According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
Nintendo (and Sony and MS) still gets the same cut whether it is digital sale or a cartridge sale. The retailer may decide to sell their retail units at a lower price, but Nintendo already got its cut, and the retailer, and subsequently the game publisher, is eating the loss or losing the margin. The retailer, if big enough, may be able to return unsold inventory at the price they bought it. Not a great comparison as the game console model is the same as App Store model to developers.
Apple App Store customers are already getting the lowest possible price. It's the nature of the App Store where publishers and developers have to compete against each other as they are just a click away. Prices only increase if the app or service is better. Prices also can rise by introducing scarcity. 3rd party app stores can increase prices by introducing scarcity. They also can decrease software sales if they make it harder to buy.
If a gov't wants to regulate, they will have tread very very carefully. It typically very frustrating as gov't never seem to promote standards, rather they promote companies.
I have no issues with Apple, MS, Sony or Nintendo getting their cut. I just pointed out that with consoles customers have the option for purchase physical games in retailers, different from Apple, that force customer thru their App Store.
Well I can go into any supermarket and buy a physical Apple Gift Card and then exchange that for any app(s) I like. No difference except no sellling of things second-hand which isn’t a big deal seeing as apps cost far far less now than software did before the iPhone. It does remind me of Metallica though
I’d rather Apple got rid of the free pricing tier and banned all ads from apps.
If Apple allows alternative app-stores that change directly affects every single iPhone running that new version of iOS. It reduces the security of every single device.
I once wrote an app and it was installed/used on more than 100x the devices that it was purchased for. Piracy on iOS is still alive & well so people can install software from places other than the app-store if they have enough will to do so but it means voiding their warranty. To be honest I’m a techie and over the years I’ve been astounded at ordinary people in the street that didn’t work in IT that have had jail-broken iPhones. Cydia does still exist btw.
This whole issue is about money and the only gripes are from massive multi-million dollar companies like Epic/Spotify. The little and the average developer is just fine with things as they are.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
macOS is no where near as safe, (from a security and privacy standpoint), as iOS. It's not even a race. And this is mainly due to the fact that macOS (including Mac OS and OSX) was built from the ground up to allow "sideloading". This is what consumers expected their laptop and desktop computers to be able to do. Back then and even now, hardly any consumers would purchase a laptop or desktop, that didn't allow "sideloading".
On the other hand, iOS (including iPhone OS) was built from the ground up with security and privacy as its main priority. It has never allowed "sideloading" in its over 15 year history. And yet there are 1.5B Apple iOS devices in use Worldwide. With annual sales in the hundreds of millions and most of those sales are to repeat customers. I doesn't seem that not being able to sideload (or having only one app store on iOS), are issues with the vast majority of consumers buying Apple iOS devices.
macOS and iOS / iPadOS share a lot of security mechanisms, so they are close from a security POV. I agree that sideloading could have some impact in the level of security of devices. But does it mean it become the "Wild West" as you said? I haven't seen that in macOS, Windows, Linux or even Android devices.
And now a days, with the amount of personal, financial and medical data that consumers have on their mobile devices, the OS's on mobile devices should be much, much more safer, (from a security and privacy standpoint), than the OS's on our laptops and desktops. Saying the iOS only needs to be as safe as macOS is a losing argument.
For some reason, security for you is based on the device, but I think should be more. For example. why my mobile device should be more secure, when I use my Mac / PC to manage financial, private or sensitive data? Both devices should be secure, don't you think? Also, it has been many years, at least from what I remember, that sideloading an application caused a major security issue in macOS, Windows, Linux or Android.
Do you have any issue with that? It's the market that should determine whether Apple should allow sideloading or third party app stores with their iOS devices. Not because of the needs of the few that wants to "sideload" apps from developers that are trying to bypass the Apple App Store because they don't want to pay Apple anything in order to profit from an ecosystem that Apple built from the ground up or their apps can not pass Apple App Store policies to be in the Apple App Store. These few iPhone and iPad users (that wants to sideload and more than one app stores) have over a dozen other brand mobile phones and tablets to chose from, that will allows sideloading and with more than one app stores. And it shouldn't matter to them if these devices are not as safe as iOS, if sideloading and having more than one app store means that much to them.
Apple iOS devices are the choice of consumers that place a high value on security and privacy and it doesn't matter to them that there is no sideloading and only one app store on their devices. And being able to buy a device from a company that also places high value on security and privacy should not be taken away from them because of the few selfish ones that thinks it's better for consumers if iOS was more like Android. Apple is not forcing consumers to buy their iOS devices. They are giving consumers a choice of using devices that has proven to be much safer than Android devices. Choice is good for competition. Competition is good for consumers.
