Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Programming Apple Technology

Apple's Latest Defense of the App Store Just Shows How Hard It is To Compete With Apple (theverge.com) 134

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
As it faces both an antitrust lawsuit with huge implications and a formal EU investigation over its App Store tactics, Apple today defended itself against Spotify and other critics of the company's massively successful software storefront. From a report: "Today, the App Store is more vibrant and innovative than ever, offering equal opportunities to developers to deliver their apps and services across iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple TV, and Apple Watch," reads a new page at Apple's website titled "App Store -- Principles and Practices." "We're proud of the store we've built and the way we've built it." Apple says it has paid out $120 billion to App Store developers worldwide since the platform launched, and the company again touts the quick approval process and efficient work of its app review team, which now "represents 81 languages across three time zones." Sixty percent of the approximately 100,000 apps and app updates reviewed each week are approved, with rejections mostly stemming from "minor bugs, followed by privacy concerns." Apple notes that anyone who feels that they were unjustly rejected can have their situation looked at by the App Store Review Board.

But the most interesting parts of this new site relate to competition. In one section, Apple goes over the core, built-in apps on iOS and lists the many popular third-party options that are available from the App Store in each category as alternatives. The company fails to mention that none of these apps can be chosen as the default messaging app, maps service, email client, web browser, or music player. That limitation isn't always a deal-breaker -- just ask WhatsApp, which is more popular than iMessage in many countries -- but it still gives Apple's services an advantage. [...] The message here seems to be that if companies don't like Apple's policies, they've got other options. Go find your riches on Android or make a Roku app.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple's Latest Defense of the App Store Just Shows How Hard It is To Compete With Apple More

Apple's Latest Defense of the App Store Just Shows How Hard It is To Compete With Apple

Comments Filter:

  • Their team covers three time zones? That doesn't even cover the continental US, let alone all of the other users. Or does this reference the number of time zones in their walled garden?

    • No one cares about Mountain Time.
      Mostly due to lack of general population.
      The population tends to be around major Water sources.
      EST has the Atlantic
      PST has the Pacific
      CST has the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico.

      MST has well mountains....

      • This kind of thinking is why the Dems lost the 2016 election by the way. Plenty of people live in the MST zone and they wont vote for the arrogant fucks who act like they don't exist.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Hillary --

          If you don't live in a city, you're a "deplorable".

          And her supporters are **utterly** and **completely** stumped why Trump is the President of the United States.

        • Actually Dems Lost the 2016 with some EST and CST states. those MST in terms of electoral votes unless all turned blue wouldn't make that much of a difference.

          Also this is about running a business not Politics. MST still will have their service, they will just end up working with people in PST or CST and just be an hour off, which isn't that big of a deal. If you live in a less populated area, it is tougher to gain access to local services, it isn't a reflection on you, just strict business.

        • Dems lost because they backed what was quite possibly the only candidate who could lose to Trump. Hillary is too polarizing and they should have known better.

  • And that seems like a great argument (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Maury Markowitz ( 452832 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @10:28AM (#58672132) Homepage

    > Go find your riches on Android or make a Roku app.

    Which is pretty much a killer argument.

    After all, lots of people complaining about Apple's policies would never buy their products in the first place, so this advice seems both cogent and valuable.

    Yeah, there's a lot of iPhones. There's more Samsungs.

    • There are more models of Samsung available then Apple.
      Just like the PC market, Apple has a small subset of products.

      But the problem is Companies will support Apple Products more then Android.
      Why? Less products to support, less hardware options.
      Android Apps, are often just a port of the iOS app, with limited support.
      Apple knows for developers it is still the best bang for the buck, so they are charging just enough to still be the best bang for the buck.

      I remember getting a quote for updating my basement. The

      • But the problem is Companies will support Apple Products more then Android.

        So hang on - the problem is SUPPOSED to be that because the App Store has Apple defaults, that companies cannot compete.

        Yet after all this time, you are saying companies PREFER to try and compete on the Apple platform, instead of the more open alternatives.

        So then how is there a problem when plainly companies that have to choose how to spend money, do not think there is a problem with Apple's system and defaults?

        • What fucking alternative is there for iOS?

          • Re:The problem you point out shows there is none (Score:5, Informative)

            by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @05:36PM (#58675116)

            What fucking alternative is there for iOS?

