Discord reverses course on iOS blanket ban of NSFW content

AppleInsider

Popular messaging and VoIP platform Discord last week retreated from plans to enact a blanket ban on NSFW servers accessed through its iOS app, a step the company claimed was an attempt to adhere to Apple's App Store guidelines.

Last week, Discord announced a set of restrictions that banned all users from accessing NSFW content on iOS.

The decision was met with blowback from both users and content creators who rely on the platform for revenue.

As noted by Gizmodo, Discord modified its stance on the matter in an about-face that was detailed in a support article last week. Instead of a blanket ban, the company is targeting servers dedicated to explicit pornographic content, including those "organized" around NSFW themes or where similar content is dominant. Further, channels categorized as NSFW are accessible, though users need to verify their age before entering.

A spokesperson for the company issued the following statement to Gizmodo:

Our goal is always to keep Discord safe, especially for our younger users. Last week, we introduced additional controls to ensure minors will not be exposed to content that is inappropriate for them per App Store guidelines. We realize the community had many questions, and we wanted to clarify our position and which servers will or will not be affected. These updates are outlined in detail on our support articles for users and server owners. We will continue to work with server owners and our partners, and will notify all server owners letting them know which of their servers are impacted.

In a statement to AppleInsider, Discord's support team confirmed that the company is adding a new feature that allows servers to identify as NSFW. As for age-gating on iOS, members who want to join an NSFW server will need to opt in on an alternate platform, the company said.

Initially, Discord blamed the content ban on Apple's developer guidelines, saying the policy was put in place "to comply with Apple's policies." The company subsequently told The Verge that Apple was applying pressure to remove adult content from the app.

9secondkox2

Good on Apple. Get that junk outta there. 

But dang, discord!

trying to put Apple and it’s users in a handicapped bad light? Especially when you should have taken measures to protect the innocent and unsuspecting to begin with?

Get it together. 

Better late than never I guess. 

darkvader

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

9secondkox2

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

Apple has created a safe haven in the midst of the Wild West as phone tech is concerned. 

Epics “case” is simply a matter of Epuc breaching contract and wanting to act like that’s not exactly what they did. 

The sad tragedy of Epics stupidity has nothing to do with this. 

While I agree that users should be able to load any app of their choosing, it should come with noticeable warning and education concerning the possible outcomes, as well as a process. 

Apple shouldn’t have to fix issues caused by malware, malicious apps, etc. so there should be an agreement signed digitally if you do this. And it gets tied to your Apple ID and associated only with that device. 

That way Apple doesn’t get to play politics with apps like Parler, etc. and users get back control. 

But at the same time, Apple isn’t on the hook for damage done by all the crap out there just waiting to invade your phone. 

Nah. Just let them keep guard over the apps. It’s been a great system. 

Ms, Sony, Nintendo do this with consoles. And phones are even more important. 

Only advertiser spies, and malicious software creators want apples shields torn down. Stay away thanks. 

AppleZulu

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

CheeseFreeze

I wonder how long Apple is going to maintain this kind of restrictive behavior. Their excessive walled garden approach going to be harder and harder to defend moving forward, especially with all these antitrust investigations happening.

CloudTalkin

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

mikewallace

It seems to me that those who want to take their apple device and do what they want to it think that their proposed actions would not affect the security of the greater apple ecosystem. I myself think that perhaps it has been too long ago for these to have experienced jailbroken iPhones, or I’d find it hard for them to espouse that belief.

But perhaps for the benefit of the doubt, maybe this compromise;

You want to use a third party App Store, mod, payment system, repair, or parts? Have at it, but in doing so, you sever your device from the apple ecosystem. No apple support or services at all on the severed device. I’d propose that even the Secure Enclave on the device should no longer function. Then if they want an apple device their way they can have at it, but you’re on your own.