If the market should determine whether Apple should allow sideloading, should Apple allow sideloading first? Because as today, Apple is then one deciding that their customers should not sideload apps in their mobile devices. I agree that most users don't care for sideloading, and they will keep using Apple App Store for their downloads. I know I will keep using the Apple App Store, unless there is a better option than what we have with Apple. For example, there are rumors that MS is creating a gaming app store. I will have no issues trusting an apps store from MS, and I don't think it could compromise my device security. At the same time, it will improve the experience of my device, since MS is far better than Apple at gaming.
BTW- Yes, Nintendo customers are forced to buy their Nintendo game console games from Nintendo. It doesn't matter that you can buy a Nintendo games disc from retailers, only Nintendo can make the games disc for their game consoles. Can any game developer make game discs for Nintendo game consoles and sell it at a GameStop or Walmart or BestBuy? You can only buy game console games from the maker of the game console. Either downloads or disc. Game consoles ecosystem are close systems. You can only "sideload" games that the maker of the game consoles allows you to. They are not like computer OS's or Android at all.
I just pointed out that you can purchase Nintendo games physical media in different retailers, and you are not forced to use the app store.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
Please explain who “these people” are and how many of them exist. When I am deciding to buy something I consider the restrictions and then make the purchase. I don’t buy something hoping to force changes on the manufacturer. It’s like marrying someone and expecting them to change.
That issue aside though, allowing me to download an app to my iPhone from some other store does not impact anyone else's iPhone. That's false assumption that many are making. Perhaps because they have fallen for Apple's propaganda.
You obviously have ZERO clue on how computers and the internet work.
You're right. My 30+ years as a software engineer have taught me nothing.
Just admit that you have fallen for Apple's propaganda. But please stop the fear-mongering.
Have they taught you about the value of a business’ reputation? When that app infects your phone and corrupts or steals your data, and this happens on an iPhone it’s Apple who will take a reputational hit as not being a secure platform. And that can affect Apple’s profits and distract its talent base, thereby its ability to invest in future R&D, which will have an effect on the quality of the future iPhone I buy.
What's the reputation of macOS, even though you can "sideload" apps? From what I have seen, still considered to be a very secure OS, right?. I don't see why it could be different with iOS / iPadOS.
I have an insanely great idea for those who do not Apple’s control of the iPhone…buy an Android phone and play away. Your life will be complete.
Apple can very probably obtain 100%, unchallenged control of the platform by cutting it off from third party connections.
That would undoubtedly kill the appeal of the devices.
Is there a halfway house option?
Probably. Require that users understand the limitations it imposes over their choices and get them to sign off on it before purchase.
That might work, but would Apple choose that route and spell out in black and white (and up front) those limitations?
I'd love for Tim Cook to be posed that question.
The answer would be 'no' and the result is that Apple will simply adapt to the requirements imposed by governments. Directly or indirectly, that is what it has done up to now.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
There is choice. That’s the market.
Some folks just enjoy breaking a nice, working system. No real logic. Just to see it broken.
There is too much at work for everyone to have everything due to the fact that the world isn’t perfect snd has actual bad actors in it.
If apple were to open the iPhone up to everything under the sun, piracy increase, hurting their rep, consumers with malicious downloads, and developers. Who remembers the warez sites that were so problematic in the Wild West days of the internet. Phones are an even better target since they’re so rich with personal data.
Next thing, apple is on the wrong end of multiple lawsuits (even from the same DOJ AND EU) related to bad things happening to customers phones, identity theft, IP theft, etc.
if Apple were to open it wide open, it would be bad for everyone. Can buskers lose security protections, apple loses the trust of its customers, developers lose their profits, and the bad guys win. Again. Better to learn from history than repeat it.
What apple has done is provide a solution. In this way, piracy gets crushed, developers get paid, customers get protected, and even the few who want the Wild West again can jailbreak their phones - which also frees apple from being on the hook from the damage done by the malicious code people download. It’s already the best case scenario.
What is really at play here is an attempt to take apple down by sabotaging their incredible business structure. As Jobs solved the online music piracy (and associated malware anites) issue with iTunes, Apple has also solved app piracy (and associated malware sources) with the App Store.
It’s been fine for over a decade. Then all of a sudden some greedy slimes see a way to poke holes with those grungy fingers and they go for it. Better to break their fingers than let them make the holes bigger.
Apple has built a desireable product that is tied to a desireable service that most people want and pay good money ON PURPOSE to have.
There is literally nothing wrong. Everything is just right. The idiots trying to “fix” what’s not broken are either totally incompetent, have not done their diligence in understanding things like liability, or just plain corrupt and on the take.
These folks shouldn’t be trying to turn utopia into a ghetto. They should be thanking Apple for doing exactly the opposite.
