It's not offering consumers ANY choice. It's offering developers choice. Not consumers. That is a VERY important difference.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iOS 17.4 Introduces Alternative App Marketplaces With No Commission in EU
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yay. Another Brexit benefit :-(
I already see where this is going, all the companies like Meta, Amazon, Google etc opening their own stores filled with ads, tracking and other BS. If I wanted an android I would have bought an android.
You mean like Android, where you have to install multiple app stores to get your apps for daily use... Oh wait.
I think it's very likely that most people will only use the Apple App Store, so Netflix, Meta, etc. will just continue to list their apps there. There will be a somewhat popular alternative store for things like console emulators though.
Directly yes, but consumers can benefit as well by the increase in competition in app distribution platforms, along with wider availability of content. In the end, I do see this as providing a significant indirect benefit to the consumer.
(If this seems rambly, I apologize, I had a very long night and have not yet had my coffee.)
Devs will still complain. You may have people not change their habits and use the App Store only. I myself feel safer sharing my card details with Apple through my Apple ID than I would and external store. Would not be surprised if devs raise prices either. Benefits that Devs tend to forget is Apple had you upload your app then pretty much no matter the country Apple took care of everything including refunds. We will see if this changes anything. But I expect devs and other large money hungry corps try and push more of their agenda onto Apple by means of the EU.
Except when third party app stores don't offer easy support (refunds, etc), have tracking ads and other disregards of user's privacy. Which is ofcourse going to happen.
I think people are underselling the $.50 fee per install per account per year. That's going to prevent a lot of big companies from moving to new App Stores. Spotify's bill would go from a couple hundred dollars per year to 10s of millions per year under the new terms.
I'm just going by the OP, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm just going by the OP, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
But it isn’t guaranteed to happen. Is it likely to be the case, probably, I’ll give you that. But if a consumer is willing to take that risk than I don’t think that it is Apple’s job to stop them from doing so.
Well that’s kind of dumb. Smells like malicious compliance to me
I don't disagree with that. But to me that should be the user's choice.. and this change does not allow the user to make that choice. This change puts that choice in the hands of the developers of those stores.
Only if you could install any app from every store it would be the user's choice. Or allow the user to sideload any app by just downloading an ipa from a public shared server. This regulation does not do that in any way or form.
I'd rather not have the choice and the developer of the app also not having the choice (the current system) than not having the choice but the developer of the app having the choice.
Except that it does, because they now have the option to sideload their apps or using alternative distribution methods instead of going through the official channel to get their content.
MacRumors does not mention the charging of €0.50 per user download for new marketplace apps, regardless of whether they reach the 1 million mark. It appears that these apps are charged €0.50 per user annually. Therefore, if a user downloads a marketplace app but does not make any purchases, would it be correct to say that the developer of the marketplace app incurs a loss on that user? Per 9 to 5 Macs article "Makers of alternative app marketplaces themselves will also have to pay the Core Technology Fee, for the download of the alternative app store itself. For app marketplaces, the charge applies immediately — there is no 1 million free installs."
I'm not sure how this speaks to benefits of competition. Perhaps you mean government regulation?
Bigger, no (come on…). Worse, definitely yes, but sadly for us users it’s not their choice.
It's been around for a lil while now. I find, even after retraining Siri, it doesn't work all that well though.
No they don't. They are either required to use the App Store or sideload, and this is controlled by the developer of the app. THAT is the difference.
For your very simple example:
Developer A makes app B.
Old: Developer A must publish app to Apple App Store.
New: Developer A is allowed to not publish App to Apple App Store, but publish it to App Marketplace created by Developer A that disregards user's privacy or security.
User who wants to download app B:
Old: Can use the private and secure Apple App Store
New: Is required to download the shady App Marketplace created by developer A.
User has only 1 option to download the app. In both scenarios. But the old scenario protects the user's privacy and security. The new scenario does not.
Last edited:
The regulations should say that all apps should be available in all app stores so that the user can choose where to shop instead of the developer choosing for the user.
I hear that a lot from people, but I’ve personally never run across something that doesn’t work for FF (other than Microsoft admin tools that require Edge).
🤷♂️
This falls short of what sideloading is, but Apple wants to control the narrative.
Okay
Okay
Who runs the given App Store? Maybe I should open up a “free” one and just collect data 🤷♂️
Because the Chinese App Store is already "politburo-approved". What did you think?
i’m crying and weeping and so sad 😭😭😭 i can’t believe people 😭😭😭 would want more freedom 😭😭😭 and choice with the devices 😭😭😭 that they paid for 😭😭😭 something something free market 😭😭😭 blah blah competition 😭😭😭 how will i explain this to my children 😢