Rayz2016

mikewallace said:

It seems to me that those who want to take their apple device and do what they want to it think that their proposed actions would not affect the security of the greater apple ecosystem. I myself think that perhaps it has been too long ago for these to have experienced jailbroken iPhones, or I’d find it hard for them to espouse that belief.

But perhaps for the benefit of the doubt, maybe this compromise;

You want to use a third party App Store, mod, payment system, repair, or parts? Have at it, but in doing so, you sever your device from the apple ecosystem. No apple support or services at all on the severed device. I’d propose that even the Secure Enclave on the device should no longer function. Then if they want an apple device their way they can have at it, but you’re on your own.

Sounds fair to me. I don’t see why Apple should foot the bill if you want to take the phone to back street repair shops or install software from shady developers. 

Apple has made no secret of how the iOS ecosystem operates. If you bought the phone then started whining that it doesn’t work like Android then I have no sympathy for you. 

shareef777

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Before iOS every OS allowed you to install other apps. MacOS and Windows particularly did as well and odds are you’ve been using (and still are) one of those two for years before and after iOS came along. As for the “walled garden”, that’s been breached years ago. Just read up about the multitude of phony anti-virus and VPN apps in the App Store that have bilked millions from users.

What’s wrong with having choice? By allowing a 3rd party store what does that take away from you? Odds are large companies will remain in the App Store just because a large number of users won’t bother with any other store. You seem to be for choice, but chose the option that limits choices!?

EsquireCats

The moderators of this forum should put in some effort to remove shill accounts.

AppleZulu

shareef777 said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Before iOS every OS allowed you to install other apps. MacOS and Windows particularly did as well and odds are you’ve been using (and still are) one of those two for years before and after iOS came along. As for the “walled garden”, that’s been breached years ago. Just read up about the multitude of phony anti-virus and VPN apps in the App Store that have bilked millions from users.

What’s wrong with having choice? By allowing a 3rd party store what does that take away from you? Odds are large companies will remain in the App Store just because a large number of users won’t bother with any other store. You seem to be for choice, but chose the option that limits choices!?

I remember the pre-app store days well. When buying a program, you had to wonder if it would work on your device, or whether it would crash your OS, or cause compatibility problems with other software you were already running. You had to wonder if it was bloatware, or if it would insert itself too deeply into your system, or if it was spyware. If buying online, you had to gamble whether the ‘store’ was legit. Most software came with thick user manuals, because the UI was probably not standardized to the OS. The list goes on. The App Store changed all that. (Also, MacOS is moving toward the iOS model in locking things down, and it seems evident that if they were starting all over again, they probably wouldn’t allow third-party loading there, either.)

So as for choice, iOS users chose a platform that doesn’t come with all those issues. Developers who want access to those customers have to abide by the App Store’s standards, and customers can download and install with a higher level of confidence and lower level of risk. This actually benefits those developers by removing barriers to customer willingness to try their software. Forcing a break from the App Store will take away that choice. 

AppleZulu

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Read the post right above. Breaking the App Store model will mean many developers stay out of it, and it will be difficult or impossible for iOS users to avoid them if they want those apps. Many of us want iPhones specifically because they work the way they do. To maintain an “I don’t like it therefore it should be forced to operate like Android” seems a bit shortsighted and self centered. 

urahara

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Your oversimplified perception of App Store and its complex infrastructure is just absurd. 

How can you open iOS for other stores and still keep it safe?
Jailbreaking is a thing. You could do it to your iPhone and load those Cidia’s apps. You can do it to your iPhone. Don’t come with your ridiculous suggestions that Apple should do it as a normal practice. 

What are you doing on AI if you are an Android user? If you are not, why not yet?

StrangeDays

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

It’s time McDonald’s ends their awful monopoly over their store! All the Whopper! Allow sushi vendors! Who is McDonald’s to dictate what’s sold in its store!? There are hundreds of food providers who are denied access but deserve the customer base McDonalds has amassed! End the gate keeping yellow wall!