There's so much in your post that's hilarious—and wrong—I wouldn't know where to begin. But the irony of calling others greedy in the face of Apple's conduct is perhaps the best part. That's pure comedy gold.
Oh well, eventually Apple will be forced to open at least a little and allow individuals to, of their own free will, download something to the phone they've paid for from someone other than paternalistic Apple. It's going to happen. It's just a matter of how and when. Apple can cooperate or be assholes about it. So far they are taking the asshole path (while trying to pretend to be noble and righteous.)
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
There is choice. That’s the market.
Some folks just enjoy breaking a nice, working system. No real logic. Just to see it broken.
There is too much at work for everyone to have everything due to the fact that the world isn’t perfect snd has actual bad actors in it.
If apple were to open the iPhone up to everything under the sun, piracy increase, hurting their rep, consumers with malicious downloads, and developers. Who remembers the warez sites that were so problematic in the Wild West days of the internet. Phones are an even better target since they’re so rich with personal data.
Next thing, apple is on the wrong end of multiple lawsuits (even from the same DOJ AND EU) related to bad things happening to customers phones, identity theft, IP theft, etc.
if Apple were to open it wide open, it would be bad for everyone. Can buskers lose security protections, apple loses the trust of its customers, developers lose their profits, and the bad guys win. Again. Better to learn from history than repeat it.
What apple has done is provide a solution. In this way, piracy gets crushed, developers get paid, customers get protected, and even the few who want the Wild West again can jailbreak their phones - which also frees apple from being on the hook from the damage done by the malicious code people download. It’s already the best case scenario.
What is really at play here is an attempt to take apple down by sabotaging their incredible business structure. As Jobs solved the online music piracy (and associated malware anites) issue with iTunes, Apple has also solved app piracy (and associated malware sources) with the App Store.
It’s been fine for over a decade. Then all of a sudden some greedy slimes see a way to poke holes with those grungy fingers and they go for it. Better to break their fingers than let them make the holes bigger.
Apple has built a desireable product that is tied to a desireable service that most people want and pay good money ON PURPOSE to have.
There is literally nothing wrong. Everything is just right. The idiots trying to “fix” what’s not broken are either totally incompetent, have not done their diligence in understanding things like liability, or just plain corrupt and on the take.
These folks shouldn’t be trying to turn utopia into a ghetto. They should be thanking Apple for doing exactly the opposite.
There's so much in your post that's hilarious—and wrong—I wouldn't know where to begin. But the irony of calling others greedy in the face of Apple's conduct is perhaps the best part. That's pure comedy gold.
Oh well, eventually Apple will be forced to open at least a little and allow individuals to, of their own free will, download something to the phone they've paid for from someone other than paternalistic Apple. It's going to happen. It's just a matter of how and when. Apple can cooperate or be assholes about it. So far they are taking the asshole path (while trying to pretend to be noble and righteous.)
Life pro tip:
Mental gymnastics for the purpose of poking holes is a waste of life. Better if you just go by common sense.
I don't need any life tips from you. Save them for someone else. TYVM. My common sense read of the situation is just fine. That it differs from your sense of things make it no less viable. Apple is playing a game here, a greedy one, a selfish one, a cynical one. They know full well they don't need to limit apps to only their app store to keep the overall platform secure. That's a lie—propaganda really—intended to serve their own self interests with the illusion of serving the customer's interests. What's most amazing is how many people have fallen for this.
P.S. The "mental gymnastics" are coming from the side insisting that the "walled garden" is the only way to secure the platform.
LOL. Bruh.
I guess if you can’t see it, even the most basic common sense won’t help.
Bruh, simply declaring your view as the "common sense" one don't make it so. Feel free to get down from your high horse. This idea (alternative app loading) isn't unreasonable at all—even if Apple has convinced you otherwise. LOL
You can’t force an OEM to let everyone - including precious customers - run roughshod over their business and then still keep them on the hook for related damages.
No one is asking for that. Stop with the histrionics. LOL
Anyway, I guess we will have to disagree. We'll see how it plays out once Apple is forced to allow people to use alternative stores. Perhaps the dystopian outcome will be true. Probably not.
That’s exactly what you’re asking apple to do.
Just let everyone and their grandma set up shop and give it a whirl.
Meanwhile, who’s footing the repair bill? The tech support for when integral system are compromised, etc. ? And don’t act like that wouldn’t happen. It most certainly will. And it has over the course of computing history.
It’s time folks learned from that history rather than repeat it. Apple has found a solution. Just like they did with iTunes. Just like Nintendo, Sony, Xbox has.
These aren’t all purpose computers like a Mac or pc. These are personal devices. Security and privacy are the names of the game.
You’re advocating trashing that in order to open the doors to literally anyone that wants to play, whether fairly and responsibly or predatorily.