            I'll assume you're not asking asking about competitors to iOS, such as Android. After all, if you're unhappy with the state of iOS, jumping ship for a different platform is the obvious answer. No, what you're really asking is, "what alternative do I have if I stay with iOS?". Unfortunately, that's a question that is predicated on a handful of incorrect presuppositions.

            For instance, why do you think there needs to be an alternative for iOS in the first place? Apple isn't obligated to allow alternatives for iOS, any more than iRobot needs to allows apps on my Roomba, Nintendo needs to let me run Linux on my Switch, Google needs to give me access to my Nest's firmware, or Tiger Electronics needs to come back from the dead so that I can run games from their competitors on my '90s-era handheld electronics. In each of those cases, the product was sold as a black box, all-in-one, physical device. The product Apple sells isn't a device that can run iOS: they sell products that are running iOS. That distinction matters, because it means that—as with all of the above examples—the OS is part-and-parcel with the product itself, which stands in contrast to, say, Microsoft selling Windows separately from PCs.

            Relatedly, I've seen many Slashdotters espouse the incorrect notion that because examples like these lock their users into a particular OS they are a form of de facto monopoly (i.e. iOS has captured 100% of the "iPhone market", so it's a monopoly). They aren't. For regulatory purposes, because the OS is part-and-parcel with the product, Apple makes smartphones, iRobot makes vacuums, Nintendo makes consoles, Google makes thermostats, Tiger made toys, and each of them competes/competed in those product categories, rather than in the OSes that run on those products. There is no "iPhone market" on which iOS competes against other OSes. To Apple and regulators looking at Apple, there's only the smartphone market, in which iPhones compete against devices from other manufacturers.

            (As an aside, they may also be a monopoly (e.g. if iPhones came to dominate the smartphone market), in which case regulators would be wise to impose additional obligations on them to ensure healthy competition (e.g. requiring that Ma Bell provide at-cost access to competitors), but that isn't the case here.)

            Or, in short, they're closed platforms competing against other platforms, both open and closed.

            And here's the thing: closed platforms are allowed to remain closed. Companies making closed platforms are under no obligation to aid others in using theirown platforms against them, so if someone wants to compete with them, the newcomer either needs to figure out how to interoperate on its own (e.g. jailbreaking) or else needs to build its own platform on which to compete from the ground up (e.g. Android running on a Google Pixel).

            • People buying iPhones can not be an indicator of acceptance for the imbalance in this market, because most people are buying hot tech and don't give a shit about how the apps even get into the app store. The fact that they can buy Android instead doesn't matter because they are unwilling participants in Apples marketing scheme. TV networks were never allowed to make their own products and sell them; they had to provide an equal market for sponsors. Finally, this isn't about Apple, this is about what's be

              • People buying iPhones can not be an indicator of acceptance for the imbalance in this market, because most people are buying hot tech and don't give a shit about how the apps even get into the app store.

                The public is fickle and ill-informed, as you suggested. If what Apple is doing is illegal, it’s illegal. If it’s not, it’s not. The public’s acceptance or lack thereof has no bearing.

                The fact that they can buy Android instead doesn't matter because they are unwilling participants in Apples marketing scheme. [...] Finally, this isn't about Apple, this is about what's better for people.

                How is that different than demanding unfettered access to the software on any of the closed platforms I mentioned before? None of these arguments of yours are Apple-specific. Instead, you seem to be targeting closed platforms as a whole on the basis of your opinion that they aren’t what’s be

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      There's more Samsungs.

      Samsung does not try to prohibit devices which they no longer own, ie which have been sold to people, from using alternate app stores. They do not put themselves in a position to harvest a cut of every future software purchase transaction involving that device and loft themselves as the sole arbiter of what the "owner" may run on it and where they may obtain the software.

      If you care a whit about the loss of control of consumer devices, you should support the EU's efforts to compel Apple to compete on an ev

    • can't do it without sideloading outside the kindle store. Same with Alexa, or google home.

      that's not a bad thing. the kindle isn't just a tablet it's a device for accessing merchandise on amazon. Just like the Dash buttons. You want this to be secure and to be seamless. So does amazon. They should exclude others things they can't control in the primary user points of access that are part of the security and content delivery envelope

      if you don't like that then buy some other tablet. there's many for sa

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Tom ( 5839674 )

        That all changed when you company is somewhat a monopoly.

        If Apple is making 95% of all mobile profits, as I have seen that number thrown around, I can see the case for monopolistic misuse of their market position.

