making things better for consumers. It’s all about giving more control (and money) to developers.

It’s about market choices for an undertaking.

It must be observed, in the context of EU competition law, that the concept of:

• an undertaking encompasses every entity engaged in an economic activity, regardless of the legal status of the entity...

No it doesn't. It gives the developer the choice where to sell their App. Not the consumer. Which means a developer could make an 'App Store' without any regard for the user's privacy or security (if they want) and then force the user to switch to their 'App Store'. That is my issue. The law does not require developers to release every app on every store or on any store (including the platform's main store)

I’m sorry but developers can’t do anything of that.

Privacy and data protection are two rights enshrined in the EU Treaties and in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Essentially a constitutional protected right.​

​

And article 16 (TFEU) obliges the EU to lay down data protection rules for the processing of personal data. The EU is unique in providing for such an obligation in its constitution.​

​

Data protection is about protecting any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural (living) person, including names, dates of birth, photographs, video footage, email addresses, telephone numbers, IP addresses, communications content - related to or provided by end-users of communications services - are also considered personal data.

And forcing developers to release their app on any store would be impossible without one of two specific criteria’s.

1. Every store would need to have zero moderation and allow anything or
2. The AppStore with the strictest content guidelines would force everyone to follow their standard.

Aka making it impossible to have.

Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union notes

"The Community shall have as its task...to promote throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities'"​

​

The Commission, together with the national competition authorities, directly enforces EU competition rules to ensure the development of such activities.​

​

European Union markets work better, by ensuring that all companies compete equally and fairly on their merits. This benefits consumers, businesses and the European economy as a whole.”​

 

[I7guy]

I think you misunderstood the point here.

Meta, the private company who owns instagram and Facebook that include messenger and marketplace services as part of Facebook.

DMA is forcing Meta to separate the services and not collect private information. Facebook, instagram, messenger and market.

It’s not the market itself doing it but a government institution forcing them to.
View attachment 2340151

It’s about market choices for an undertaking.

It must be observed, in the context of EU competition law, that the concept of:

• an undertaking encompasses every entity engaged in an economic activity, regardless of the legal status of the entity...

I’m sorry but developers can’t do anything of that.

Privacy and data protection are two rights enshrined in the EU Treaties and in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Essentially a constitutional protected right.​

​

And article 16 (TFEU) obliges the EU to lay down data protection rules for the processing of personal data. The EU is unique in providing for such an obligation in its constitution.​

​

Data protection is about protecting any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural (living) person, including names, dates of birth, photographs, video footage, email addresses, telephone numbers, IP addresses, communications content - related to or provided by end-users of communications services - are also considered personal data.

And forcing developers to release their app on any store would be impossible without one of two specific criteria’s.

1. Every store would need to have zero moderation and allow anything or
2. The AppStore with the strictest content guidelines would force everyone to follow their standard.

Aka making it impossible to have.

Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union notes

Nope don’t misunderstand at all.

 

[webkit]

There is one major operating system, one minor operating system that is customized by each manufacturer and a thousand phone manufacturers each offering something g different of value/

There are two major mobile and two major tablet operating systems. Apple (with iOS and iPadOS) has the larger shares in some countries and Google (with Android) has the larger shares in other countries.

Well no it doesn’t.

Well, yes it does.

 

[webkit]

No it doesn't. It gives the developer the choice where to sell their App. Not the consumer. Which means a developer could make an 'App Store' without any regard for the user's privacy or security (if they want) and then force the user to switch to their 'App Store'. That is my issue. The law does not require developers to release every app on every store or on any store (including the platform's main store)

Yeah some people seem to miss this very obvious caveat. None of this regulation is about consumer choice or making things better for consumers. It’s all about giving more control (and money) to developers.

Allowing sideloading and alternative app stores on iOS and iPadOS can gives iOS and iPadOS app developers more choice in where the offer their apps. It similarly gives iOS and iPadOS users more choice in where they acquire their apps.