No thanks. I shouldn’t be exposed to that and neither should apple.
I have an insanely great idea for those who do not Apple’s control of the iPhone…buy an Android phone and play away. Your life will be complete.
Apple can very probably obtain 100%, unchallenged control of the platform by cutting it off from third party connections.
That would undoubtedly kill the appeal of the devices.
Is there a halfway house option?
Probably. Require that users understand the limitations it imposes over their choices and get them to sign off on it before purchase.
That might work, but would Apple choose that route and spell out in black and white (and up front) those limitations?
I'd love for Tim Cook to be posed that question.
The answer would be 'no' and the result is that Apple will simply adapt to the requirements imposed by governments. Directly or indirectly, that is what it has done up to now.
You do realize that’s already how it is, right? Folks can jailbreak their phone and know that doing so relieved apple of responsibility.
There doesn’t need to be a halfway option. It’s a great and fair system as-is. Nothing wrong with it.
You’ll always have detractors and opportunists come knocking. It doesn’t mean you have to let them in or even crack the door.
Apple has created a fair, secure system that offers freedom of choice while operating a profitable business model. The first thing you learn in business class is the purpose of business: to make a profit.
Apple isn’t charging some exorbitant fee. They are simply charging a platform fee, just like bookstores, Walmart, other app stores, etc. do.
Just because someone wants to come along and poke a hole doesn’t mean you have to let them - or even just poke the hole halfway.
I have an insanely great idea for those who do not Apple’s control of the iPhone…buy an Android phone and play away. Your life will be complete.
Apple can very probably obtain 100%, unchallenged control of the platform by cutting it off from third party connections.
That would undoubtedly kill the appeal of the devices.
Is there a halfway house option?
Probably. Require that users understand the limitations it imposes over their choices and get them to sign off on it before purchase.
That might work, but would Apple choose that route and spell out in black and white (and up front) those limitations?
I'd love for Tim Cook to be posed that question.
The answer would be 'no' and the result is that Apple will simply adapt to the requirements imposed by governments. Directly or indirectly, that is what it has done up to now.
You do realize that’s already how it is, right? Folks can jailbreak their phone and know that doing so relieved apple of responsibility.
There doesn’t need to be a halfway option. It’s a great and fair system as-is. Nothing wrong with it.
You’ll always have detractors and opportunists come knocking. It doesn’t mean you have to let them in or even crack the door.
Apple has created a fair, secure system that offers freedom of choice while operating a profitable business model. The first thing you learn in business class is the purpose of business: to make a profit.
Apple isn’t charging some exorbitant fee. They are simply charging a platform fee, just like bookstores, Walmart, other app stores, etc. do.
Just because someone wants to come along and poke a hole doesn’t mean you have to let them - or even just poke the hole halfway.
Erm. That's not how it is.
Customers are never informed of the limitations Apple imposes, much less required to sign off on them.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
You knew going in that iOS worked this way. After getting an iPhone then complaining about the lack of alternative sources of apps is just ludicrous.
Are people like you really this unhappy that you want to ruin the iOS experience by turning it into Android?
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
You knew going in that iOS worked this way. After getting an iPhone then complaining about the lack of alternative sources of apps is just ludicrous.
Are people like you really this unhappy that you want to ruin the iOS experience by turning it into Android?
I knew that going in. Maybe you did.
But the vast majority of users don't, because the question is not something that would ever occur to them in the first place unless they actually run into an issue caused by it. And even then, they might not even recognise it as a result of this situation.
(Non-iOS Example: Apple is trying to establish iPad as a music production platform. Third-party plugins almost all have their own store/management platforms on Windows/Mac. How many iPad purchasers are clear on the fact that these industry-standard plugins are probably never going to be available on iPadOS unless they can be distributed through an iPad port their own store platform? How many will even know or care to ask the right questions?)
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
You knew going in that iOS worked this way. After getting an iPhone then complaining about the lack of alternative sources of apps is just ludicrous.
Are people like you really this unhappy that you want to ruin the iOS experience by turning it into Android?
That's a very narrow view of the situation.
I knew the situation very well but still bought an iPhone 14 Pro Max.
Knowing the situation doesn't mean agreeing with it.
Apple definitely never ever speaks of the restrictions it imposes. We know why.
Apple always takes advantage of whatever others say to insert the protection/privacy angle which isn't relevant in the slightest to why they are on the hook.
BTW- Yes, Nintendo customers are forced to buy their Nintendo game console games from Nintendo. It doesn't matter that you can buy a Nintendo games disc from retailers, only Nintendo can make the games disc for their game consoles. Can any game developer make game discs for Nintendo game consoles and sell it at a GameStop or Walmart or BestBuy? You can only buy game console games from the maker of the game console. Either downloads or disc. Game consoles ecosystem are close systems. You can only "sideload" games that the maker of the game consoles allows you to. They are not like computer OS's or Android at all.
