It’s happening again.

  • woelkchen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    People buying Apple products want to be told by Apple what’s allowed. The walled garden is core to Apple’s product philosophy. It’s not like everybody was expecting Apple to be super open and inclusive with anything and then be taken by surprise from the Fortnite situation. Even before they deprecated open standards because their own tech is supposedly evolving faster and are better integrated.

    People wanting to play Fortnite on phones can just get a reasonably specced Android phone and install EGS next to Play Store with just a few taps.

    • CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Eh, not really. I buy Apple because I’ve had 3 Android phones crap out on me literally days after their warranty died. I got tired of that shit, I paid a bit more and got myself an iPhone 13. It still works as good as it did on the first day. While I do know that Apple devices have a set death day (when they stop getting security updates), I believe I generate far less e-waste by buying 1 iPhone every 7 or 8 years instead of buying a brand new Android every year.

      As far as Fortnite goes, I don’t care for the game itself, but I am happy that they fought Apple in court and gave developers the freedom to implement third party IAP, albeit I have no use for it as I only use my phone for phone calls and messaging and the occasional web browsing.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Android is an operating system. It has nothing to do with crappy hardware. At least they’re somewhat repairable when they do break.

      • bork@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        buying a brand new android every year

        We’ve had wildly different experiences with these companies, for what it’s worth.

        I bought an iPhone X back when they were new, and had to get it replaced twice within the first 6 months because of hardware failures.

        Conversely, I kept my Pixel 3 (from 2019) until last year.

        • _____@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Predicting a classic tale of comparing apple flagships to $150 android phones.

  • ThePantser@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Keep it up Apple, keep pissing off the gamers. Shrink that monopoly. Seems pretty fucking insane that they can stop an app from working remotely. If an app that is being used to coordinate a rebellion takes off the US government can order Apple to disable its use. I hope the degoogling Android trend takes off further.

  • Zak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    8 hours ago

    The DMA should never have allowed Apple any oversight of apps distributed outside their store.

      • Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        50 minutes ago

        Epic was planning to distribute it in its own store in the EU.

        flashlight man.

        I’ll take it.

  • AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Epic isn’t wrong about Apples payment requirements being BS, but Epic also isn’t exactly a hero here.

    Will be interesting to see how this pissing match plays out over time.

    Should you be able to use other payment providers outside of apple pay YES!

    Should you be able to install other APP stores on an iPhone? Not sure.

    • middlemanSI@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Why shouldn’t you be able to install whatever you want? Maybe I’m missing something…

      • AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I am in the camp that there is a benefit to the managed store. Since moving family members to iOS devices the number of times they have loaded malware or asked me for help installing ANYTHING dropped to zero.

        Should techies be able to side load if they want? Sure, should that be a primary install method? No.

        • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          31 minutes ago

          There’s a lot of very techy people who’ve never had to do family tech support on this platform.

          Yes, the fact that Mum can’t accidentally install a shitty browser toolbar is a feature.

        • Ulrich@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          There is a benefit. And you can continue using the first-party store if you want. There’s no benefit to not being able to use 3rd-party ones to anyone but Apple and their investors.

        • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          Nope. No reason that you should pay $1000 for a device and not, at the very least, be able to install compatible software from other sources.

          We wouldn’t accept this from Microsoft. Could you imagine if this was the norm for DOS or Windows?

          Should side loading be discouraged and warned about? Yes. Should it be impossible? Maybe through “parental” controls or MDM, but absolutely not out-of-the-box.

        • FreeBooteR69@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          9 hours ago

          All bootloaders should be able to be unlocked and able to install the OS of your choice. Also you should be able to choose whatever app store you want. It is your hardware, you payed for it.

          • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            If you want a customizable phone, yes. If you want a secured phone, no.

            There are already existing products for both sides. No point in forcing them to do something else at this point.

            • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Except Google is trying to limit this on Android phones as well (e.g. with SafetyNet).

              If manufacturers had their way, there wouldn’t be any phones for one side.

              • Zak@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                If manufacturers had their way, there wouldn’t be any phones for one side.

                There’s nothing stopping manufacturers from permanently locking the bootloader. Some do and others don’t suggesting that the industry does not have a universal preference.

                I do think Google wants it to be inconvenient enough to run a version of Android they haven’t blessed as one’s main phone that it has no chance to become mainstream, but that’s about the prospect of an OEM not bundling Google’s apps and store, not hobbyists running custom builds. If that sounds like an attempt to use market power to exclude competitors in violation of fair trading laws in a multitude of jurisdictions, you might be on to something.

                • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  There’s nothing stopping manufacturers from permanently locking the bootloader. Some do and others don’t suggesting that the industry does not have a universal preference.

                  Some manufacturers have stopped allowing unlocking their bootloaders, some bootloaders have been hacked by the community. It’s not like this is a static system.

                  I do think Google wants it to be inconvenient enough to run a version of Android they haven’t blessed as one’s main phone that it has no chance to become mainstream, but that’s about the prospect of an OEM not bundling Google’s apps and store, not hobbyists running custom builds.

                  No, Google is also trying to stop hobbyists running custom builds from accessing services built on their software (the aforementioned SafetyNet). Hackers keep finding ways around this, but Google keeps trying to lock them out.

              • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                I mean that’s something that’d happen regardless of whether you may install other App Stores on an iPhone easily, no?

                • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  GP wrote:

                  All bootloaders should be able to be unlocked and able to install the OS of your choice. Also you should be able to choose whatever app store you want. It is your hardware, you payed for it.

                  App stores are just one part of the puzzle. Unless consumers actually have rights, manufacturers will keep trying to limit their options.

        • noride@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          “I frequently interface with idiots, so I don’t feel it would be safe for you to have full control over the hardware you own.”

        • middlemanSI@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I can see benefits of such limitations for say a company-owned devices with cyber-security in mind. When we talk about open market of devices in an increasingly “digital” world I am against limitations with profit in mind. It’s like many things in life. When you want to do or use something you have to learn to use it, often by getting burned or otherwise making a mistake. You having to fix family devices has nothing to do with it. Anyway I have no stake in this, I would never buy an Apple device. Companies pushing for “infinite growth” with such policies will be left in the dust imo, but the billionares will just move on after milking everything dry.