        These lawsuits will not get smaller, and will eventually force Apple to open up their OS and Marketplace. They can't say there are alternatives for their built in apps, then make it impossible to use the alternatives as default. That anti-trust argument has already been LOST by Microsoft, and will

        • Apple has a significant enough portion of the market for this to be a problem. Why do you get to say 95%? Why can't I say more than 10% control of one company on a market is terrible? If anything, the EU should be the ones to set that line for Europe.

        • is because they are selling something people want. Nothing they sell is functionally diffrenent tna an android. It's actually more constrained than an android. It's the integration and seemlessness that garner the premium.

          they don't have 95% of the handsets. just 95% of the profits.

          your argument undoes itself.

        • Re:Try installing a different browser on a Kindle (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Alrescha ( 50745 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @02:35PM (#58673536)

          > If Apple is making 95% of all mobile profits, as I have seen that number thrown around, I can see the case for monopolistic misuse of their market position.

          Forgive me for pointing it out, but you have casually redefined the word monopoly to be about profits when in reality it is about markets. Apple is not a monopoly in any market.

          Even if it were, becoming a monopoly by simple doing a better job than everyone else is perfectly legal - even if you drive every one of your competitors out of business.

          A.

          • Forgive me for pointing it out, but you have casually redefined the word monopoly to be about profits when in reality it is about markets. Apple is not a monopoly in any market.

            Apple has a monopoly on brokering sales of apps on iDevices, in exactly the way that Google doesn't on Android devices. It's abusive to people who purchased iDevices, or were given them as gifts. They should be forced to permit sideloading, if not app stores.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Alrescha ( 50745 )

              > Apple has a monopoly on brokering sales of apps on iDevices

              These devices are Apple products. As people much more knowledgeable in the ways of anti-trust than I have pointed out, defining a single companys product as a market is absurd on its face. The word monopoly does not apply.

              A.

      • can't do it without sideloading outside the kindle store

        So? You can sideload a whole store if you want to. If you want F-Droid on your Amazon device, you can do that. You can't do the same thing on iOS.

        Personally I am happy to have Apple securing my iphone. [...] closed source has it's benefits too. Use what you prefer, don't insist it all has to be the same.

        This isn't about open or closed source, and it's Apple that's insisting that it all has to be the same.

    • That'd be a losing argument (Score:4)

      by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @02:48PM (#58673676)
      The EU has shown it'll take action any time a company uses control in one market (purchasers of phones/tablet) to leverage control over another market (producers of apps for those devices). That was the entire reason it cracked down on Microsoft, who was using its control over the OS market as leverage to gain control over the browser market. That's why the EU remedy involved giving Windows users a choice of default browser. It didn't have a problem with Windows' dominance per se. It did have a problem with Microsoft trying to use that dominance in OSes to gain advantage in a different market (browsers).

      For the same reason, the monopoly or non-monopoly nature of iOS is not what's at issue here. It's the fact that Apple is using its popularity among mobile device buyers to control app developers - that's what's not sitting well with the EU. The fact that the developers can make apps on other platforms is irrelevant. The transgression is using control in the device market as leverage to gain control in the app market.

      IMHO Apple's best argument is that it needs the level of control it wields over its app store to maintain the security of its devices. I happen to disagree with their walled garden philosophy, but I don't think my disagreement constitutes enough grounds to prohibit others who agree with it from partaking in it.

      Do note however that to remain consistent with the security argument, if a developer whose app was blocked from the app store should appeal the rejection, Apple should be required to demonstrate that the rejection was for legitimate security reasons. None of this rejecting without explaining BS companies seem to be so fond of nowadays. If there were multiple stores for iOS, I'd say Apple is free to reject any app they wish for any reason they wish. In that situation, if an app is popular and Apple rejects it from their store, then Apple's rejection effectively shifts the revenue money from selling that app to a different store. So Apple would be rejecting the app even though doing so costs them money. That the rejection was against their financial best interests constitutes evidence that the rejection was for legitimate reasons. But if there's only one store and no competition, then the store owner can reject apps for capricious or vindictive reasons if they're not required to justify their rejections. It can even wield that rejection power to silence critics (make it more likely to reject apps from companies which have criticized their unexplained rejections in the past). So at a minimum, they should be required to openly explain the reason for rejections.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Alrescha ( 50745 )

        > It's the fact that Apple is using its popularity among mobile device buyers to control app developers - that's what's not sitting well with the EU.

        What makes you say that this is not sitting well with the EU? Spotify made a complaint, the EU is obligated to investigate. Do you think there is more to it than that?

        A.