A Nintendo games "disc"?
Jfc, tell me you know nothing about what you're talking about without... etc.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
You knew going in that iOS worked this way. After getting an iPhone then complaining about the lack of alternative sources of apps is just ludicrous.
Are people like you really this unhappy that you want to ruin the iOS experience by turning it into Android?
I have been an iPhone user since the 3GS, so I knew what I was getting, and have zero issues with it the Apple App Store. I just was pointing out a difference from a customer POV between Nintendo and the Apple App Store.
And I'm very happy with my iPhone, with no intentions to change. But at the same time, I don't think iOS / iPadOS will be become Android or be a worst OS if Apple is forced to open to more app stores.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
You knew going in that iOS worked this way. After getting an iPhone then complaining about the lack of alternative sources of apps is just ludicrous.
Are people like you really this unhappy that you want to ruin the iOS experience by turning it into Android?
I knew that going in. Maybe you did.
But the vast majority of users don't, because the question is not something that would ever occur to them in the first place unless they actually run into an issue caused by it. And even then, they might not even recognise it as a result of this situation.
(Non-iOS Example: Apple is trying to establish iPad as a music production platform. Third-party plugins almost all have their own store/management platforms on Windows/Mac. How many iPad purchasers are clear on the fact that these industry-standard plugins are probably never going to be available on iPadOS unless they can be distributed through an iPad port their own store platform? How many will even know or care to ask the right questions?)
The vast majority of consumers buying an iPhone are buying at least their second iPhone. This is mentioned in nearly every quarterly earning report from Apple. Over 80% of iPhone sales were to buyers that are already using an iPhone. About 10% of sales are to buyers that are switching from Android, though not necessarily using iOS for the first time. And about 8% are buying their first iPhone. So even if all 10% of switchers and all 8% of first time iPhone buyers, didn't know about iOS limitations, that's hardly the ...vast majority .... as you seem to claim.
It doesn't matter whether the question would never occur to iOS device buyers, the vast majority of iPhones purchased (which are the vast majority of iOS devices) now are to consumers that been using an iPhone for years. Even consumers buying their second iPhone, would most likely been using one for over 2 years. How can the vast majority of iPhone buyers not know the limitation of iOS on the iPhones that they been using for years? Now back in 2012, you might have a point.
The discussion is about whether consumers knew about iOS only having one app store from with the user can download apps from, either purchased or for free. Not some limitation that might only affect .001% of iOS users.
So does not having some third party standard plug-in for music production available for the iPad, make it any less of a device for music production, that Apple claim the iPad to be? Maybe Apple should be more informative about these profession music production software. But I bet the EU will get on Apple case if they do. That's a clear violation of of the DMA, as "gatekeepers" are not allow to promote their own product.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
You knew going in that iOS worked this way. After getting an iPhone then complaining about the lack of alternative sources of apps is just ludicrous.
Are people like you really this unhappy that you want to ruin the iOS experience by turning it into Android?
I knew that going in. Maybe you did.
But the vast majority of users don't, because the question is not something that would ever occur to them in the first place unless they actually run into an issue caused by it. And even then, they might not even recognise it as a result of this situation.
(Non-iOS Example: Apple is trying to establish iPad as a music production platform. Third-party plugins almost all have their own store/management platforms on Windows/Mac. How many iPad purchasers are clear on the fact that these industry-standard plugins are probably never going to be available on iPadOS unless they can be distributed through an iPad port their own store platform? How many will even know or care to ask the right questions?)
The vast majority of consumers buying an iPhone are buying at least their second iPhone. This is mentioned in nearly every quarterly earning report from Apple. Over 80% of iPhone sales were to buyers that are already using an iPhone. About 10% of sales are to buyers that are switching from Android, though not necessarily using iOS for the first time. And about 8% are buying their first iPhone. So even if all 10% of switchers and all 8% of first time iPhone buyers, didn't know about iOS limitations, that's hardly the ...vast majority .... as you seem to claim.
It doesn't matter whether the question would never occur to iOS device buyers, the vast majority of iPhones purchased (which are the vast majority of iOS devices) now are to consumers that been using an iPhone for years. Even consumers buying their second iPhone, would most likely been using one for over 2 years. How can the vast majority of iPhone buyers not know the limitation of iOS on the iPhones that they been using for years? Now back in 2012, you might have a point.
The discussion is about whether consumers knew about iOS only having one app store from with the user can download apps from, either purchased or for free. Not some limitation that might only affect .001% of iOS users.
