Excellent news! A major win for users in the EU today, and hopefully similar protective legislation in other jurisdictions to follow.
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.
New EU Law Could Force Apple to Allow Other App Stores, Sideloading, and iMessage Interoperability
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
On the one hand this is absolutely true. Tim Sweeney is frothing at the mouth to release an Epic Games Store on smartphones, and Adobe will 100% pull their apps back into an Adobe only app store the instant they can. Prices won't change in either case, of course, they just don't want to share profits with Apple.
On the other hand there will be tons and tons of smaller developers who don't have the ability to maintain their own app store who would be happy to move to a store that only takes 15% off their sale price instead of 30%, and who would gladly drop the price of their app 7% in order to encourage their users to move with them. They get a tidy little raise, consumers pay a little less money, and somebody running that app store gets income they didn't have before.
So no, it won't be a net benefit across the board, and there will be some additional challenges in terms of research before you download software. But it would be silly to pretend there won't be benefits directly to the consumer. It would also be silly to think that most apps will be moving to other stores. Aside from high profile companies like Adobe, I suspect migration to any third-party stores would be pretty slow, as developers are just as likely to be skeptical of them as consumers.
And besides, at some point some open-source community will start an open app store hosting barely functional mobile versions of various community projects that would never get approved through the App Store because, again, barely functional. And I'd genuinely love to play with some of those.
If Apple do not like it then they should either pull out of Europe or stop making consumer products because the EU are telling Apple and other big tech giants that they are not the ones to control what consumers do with devices they own but it is the consumer who controls it and as such Apple and others must change their ways to allow that to happen.
On the other other hand, small developers already pay only 15% on Apple's store and app store prices are already low.On the one hand this is absolutely true. Tim Sweeney is frothing at the mouth to release an Epic Games Store on smartphones, and Adobe will 100% pull their apps back into an Adobe only app store the instant they can. Prices won't change in either case, of course, they just don't want to share profits with Apple.
On the other hand there will be tons and tons of smaller developers who don't have the ability to maintain their own app store who would be happy to move to a store that only takes 15% off their sale price instead of 30%, and who would gladly drop the price of their app 7% in order to encourage their users to move with them. They get a tidy little raise, consumers pay a little less money, and somebody running that app store gets income they didn't have before.
So no, it won't be a net benefit across the board, and there will be some additional challenges in terms of research before you download software. But it would be silly to pretend there won't be benefits directly to the consumer. It would also be silly to think that most apps will be moving to other stores. Aside from high profile companies like Adobe, I suspect migration to any third-party stores would be pretty slow, as developers are just as likely to be skeptical of them as consumers.
And besides, at some point some open-source community will start an open app store hosting barely functional mobile versions of various community projects that would never get approved through the App Store because, again, barely functional. And I'd genuinely love to play with some of those.
At this point I suspect Apple is just waiting for compelling evidence that they can monetize iMessage on other platforms before they release it. Like if you had to pay for sticker packs in the app, or something like that. Apple's shift to emphasizing service revenue to complement hardware has been pretty unmistakable over the past decade. The instant it looks plausible that they could turn a profit on Android by releasing services there, they absolutely will.
Welcome apple. Interoperability for the win
I suppose I'm referring to medium-sized developers. Small teams doing more than a million in sales every year, but not by much. Devs doing less than a million in revenue are likely already not charging for the app and relying on ads instead, or they're already charging the minimum of what's feasible anyway. But like I said, those folks aren't likely going to migrate away from the App Store anyhow.On the other other hand, small developers already pay only 15% on Apple's store and app store prices are already low.
Mac is very secure with side loading, but no where near as secure as the iPhone, they don't want to loose that. And any app that can side load, will be able to get around Apple provide APIs, and skip security blocks.
Buy an Android. It’s not like you’re being forced to use an iPhone.
Funny how that works huh?
Sideloading alone wouldn’t be enough since those apps would need a store app to do updates, unless these rules would mandate allowing apps to update themselves, which would be terrible for security.
The EU forces their citizens to do all kinds of stuff, but if a major company is forced to comply with regulations, it often is whining like a baby. It is a major problem that the whole smartphone market is controlled by two companies. If those companies use their market powers against smaller players, they have to get stopped.
The EU forced electric car makers and owners of charging networks to make their plugs compatible. So in the EU you can charge any electric car with any charger, while in the US you need a Tesla charger for a Tesla and an "Electrify America" charger for an electric Volkswagen. The consumer benefits a lot from that. He can charge his car anywhere.