    • " lots of people complaining about Apple's policies would never buy their products in the first place"

      Demonstrate that iphone owners even understand this issue. They can't be voting for their compliance in this matter by buying the device if they don't even know about the issue at hand.

  • Although they make a good point about the other items like the browser and maps being default, I'm not sure iTunes is really a "default" music player, in that there's not really any default music player.

    Yes it ships with the system, but to initiate music usually you open an app to start playing playing - Spotify works as well as iTunes in that regard. Once you are playing music with any application, it is a first class citizen with the OS in terms of music control and data presentation.

    Indeed you are like

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ls671 ( 1122017 )

      It is called file associations. When your click on a file, every system that I know uses the defined default application to open it. Browsers, email clients, etc. even do that with links when they can't handle the content by themselves.

      • On iOS, you don't generally open audio files into other applications.

        But if you do (like if you put an MP3 into iCloud Drive and open it), you can view the file as a preview and play in place - but to actually open the file you are given the option to open it in any app that supports that file type via extensions.

        So it is not the case that the iOS music player is a "default" audio playing app for the case you mention, in fact to open an audio file I don't even see iTunes as a choice - just VLC and some othe

    • I'm not even sure that you can call any of the apps "default" in the iOS ecosystem. Apps are responsible for choosing what other apps are used to open e.g. navigation and mapping links or sending messages. If the Yelp app wants to give someone directions to a restaurant, its up to the developers of Yelp whether they use the Apple Maps URI scheme or the Google Maps URI scheme to switch to a mapping app and provide that content. Most apps that I've seen support opening Apple Maps, Google Maps, and Waze for di

      • Apps are responsible for choosing what other apps are used to open e.g. navigation and mapping links or sending messages.

        Mostly that is true, but there are things like the mail composition pane which use the built in mail accounts to send a message (somewhat different than the mail app although it will be placed in sent mail there), and data detectors in things like text fields which I think would recognize addresses and open up maps...

        But there are also semantic parsing libraries in the OS to do your own

      • Google has this problem solved on Android. Apple could do the same, but they prefer people to be corraled into the cathedral.

    • Yes it ships with the system, but to initiate music usually you open an app to start playing playing - Spotify works as well as iTunes in that regard.

      So on Google Home I can say "Hey Google, play Foo Fighters" and it will play Foo Fighters on Spotify because of course I have told it I have a Spotify account.
      Now on iOS devices? "Hey Siri, play Foo Fighters", and it says "Sorry I can't find Foo Fighters in your music" and what does it suggest?

      • - View on Apple Music
      • - Search iTunes Store

      It knows I have the Spotify app, you can't honestly tell me that with all their touting of machine learning chips that they don't know that I use Spotify all the time, cl

  • What exactly makes something the "default app"? Any app, whether Apple or 3rd party, is just another icon. Apps are used either by tapping that icon (same for all apps), reacting to incoming data such as a message (same for all apps), by displaying a "widget" on the home screen or Apple watch (equally possible for all apps), in context menus, or by responding to a certain URL like whatsapp://action or file type. Oh, when I start my car, autoplay (which should be banned to the deepest level of hell along

    • What exactly makes something the "default app"? Any app, whether Apple or 3rd party, is just another icon.

      Then how do you select which of these "icons" receives your SMS? How do you direct them away from iMessage?
      Can you even remove the poor Apple applications such as their browser, iMessage, Facetime and iTunes and use cross platform alternatives instead?

      I'd say that Apple have done plenty of work to make sure these apps can interact with iOS and vice versa to the same degree as Apple's own apps.

      Then you'd be wrong.

      • Counter (Score:2, Interesting)

        by SuperKendall ( 25149 )

        Then how do you select which of these "icons" receives your SMS?

        By chatting over WhatsApp, or FaceBook Messenger, or Snapchat, etc.

        Lots of people use alternative messaging platforms these days. It hardly matters what supports SMS, because no-one uses SMS directly these days if they can avoid it. Ask any teenager what they use to chat, how many "sms" responses will you get?

        Can you even remove the poor Apple applications such as their browser, iMessage, Facetime and iTunes and use cross platform alternative

        • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

          by fred6666 ( 4718031 )

          Then how do you select which of these "icons" receives your SMS?

          By chatting over WhatsApp, or FaceBook Messenger, or Snapchat, etc.

          So basically you don't. Thanks for confirming as I don't own any Apple product.
          With Apple, you are forced to use iMessage as the SMS application. Even Google allows you to switch.