Same with Xbox, Sony, and Nintendo - who are they to decide what games work on the consoles they developed and sell to their users!

jordon schultz

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you no install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

Typical trash “[hmph!] hey that’s not fair, mommy!” reply. When I go out to eat I make a point to ask for things not on the menu and throw a fit when THEY won’t bend to my needs. 

maximara

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

There is nothing illegal about Apple taking masures to limit NSFW content.  Heck, in some localities not doing so could land Apple in trouble.

nicholfd

shareef777 said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Before iOS every OS allowed you to install other apps. MacOS and Windows particularly did as well and odds are you’ve been using (and still are) one of those two for years before and after iOS came along. As for the “walled garden”, that’s been breached years ago. Just read up about the multitude of phony anti-virus and VPN apps in the App Store that have bilked millions from users.

What’s wrong with having choice? By allowing a 3rd party store what does that take away from you? Odds are large companies will remain in the App Store just because a large number of users won’t bother with any other store. You seem to be for choice, but chose the option that limits choices!?

You are wrong - ever own a BlackBerry or one of the flip phones that came with the Verizon/AT&T/Sprint/T-Mobile app stores?

CloudTalkin

urahara said:

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Your oversimplified perception of App Store and its complex infrastructure is just absurd. 

How can you open iOS for other stores and still keep it safe?
Jailbreaking is a thing. You could do it to your iPhone and load those Cidia’s apps. You can do it to your iPhone. Don’t come with your ridiculous suggestions that Apple should do it as a normal practice. 

What are you doing on AI if you are an Android user? If you are not, why not yet?

Your reliance on vague conjecture and mild FUD isn't really a compelling argument.  Billions of people use multiple backend payment systems multiple times daily with nary an issue.  To imply Apple's system is the only one with the capability to maintain safety and security defies logic.  Simply stating something else would be less secure doesn't make it so.  No matter how many times it's repeated.  The Mac App Store is just as secure as the iOS App Store and has been for years.  So iOS can be more open and still be safe imo.  But if you believe differently, back that opinion with some semblance of sound logic instead of empty rhetoric.  Whether Apple eventually allows it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other.  That's not what I'm arguing for/against.  Both my responses in this thread are disagreements with the content of the posts which I countered; not Apple.  There's a distinct difference.  One that some people fail to recognize.

What does Android have to do with anything?  Please tell me you aren't going to resort to ad hominem due to ineffective arguments.

AppleZulu said:

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Read the post right above. Breaking the App Store model will mean many developers stay out of it, and it will be difficult or impossible for iOS users to avoid them if they want those apps. Many of us want iPhones specifically because they work the way they do. To maintain an “I don’t like it therefore it should be forced to operate like Android” seems a bit shortsighted and self centered. 

It will mean no such thing.  Imo, if Apple does eventually allow 3rd party backend processing the vast, vast, vast majority of apps will remain status quo using Apple's systems.  It will be financially and logistically in their favor to do so.  Only the largest devs would realistically be able to take advantage.  As long as the App Store makes the devs money they'd stay put. I say this because anecdotal evidence suggests it's exactly what would happen.  What anecdotal evidence you ask?  Android.  Android, which you mention derisively is the most likely analog for what would happen to iOS.  It's obvious you have no idea how Android works.  Vast majority of Android devs use Google's backend (all of them on the Play Store use it, just like all devs on iOS use Apple's currently).  For access to alternate android app store and billing, a user would need to manually and purposely elect to sideload an app or app store.  Those who choose to do so don't affect those who like going through Google.  It would be the same circumstance on iOS imo.  

I'd love to hear the thought process behind thinking devs would "stay out of it".  

AppleZulu

CloudTalkin said:

urahara said:

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Your oversimplified perception of App Store and its complex infrastructure is just absurd. 

How can you open iOS for other stores and still keep it safe?
Jailbreaking is a thing. You could do it to your iPhone and load those Cidia’s apps. You can do it to your iPhone. Don’t come with your ridiculous suggestions that Apple should do it as a normal practice. 