So does not having some third party standard plug-in for music production available for the iPad, make it any less of a device for music production, that Apple claim the iPad to be? Maybe Apple should be more informative about these profession music production software. But I bet the EU will get on Apple case if they do. That's a clear violation of of the DMA, as "gatekeepers" are not allow to promote their own product.
Just ask people!
I make a point of it. I know people who have used iPhones since iPhone 4 and they are wholly unaware of the restrictions.
Just yesterday I bought my underground travelcard online and loaded it onto my phone. My wife asked if I could do the same for her. Nope. Because Apple hasn't granted permission to use NFC for ticket validation.
She has to pay for a dedicated physical card and load her options onto that.
Ask them specifically if they are aware of software, app store, wallet and payment limitations.
I will add that while setting up the iPhone late last year, the process was very aggressive on trying to get my wife's card into Apple Pay. And nagged afterwards.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
But it’s the exact same concept. Either way, digital or physical, developers pay a platform fee for the privilege of accessing Nintendos reknow loyal customer base. This is true for digital sales as well as physical.
It's not the exact same concept. As a customer, you are not forced to purchase digital games in their store. You can go to many retailers and purchase games in physical media. Apple force every customer to purchase apps only in digital form from their app store. That's the difference I pointed out.
“Nintendo has hardware and software preventing unauthorized games/apps from playing. “
Every console has a mechanism to prevent unauthorized games. I don't see any issues with that.
The reason why game console users can purchase games (for their game consoles) on a physical media from third party retail stores, is because their game consoles have a physical media drive. Apple iOS devices have no such physical media drive from which the users can load apps. So it's hardly logical to claim that somehow Apple is being anti-competitive because one can't buy apps for iOS at any third party retail store, like one can buy games (on a physical media) for a game console. That's comparing apple to oranges.
The question should be can one download any games for their game console, from a third party app store? Can game console owners download a game at a Walmart retail store, like they can buy the physical media of that game? Why not? You seem to think that it makes no difference because both are "digital". Games consoles only have one app store from which the user can purchase downloaded games to play on their console. The same as Apple for their iOS devices.
Newer game consoles can be bought without a disc drive, thus forcing users to download their games from the single app store on their console. But many gamers still buy the console with the disc drive because they have an older library of games on disc. Plus many gamers would rather buy the game on a disc because they can sell it after they no longer want to play the game. And also buy used game discs at a discount. Thus cutting down on the cost of playing games with their consoles.
So the real comparison should be between an iOS device and a game console without a physical media drive. And in both cases, the user is forced to download their apps from the device maker's own app store. While game console makers are obligated to make game consoles with a physical media drive to appease their users, Apple (and most mobile device makers), see no need to have a physical media drive built into their device. And I would say that nearly all mobile device users do not want or need one. Why would any mobile device owner want to drive to a retail store, to buy apps on a physical media, for their mobile devices? Because they want to be able to buy apps from other parties ..... get real.
According to another article these are the things they've been looking into:
How the Apple Watch works better with iPhone than other smart watches do.
How Apple locks competitors out of iMessage.
How Apple blocks other financial firms from offering tap-to-pay services similar to Apple Pay on the iPhone.
Whether Apple favors its own apps and services over those provided by third-party developers.
How Apple has blocked cloud gaming apps from the App Store.
How Apple restricts the iPhone's location services from devices that compete with AirTag.
How App Tracking Transparency impacted the collection of advertising data.
In-app purchase fees collected by Apple.
(Numbered only so I can address them specifically here.)
Is probably just because Apple has great engineers.
Totally Apple's prerogative.
Might be a bit sketchy of Apple—and a legitimate reason for consumer/owner/user complaints.
Not sure exactly what number 4 means.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
Might be sketchy of Apple too.
Not sure about this one.
Would be solved by allowing users to load apps from alternative app stores.
All and all, of the various claims, complaints, and concerns leveled against Apple I would say that not allowing users to load apps from sources other than the Apple App Store perhaps carries the most legitimate weight. This is a bone that Apple can—and should—throw the regulators and anti-trust litigators before it's too late. What's more, Apple should seriously leave even more heavily into enabling a gold-standard platform for web apps (i.e., Progressive Web Apps). Surely they can't be making so much money from the App Store to risk bringing the rest of their profit and revenue structure come tumbling down. Just build the best damn phone (or tablet or computer) for running almost any kind of app (i.e., native, web, etc.) and loaded from anywhere. Do this and much of this brouhaha ends overnight.
Apple owns their platform: 1st party devices only, the OS and platform only goes on their devices, and as such, every item on the list you have is up to them and them only.
Interesting perspective. The implication is that Apple "owns" the devices that I have purchased.
Bottom line is that I should be allowed to install apps from anyone I choose to.