The EU forced electric car makers and owners of charging networks to make their plugs compatible. So in the EU you can charge any electric car with any charger, while in the US you need a Tesla charger for a Tesla and an "Electrify America" charger for an electric Volkswagen. The consumer benefits a lot from that. He can charge his car anywhere.
Totally amazing to me that people think developers should be entitled to the GIGANTIC benefit of distributing their products through a platform and marketplace that Apple created without paying a penny for it. That 30% you’re bitching about is well worth it for access to Apple’s user base. And if it’s not? Well, then developers can stop developing for iOS. But they don’t. What does that tell you?
NOBODY is forcing you to use an iPhone. See how that works?
There is no reason that should be the case.
Most people use WhatsApp, but many people use iMessage or sms, also depending a lot on the country.
Download something, put it on the desktop, right click and run? That’s what I do.
Both arguments are important
It shouldn’t be the case. If anything, security would only be weakened if you add your account to additional devices or similar.
There is absolutely no evidence that the goal would be to spy on citizens. This legislation does t enable that.
It’s not that few (that use iMessage), even though other apps are used more.
Messages (the app) supports sms. iMessage is the platform, and doesn’t.
Everyone who uses iMessage would care, which is still a lot. Here in Denmark WhatsApp isn’t used that much, for instance.
Third. Behind China. And “Europe” as defined by Apple includes all European countries (even those outside the EU), India, the Middle East, and Africa. So that ENTIRE region is 19% of revenue. Wonder how much the EU makes up?
It’s not like you are being forced to be part of apples walled garden. There is already a system with all the pros and cons of this approach available. From
My perspective it is easy to see how side loading degrades the entire experience not just for those who side load.
Would side loading not open you up to drive by downloads and installs of malware? Seems like a dangerous precedent.
this is one clueless person, it isn't free to run you know
Greedy EU. It’s a shame what they’re doing with our countries, totally opposed to the foundational idea of the union.
I will block any attempt from each and every android-user trying to infiltrate my iMessage. On a more serious note, I don’t care about these stupid European Union mandates as long as it doesn’t change the user experience for iPhone users. Give us a choice. Don’t force us to side load. Let us free!!!
This is what you get when socialist nations start calling the shots for businesses started under Capitalism in the U.S.
I mean, seriously --- "making things more competitive and fair" is a relative statement. For who? In this case, only for people who want to force their products to be available in a purposely closed ecosystem, breaking the advantages of keeping it closed.
This reminds me of such things as private country clubs. Perfectly acceptable concept to have a place where the general public can't just come through. Gives the people willing to pay the membership fees a place of their own to socialize, etc. But all of a sudden, someone's screaming it's unfair and they have to allow everybody in, and not just on their terms of buying a membership!
When will the EU demand that Sony open up the Playstation consoles so everyone can load their software onto them, distributed by multiple app stores online? Or do they only care when it's a device used by people who don't just play games on it?
I mean, seriously --- "making things more competitive and fair" is a relative statement. For who? In this case, only for people who want to force their products to be available in a purposely closed ecosystem, breaking the advantages of keeping it closed.
This reminds me of such things as private country clubs. Perfectly acceptable concept to have a place where the general public can't just come through. Gives the people willing to pay the membership fees a place of their own to socialize, etc. But all of a sudden, someone's screaming it's unfair and they have to allow everybody in, and not just on their terms of buying a membership!
When will the EU demand that Sony open up the Playstation consoles so everyone can load their software onto them, distributed by multiple app stores online? Or do they only care when it's a device used by people who don't just play games on it?
I honestly doubt many users would care if sideloading was available. The masses use iPhone for the iPhone and everything it is. Sideloading will come with an Apple warning.
If someone bricks their phone or even something less severe but causes the phone to stop working or lose data, anything really. Then Apple will say you are on your own. No support. No warranty cover.
If someone bricks their phone or even something less severe but causes the phone to stop working or lose data, anything really. Then Apple will say you are on your own. No support. No warranty cover.
There is a duopoly of Apple and Android. You have to use either of those platforms, if you want to use a smartphone at all. That's why it is very important to regulate them and stop them from using their market power to create a walled garden.
We have similar problems when in comes to credit cards. Their are only two major players: Visa and Mastercard. American Express is not accepted by many businesses because of the high processing fees. So two companies have an incredible power. That's why heavy regulation is needed.