What are you doing on AI if you are an Android user? If you are not, why not yet?

Your reliance on vague conjecture and mild FUD isn't really a compelling argument.  Billions of people use multiple backend payment systems multiple times daily with nary an issue.  To imply Apple's system is the only one with the capability to maintain safety and security defies logic.  Simply stating something else would be less secure doesn't make it so.  No matter how many times it's repeated.  The Mac App Store is just as secure as the iOS App Store and has been for years.  So iOS can be more open and still be safe imo.  But if you believe differently, back that opinion with some semblance of sound logic instead of empty rhetoric.  Whether Apple eventually allows it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other.  That's not what I'm arguing for/against.  Both my responses in this thread are disagreements with the content of the posts which I countered; not Apple.  There's a distinct difference.  One that some people fail to recognize.

What does Android have to do with anything?  Please tell me you aren't going to resort to ad hominem due to ineffective arguments.

AppleZulu said:

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Read the post right above. Breaking the App Store model will mean many developers stay out of it, and it will be difficult or impossible for iOS users to avoid them if they want those apps. Many of us want iPhones specifically because they work the way they do. To maintain an “I don’t like it therefore it should be forced to operate like Android” seems a bit shortsighted and self centered. 

It will mean no such thing.  Imo, if Apple does eventually allow 3rd party backend processing the vast, vast, vast majority of apps will remain status quo using Apple's systems.  It will be financially and logistically in their favor to do so.  Only the largest devs would realistically be able to take advantage.  As long as the App Store makes the devs money they'd stay put. I say this because anecdotal evidence suggests it's exactly what would happen.  What anecdotal evidence you ask?  Android.  Android, which you mention derisively is the most likely analog for what would happen to iOS.  It's obvious you have no idea how Android works.  Vast majority of Android devs use Google's backend (all of them on the Play Store use it, just like all devs on iOS currently).  For access to alternate android app store and billing, a user would need to manually and purposely elect to sideload an app or app store.  Those who choose to do so don't affect those who like gong through Google.  It would be the same circumstance on iOS imo.  

I'd love to hear the thought process behind thinking devs would "stay out of it".  

I'd love to hear the thought process behind thinking Apple must break the App Store, even though, apparently, nobody important will do anything different as a result. 

Currently, Facebook, Google and others are quite put out that participating in the app store will require them to ask users' permission first, before they track them and sell their data. You think that's not an incentive for those major and minor developers, whose business model is built on monetizing end-user data, to move out of the app store?  You think they won't take the opportunity to go to a separate store platform, if doing so provides the option to stay on iOS devices without meeting Apple's basic privacy requirements? That's the whole reason they're currently clamoring to break the App Store with your BS narrative that the App Store is anti-competitive. They don't want the competition that the App Store creates! If they're successful, they'll gladly take away user choice to have the privacy protections built into iOS. Gladly.

CloudTalkin

AppleZulu said:

CloudTalkin said:

urahara said:

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Your oversimplified perception of App Store and its complex infrastructure is just absurd. 

How can you open iOS for other stores and still keep it safe?
Jailbreaking is a thing. You could do it to your iPhone and load those Cidia’s apps. You can do it to your iPhone. Don’t come with your ridiculous suggestions that Apple should do it as a normal practice. 

What are you doing on AI if you are an Android user? If you are not, why not yet?

Your reliance on vague conjecture and mild FUD isn't really a compelling argument.  Billions of people use multiple backend payment systems multiple times daily with nary an issue.  To imply Apple's system is the only one with the capability to maintain safety and security defies logic.  Simply stating something else would be less secure doesn't make it so.  No matter how many times it's repeated.  The Mac App Store is just as secure as the iOS App Store and has been for years.  So iOS can be more open and still be safe imo.  But if you believe differently, back that opinion with some semblance of sound logic instead of empty rhetoric.  Whether Apple eventually allows it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other.  That's not what I'm arguing for/against.  Both my responses in this thread are disagreements with the content of the posts which I countered; not Apple.  There's a distinct difference.  One that some people fail to recognize.