(NOTE: For some of the other items like Messages, I agree, that's their platform. But there's clearly a line here where Apple is extending its controlling, authoritarian hand into a device that I have paid for—and handsomely I might add.)
Either way, Apple best be careful here.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get copy or change it and git your money back.
And downloading software from somewhere else does neither of those. That's crazy talk.
Apple owns the Software OS, you own the hardware as is you don't get to copy the software and sell it separately not without the hardware.
Stop it. No one is suggesting doing that. People just want to be able to download apps without (necessarily) getting them from Apple's App Store. This is not complicated or unreasonable. Except for Apple Fanbois I suppose.
And Nintendo customers want to download games from Steam. When you buy Apple, you buy Apple. If you want the Wild West, you buy android.
Remember that Nintendo customers are not forced to purchase digital games from Nintendo. They have the option to purchase physical games from many retailers. That option does not exist for iOS / iPadOS customers.
Do you have any issues running macOS, that is in the same line of Android and the "Wild West"?
macOS is no where near as safe, (from a security and privacy standpoint), as iOS. It's not even a race. And this is mainly due to the fact that macOS (including Mac OS and OSX) was built from the ground up to allow "sideloading". This is what consumers expected their laptop and desktop computers to be able to do. Back then and even now, hardly any consumers would purchase a laptop or desktop, that didn't allow "sideloading".
On the other hand, iOS (including iPhone OS) was built from the ground up with security and privacy as its main priority. It has never allowed "sideloading" in its over 15 year history. And yet there are 1.5B Apple iOS devices in use Worldwide. With annual sales in the hundreds of millions and most of those sales are to repeat customers. I doesn't seem that not being able to sideload (or having only one app store on iOS), are issues with the vast majority of consumers buying Apple iOS devices.
macOS and iOS / iPadOS share a lot of security mechanisms, so they are close from a security POV. I agree that sideloading could have some impact in the level of security of devices. But does it mean it become the "Wild West" as you said? I haven't seen that in macOS, Windows, Linux or even Android devices.
And now a days, with the amount of personal, financial and medical data that consumers have on their mobile devices, the OS's on mobile devices should be much, much more safer, (from a security and privacy standpoint), than the OS's on our laptops and desktops. Saying the iOS only needs to be as safe as macOS is a losing argument.
For some reason, security for you is based on the device, but I think should be more. For example. why my mobile device should be more secure, when I use my Mac / PC to manage financial, private or sensitive data? Both devices should be secure, don't you think? Also, it has been many years, at least from what I remember, that sideloading an application caused a major security issue in macOS, Windows, Linux or Android.
Do you have any issue with that? It's the market that should determine whether Apple should allow sideloading or third party app stores with their iOS devices. Not because of the needs of the few that wants to "sideload" apps from developers that are trying to bypass the Apple App Store because they don't want to pay Apple anything in order to profit from an ecosystem that Apple built from the ground up or their apps can not pass Apple App Store policies to be in the Apple App Store. These few iPhone and iPad users (that wants to sideload and more than one app stores) have over a dozen other brand mobile phones and tablets to chose from, that will allows sideloading and with more than one app stores. And it shouldn't matter to them if these devices are not as safe as iOS, if sideloading and having more than one app store means that much to them.
Apple iOS devices are the choice of consumers that place a high value on security and privacy and it doesn't matter to them that there is no sideloading and only one app store on their devices. And being able to buy a device from a company that also places high value on security and privacy should not be taken away from them because of the few selfish ones that thinks it's better for consumers if iOS was more like Android. Apple is not forcing consumers to buy their iOS devices. They are giving consumers a choice of using devices that has proven to be much safer than Android devices. Choice is good for competition. Competition is good for consumers.
If the market should determine whether Apple should allow sideloading, should Apple allow sideloading first? Because as today, Apple is then one deciding that their customers should not sideload apps in their mobile devices. I agree that most users don't care for sideloading, and they will keep using Apple App Store for their downloads. I know I will keep using the Apple App Store, unless there is a better option than what we have with Apple. For example, there are rumors that MS is creating a gaming app store. I will have no issues trusting an apps store from MS, and I don't think it could compromise my device security. At the same time, it will improve the experience of my device, since MS is far better than Apple at gaming.
BTW- Yes, Nintendo customers are forced to buy their Nintendo game console games from Nintendo. It doesn't matter that you can buy a Nintendo games disc from retailers, only Nintendo can make the games disc for their game consoles. Can any game developer make game discs for Nintendo game consoles and sell it at a GameStop or Walmart or BestBuy? You can only buy game console games from the maker of the game console. Either downloads or disc. Game consoles ecosystem are close systems. You can only "sideload" games that the maker of the game consoles allows you to. They are not like computer OS's or Android at all.
I just pointed out that you can purchase Nintendo games physical media in different retailers, and you are not forced to use the app store.
