Multiple Alternative Channels
Asha Barbaschow (MacRumors, Slashdot):
Apple has responded further to the Australian consumer watchdog’s probe of app marketplaces, this time rejecting characterisation that the Apple App Store is the most dominant app marketplace and saying there are other options for iOS users, such as by going to a website.
“Apple perceives and treats other distributors of apps, for platforms other than iOS, as significant competitors whose pricing and policies constrain Apple’s ability to exercise power over developers,” the iPhone maker said in a submission [PDF] to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC)
[…]
“Apple faces competitive constraints from distribution alternatives within the iOS ecosystem (including developer websites and other outlets through which consumers may obtain third party apps and use them on their iOS devices) and outside iOS,” it said.
Which developer sites are distributing iOS apps? Is Apple actually citing competition from jailbreak apps?
“Even if a user only owns iOS-based devices, distribution is far from limited to the Apple App Store because developers have multiple alternative channels to reach that user.
“The whole web is available to them, and iOS devices have unrestricted and uncontrolled access to it. One common approach is for users to purchase and consume digital content or services on a website.”
Ah, yes, the sweet solution.
This smacks of disingenuousness.
LOL
mtom:
A whole list of relatively unimportant apis turn up but PWAs seem to be deliberately restricted.
brb, implementing my Apple Watch keyboard as a web app.
Apple: We have to be the only source of apps on the iPhone to keep users and the network safe
Also Apple: What do you mean we’re the only source of apps
But we all know — including the folks at Apple — that this is pretty lame. Web apps are not even close to being in the same league as native apps.
There should be a way to distribute apps outside of the App Store. The absence of this capability is holding the platform back.
Regardless of whether I would personally prefer more flexibility with my own devices, it is frustrating that I cannot decide that without switching to a worse platform that has generally lower-quality apps.
[…]
I wish apps did not individually handle updates in their own way on my Mac. I wish that all of them could tie into a universal software update mechanism, so my apps are always up to date no matter whether I got them from the App Store or elsewhere. I appreciate Sparkle for what it is, but I prefer silent updates done in the background.
Apple certainly could make it possible for a universal update mechanism to work with apps not sold through the App Store. It even used to maintain a MacUpdate-style list of Mac apps, with direct download links. It’s just that it doesn’t consider this a high priority and, as with security, wants people to ascribe the benefits to the App Store itself.
Previously:
2 Comments RSS · Twitter
Apple perceives and treats other distributors of apps, for platforms other than iOS, as significant competitors whose pricing and policies constrain Apple’s ability to exercise power over developers
It's so nice to have it spelled out.
"Apple faces competitive constraints from distribution alternatives within the iOS ecosystem (including developer websites and other outlets through which consumers may obtain third party apps and use them on their iOS devices) and outside iOS. Apple’s “reader” and “multiplatform” rules contemplate and permit precisely this because of the competitive importance of providing developers with flexibility in competition with other operating platforms."
Straight from the horse's mouth: apps like Spotify/Netflix/Dropbox are only allowed to distribute digital goods paid for outside of Apple's IAP system because of external "competition".
That is, if Apple won't classify your app as a "reader" and let you do the same, that's because Apple thinks they face no competition there, i.e., we're making you pay us more because you don't have a choice, sucka. Come back when you're a super-rich multinational tech company and then we'll talk.