What does Android have to do with anything?  Please tell me you aren't going to resort to ad hominem due to ineffective arguments.

AppleZulu said:

CloudTalkin said:

AppleZulu said:

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious.  It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right.  But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device. 

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates. 

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS.  On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted. 

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want. 

Almost everything you typed is completely absurd.  You wouldn't lose your choice to use Apple's infrastructure.  You could easily choose to only use apps that rely on Apple.  If an app decides to do their own back end processing, what facts are you relying on to claim security and quality would suffer?  You choose iOS devices because you want that system.  Nothing has to change for you.  Continue doing what you do.  For others, they gain options.  If some app you like chooses to forego Apple's processing, then you forego the app.  For every app in the App Store there are probably dozens of others that do the same function.  Pretty simple.  To maintain an "I don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist" attitude seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.

Read the post right above. Breaking the App Store model will mean many developers stay out of it, and it will be difficult or impossible for iOS users to avoid them if they want those apps. Many of us want iPhones specifically because they work the way they do. To maintain an “I don’t like it therefore it should be forced to operate like Android” seems a bit shortsighted and self centered. 

It will mean no such thing.  Imo, if Apple does eventually allow 3rd party backend processing the vast, vast, vast majority of apps will remain status quo using Apple's systems.  It will be financially and logistically in their favor to do so.  Only the largest devs would realistically be able to take advantage.  As long as the App Store makes the devs money they'd stay put. I say this because anecdotal evidence suggests it's exactly what would happen.  What anecdotal evidence you ask?  Android.  Android, which you mention derisively is the most likely analog for what would happen to iOS.  It's obvious you have no idea how Android works.  Vast majority of Android devs use Google's backend (all of them on the Play Store use it, just like all devs on iOS currently).  For access to alternate android app store and billing, a user would need to manually and purposely elect to sideload an app or app store.  Those who choose to do so don't affect those who like gong through Google.  It would be the same circumstance on iOS imo.  

I'd love to hear the thought process behind thinking devs would "stay out of it".  

I'd love to hear the thought process behind thinking Apple must break the App Store, even though, apparently, nobody important will do anything different as a result. 

Currently, Facebook, Google and others are quite put out that participating in the app store will require them to ask users' permission first, before they track them and sell their data. You think that's not an incentive for those major and minor developers, whose business model is built on monetizing end-user data, to move out of the app store?  You think they won't take the opportunity to go to a separate store platform, if doing so provides the option to stay on iOS devices without meeting Apple's basic privacy requirements? That's the whole reason they're currently clamoring to break the App Store with your BS narrative that the App Store is anti-competitive. They don't want the competition that the App Store creates! If they're successful, they'll gladly take away user choice to have the privacy protections built into iOS. Gladly.

Either read better please or refrain from snarky attempts to use my words in arguments against me.  You can't hear my thought process regarding the things you requested because I never said any of it.   Nowhere have I advocated for Apple breaking up the App Store.  Nowhere have I stated or implied the App Store is anti-competitive.  But you're more than welcome to go back and try to point to where I did.  As I clearly stated, I'm disagreeing with the points you're making, not Apple.  More importantly, nowhere have you provided anything close to a convincing supporting argument for your opinion.  All you're doing is finding different ways to say "they're gonna wanna leave".  Why would they? Most devs are going to continue doing what they've always done because it's cost effective and efficient.  Being responsible for their own backend incurs costs they currently don't have.  Remember the vast majority of devs already qualify for reduced commissions to Apple so they're already saving there.  Switching processors wouldn't be the huge disruption some think.  

Large devs with established infrastructure would probably be the only ones to use their own (already established) backend.  

An alternate app store on iOS would produce the same results as alternate app stores on Android: fringe use with little to no uptake.  Little to no uptake from devs and customers.