Also, just because apps may become available outside Apple's App Store doesn't necessarily mean they won't still also be available through Apple's App Store. Products in general are often offered multiple places, at least when there are no limitations or restrictions.

 

[Samplasion]

No it doesn't. It gives the developer the choice where to sell their App. Not the consumer.

It does. Giving the choice of where to download their apps is implied by the existence of multiple app stores. Besides, why is it suddenly bad that developers choose the app store that best fits their needs?

Which means a developer could make an 'App Store' without any regard for the user's [...] security (if they want) and then force the user to switch to their 'App Store'.

It's impossible to do that more than you already can today with 7-day sideloading. Security is in the OS, not the store.

and then force the user to switch to their 'App Store'.

Nobody but the OS developer can force users to do anything. You always have the choice to either follow a developer around or use another app. That is not the case if the OS developer decides you don't get access to particular functionality.

The law does not require developers to release every app on every store or on any store (including the platform's main store)

Nor should it have to. If you need an app, use your store of choice to find it and download it, or find a similar one.

 

[mrochester]

Allowing sideloading and alternative app stores on iOS and iPadOS can gives iOS and iPadOS app developers more choice in where the offer their apps. It similarly gives iOS and iPadOS users more choice in where they acquire their apps.

Also, just because apps may become available outside Apple's App Store doesn't necessarily mean they won't still also be available through Apple's App Store. Products in general are often offered multiple places, at least when there are no limitations or restrictions.

The point is that the choice as to which store the app is sold in is with the developer, not the consumer. Currently consumers have the benefit of getting everything they need through one store. In the future that might not be the case, even if that is what the consumer still wants.

 

[Samplasion]

The point is that the choice as to which store the app is sold in is with the developer, not the consumer.

Which I'd argue is better than having the choice as to whether an app is or isn't sold to the device manufacturer.

Currently consumers have the benefit of getting everything they need through one store.

You could even say that consumers are limited in their selection of apps by the rather inconsistent managers of the only store in town.

In the future that might not be the case, even if that is what the consumer still wants.

Then what's wrong about it?

 

[I7guy]

There are two major mobile and two major tablet operating systems. Apple (with iOS and iPadOS) has the larger shares in some countries and Google (with Android) has the larger shares in other countries.





Well, yes it does.

There are still hundreds of phone manufacturers. As epic found out a marketplace can have different meanings depending on the bias.

 

[OneBar]

Competition as in sideloading from developers websites/stores and/or accessing through alternative app stores instead of being limited to just Apple's App Store for iOS and iPadOS apps.

That's just options. That's not competition. Competition would be App Store sells Photo App A for $5 and AppX Store Sells Photo App B for $4 but it does all the same things for the price. Saying I can go to this store and get things I can't at the first store isn't competition.

 

[I7guy]

Which I'd argue is better than having the choice as to whether an app is or isn't sold to the device manufacturer.

You could even say that consumers are limited in their selection of apps by the rather inconsistent managers of the only store in town.

Then what's wrong about it?

Multiple app stores are anti-consumer for the reasons mentioned.

 

[Samplasion]

That's just options. That's not competition. Competition would be App Store sells Photo App A for $5 and AppX Store Sells Photo App B for $4 but it does all the same things for the price. Saying I can go to this store and get things I can't at the first store isn't competition.

It is competition in the sense that it's not impossible that, in your scenario, if AppX store wasn't allowed to exist then neither would Photo App B, thus making the App Store the deciding factor in deciding whether an app can be sold altogether.

Multiple app stores are anti-consumer for the reasons mentioned.

They aren't.

 

[mrochester]

Which I'd argue is better than having the choice as to whether an app is or isn't sold to the device manufacturer.

You could even say that consumers are limited in their selection of apps by the rather inconsistent managers of the only store in town.

Then what's wrong about it?

Consumers are definitely not limited by their selection of apps! in fact we probably have far too many apps and the selection should get smaller rather than larger.