Because in order to make the macOS more secure, Apple would have to prevent sideloading and the purchasing apps from third party app stores. That is not going to happen. Its too late for that. Apple goal is to make iOS more secure than macOS, not just as secure. Just as secure is not enough, if Apple can make it more secure. Over 85% of iOS users will ever need or want to sideload or purchase apps from a third party store (and have to pay using some other method besides their Apple ID (iTunes) account). That is about the how it is with Android and Android is much less safer than iOS. So why should Apple comprise on security and privacy, for the less than 15%, just to be like Android?
Using an iPad is much, much safer, if it can replace your Mac laptop.
The biggest security issue now a days are phishing scams where one is tricked into downloading malware into their device. Because iOS do not allow the installation of software from any other source, other than from the Apple App store, it is very difficult for scammers to trick iOS users into downloading malware. Therefore, iOS shouldn't be as safe as needed, for the users that knows better. It should be as safe as possible, for the users that don't know any better.
Comments
Is this journalism or ChatGPT ?
Well I can go into any supermarket and buy a physical Apple Gift Card and then exchange that for any app(s) I like. No difference except no sellling of things second-hand which isn’t a big deal seeing as apps cost far far less now than software did before the iPhone. It does remind me of Metallica though
I’d rather Apple got rid of the free pricing tier and banned all ads from apps.
I once wrote an app and it was installed/used on more than 100x the devices that it was purchased for. Piracy on iOS is still alive & well so people can install software from places other than the app-store if they have enough will to do so but it means voiding their warranty. To be honest I’m a techie and over the years I’ve been astounded at ordinary people in the street that didn’t work in IT that have had jail-broken iPhones. Cydia does still exist btw.
This whole issue is about money and the only gripes are from massive multi-million dollar companies like Epic/Spotify. The little and the average developer is just fine with things as they are.
For some reason, security for you is based on the device, but I think should be more. For example. why my mobile device should be more secure, when I use my Mac / PC to manage financial, private or sensitive data? Both devices should be secure, don't you think? Also, it has been many years, at least from what I remember, that sideloading an application caused a major security issue in macOS, Windows, Linux or Android.
If the market should determine whether Apple should allow sideloading, should Apple allow sideloading first? Because as today, Apple is then one deciding that their customers should not sideload apps in their mobile devices. I agree that most users don't care for sideloading, and they will keep using Apple App Store for their downloads. I know I will keep using the Apple App Store, unless there is a better option than what we have with Apple. For example, there are rumors that MS is creating a gaming app store. I will have no issues trusting an apps store from MS, and I don't think it could compromise my device security. At the same time, it will improve the experience of my device, since MS is far better than Apple at gaming.
I just pointed out that you can purchase Nintendo games physical media in different retailers, and you are not forced to use the app store.
That would undoubtedly kill the appeal of the devices.
Is there a halfway house option?
Probably. Require that users understand the limitations it imposes over their choices and get them to sign off on it before purchase.
That might work, but would Apple choose that route and spell out in black and white (and up front) those limitations?
I'd love for Tim Cook to be posed that question.
The answer would be 'no' and the result is that Apple will simply adapt to the requirements imposed by governments. Directly or indirectly, that is what it has done up to now.
Customers are never informed of the limitations Apple imposes, much less required to sign off on them.
(Non-iOS Example: Apple is trying to establish iPad as a music production platform. Third-party plugins almost all have their own store/management platforms on Windows/Mac. How many iPad purchasers are clear on the fact that these industry-standard plugins are probably never going to be available on iPadOS unless they can be distributed through an iPad port their own store platform? How many will even know or care to ask the right questions?)
I knew the situation very well but still bought an iPhone 14 Pro Max.
Knowing the situation doesn't mean agreeing with it.
Apple definitely never ever speaks of the restrictions it imposes. We know why.
Apple always takes advantage of whatever others say to insert the protection/privacy angle which isn't relevant in the slightest to why they are on the hook.
Jfc, tell me you know nothing about what you're talking about without... etc.
And I'm very happy with my iPhone, with no intentions to change. But at the same time, I don't think iOS / iPadOS will be become Android or be a worst OS if Apple is forced to open to more app stores.
I make a point of it. I know people who have used iPhones since iPhone 4 and they are wholly unaware of the restrictions.
Just yesterday I bought my underground travelcard online and loaded it onto my phone. My wife asked if I could do the same for her. Nope. Because Apple hasn't granted permission to use NFC for ticket validation.
She has to pay for a dedicated physical card and load her options onto that.
Ask them specifically if they are aware of software, app store, wallet and payment limitations.
I will add that while setting up the iPhone late last year, the process was very aggressive on trying to get my wife's card into Apple Pay. And nagged afterwards.