          Lots of people use alternative messaging platforms these days. It hardly matters what supports SMS, because no-one uses SMS directly these days if they can avoid it.

          The only reason some people are using iMessage is because it's the default SMS application on the iPhone. They write to all their contacts by phone number, without caring if you are on iMessage or not. Because if you aren't, they'll assume you are using SMS (even if you aren't).

          Ask any teenager what they use to chat, how many "sms" responses will you get?

          It varies by country, and they may call it something e

    • Oh, when I start my car, autoplay (which should be banned to the deepest level of hell along with anyone who ever thought that was a good idea) picks the last music app that played, whether it's Apple's Music app or Spotify.

      Yes, a thousand times yes.

  • "the company's massively successful software storefront." Errrr... it's the *only* option for Apple users. This sounds just like Microsoft in the '90s and early '00s doesn't it?
    • No. Apple isn't telling app developers "If you dev for any other platform we won't let you on our store." Apple is saying "If you want to develop for our platform you must use our store." This is like a dairy farmer going into Costco and screaming that they don't let Sam's Club sell their milk and thus Costco is totes a monopoly.

      • This is like a dairy farmer going into Costco and screaming that they don't let Sam's Club sell their milk and thus Costco is totes a monopoly.

        I'm not sure I get it.

        The dairy farmer is complaining to Costco that they don't let Sam's Club sell "their" milk. Does the "their" refer to the dairy farmer's milk or the Sam's Club brand milk which, I assume, the dairy farmer supplies?

        Assuming you're talking about the Sam's Club brand milk, that's a store brand. The idea behind a store brand is that it is exclusive to the store. Sam's Club produces the milk and sells it directly (usually cutting out the middle man, which allows it to be sold cheaper).

  • Therein resides the weakness of Apple's position in the App Store arguments. Apple is only arguing their legal strengths.

  • Why do some people feel that a smartphone vendor that has under 20% of global marketshare should be obligated and forced to "open up" their platform to potential competitors in *ANY* way?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by pjt33 ( 739471 )

      Is market share in China and India relevant to EU or US monopoly regulators? Should it be? You seem to be saying that the answer to both questions is affirmative, but I don't see that as a self-arguing position.

    • I guess then it follows that as long as only 20% of industries are monopolies that's ok too right?
  • I think the EU was looking for "fair", not "more vibrant and innovative than ever". Sorry here is the nazi post: One could say that about Nazi Germany.
  • What Apple is doing is like a bread maker opening a grocery store that only sells their bread and then compelling a city to legislate that apartment dwellers (or some other large segment) can only use their store. Of course a law like that would be ridiculous, right? Enter the Apple app store.

  • Developing for iOS Sucks. (Score:3)

    by DigitalisAkujin ( 846133 ) on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @04:03PM (#58674310) Homepage

    My team currently maintains an app for iOS and Android. It's Cordova/Ionic based. The build process is complicated and requires a Windows machine running Visual Studio to generate a a bundle for Android and a bundle for iOS that will actually transfer a payload over the network to an OS X build machine for OS X. You can get setup automated builds for Android via Amazon and others where as soon as you commit your code a server automatically starts the build process but because of the close minded approach of Apple that is literally impossible to configure without running OS X yourself.

    When we submit a new version for update by the time they can review our app it's usually 48-72 hours.

    Testing is a nightmare. When testing SSO or OAuth2 sometimes the identity provider service will require the origin domain name to match. I can easily override the hosts file on my local to be the production domain but then the HTTPS cert fails and in iOS the HTTPS cert failing can't be ignored even in dev. I literally have to deploy my code and redirect our amazon load balancer to a test VM for just my IP just so I can use our real domain and our real HTTPS cert for a test instead of being able to test locally. On Android device? Redirect at DNS level to local and ignore HTTPS errors. No problem.

    And good luck maintaining that dev environment when you're working remote.

  • I have an amazing new product. It's a handgun with big metal truck nuts on it. Those midwestern guys are going to love it. But Walmart says they won't stock it on their shelves because it violates their safety guidelines. "This weapon is too front-heavy," they say. Bah, what do those pencil-pushers know about firearm design?

    You know what I found out? Only Walmart gets to approve what Walmart puts on their store shelves! That's a god damn monopoly!! My attorney says so too, and so far he's taken $75,

  • I'm behind on this... my fault. If people are so butthurt over the Apple Store, etc, why don't they just switch to Android?

Slashdot Top Deals

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Close