 

[mrochester]

It is competition in the sense that it's not impossible that, in your scenario, if AppX store wasn't allowed to exist then neither would Photo App B, thus making the App Store the deciding factor in deciding whether an app can be sold altogether.

They aren't.

So your assumption is that alternative app stores will offer apps that don’t appear in the original App Store? Do we have any evidence thatll be the case?

 

[webkit]

The point is that the choice as to which store the app is sold in is with the developer, not the consumer.

That would be a good thing rather than iOS and iPadOS developers AND users being forced to only use Apple’s App Store.

Currently consumers have the benefit of getting everything they need through one store. In the future that might not be the case, even if that is what the consumer still wants.

That benefit isn't necessarily going away. Companies often offer their products through multiple outlets when they can. Apple, for example, offers its products through its own stores but also through various carriers, electronics chains and other retailers. Apple is restricting iOS and iPadOS developers from having that same choice.

The App Store will still be a preferred app source for many iOS and iPadOS users so app developers will still want their product(s) available there. However, they may also want to be able to offer them elsewhere for a variety of reasons. iOS and iPadOS app developers want to be able to choose where they offer their apps (their own store and/or alternative stores) just as Apple is able to choose where they offer their products (their own store and/or alternative stores).

 

[webkit]

There are still hundreds of phone manufacturers. As epic found out a marketplace can have different meanings depending on the bias.

This is about dominance in the mobile OS and tablet OS markets. Apple (with iOS and iPadOS) and Google (with Android) are the only two major players.

 

[mrochester]

That would be a good thing rather than iOS and iPadOS developers AND users being forced to only use Apple’s App Store.





That benefit isn't necessarily going away. Companies often offer their products through multiple outlets when they can. Apple, for example, offers its products through its own stores but also through various carriers, electronics chains and other retailers. Apple is restricting iOS and iPadOS developers from having that same choice.

The App Store will still be a preferred app source for many iOS and iPadOS users so app developers will still want their product(s) available there. However, they may also want to be able to offer them elsewhere for a variety of reasons. iOS and iPadOS app developers want to be able to choose where they offer their apps (their own store and/or alternative stores) just as Apple is able to choose where they offer their products (their own store and/or alternative stores).

It should work the way consumers want it to work, not the way Apple or developers want it to work.

 

[webkit]

That's just options. That's not competition. Competition would be App Store sells Photo App A for $5 and AppX Store Sells Photo App B for $4 but it does all the same things for the price. Saying I can go to this store and get things I can't at the first store isn't competition.

Options create the competition that is severely lacking in major segments of the mobile and table OS markets by Apple's restrictions on sideloading and alternative app stores. Again, Apple is stifling competition by its restrictions on sideloading and alternative app stores on major mobile and tablet OS marketplaces.

 

[webkit]

It should work the way consumers want it to work, not the way Apple or developers want it to work.

And many consumers want the choice as well. Allowing sidelaoding and alternative app stores can give BOTH iOS and iPadOS developers AND users the choices they want.

 

[mrochester]

Options create the competition that is severely lacking in major segments of the mobile and table OS markets by Apple's restrictions on sideloading and alternative app stores. Again, Apple is stifling competition by its restrictions on sideloading and alternative app stores on major mobile and tablet OS marketplaces.

And smartphone manufacturers are stifling competition in the mobile OS and ecosystem market by refusing to compete, and app developers stifle competition in the mobile OS and ecosystem market by refusing to make their apps available across all platforms. These are all problems that need regulations to address.

 

[mrochester]

And many consumers want the choice as well. Allowing sidelaoding and alternative app stores can give BOTH iOS and iPadOS developers AND users the choices they want.

I suspect most users do not want alternative app stores. How it works should be what MOST users want, not what a MINORITY of users want.

 

[I7guy]

This is about dominance in the mobile OS and tablet OS markets. Apple (with iOS and iPadOS) and Google (with Android) are the only two major players.

This is about reigning in apple by defying a market place with two operating system instead of hundreds of competitors.