Coinbase CEO says App Store policies stifle innovation in cryptocurrency

Posted:
in General Discussion
Brian Armstrong, CEO of digital currency exchange Coinbase, on Friday made an argument that Apple's App Store regulations stifle innovation in the cryptocurrency space.

App Store


Detailed in a Twitter thread, Armstrong's assessment of current App Store policy targets Apple's numerous and specific restrictions on digital currency handling.

As it pertains to Coinbase, which markets an iOS app, the rules disallow the company from earning money using cryptocurrency and accessing decentralized finance apps. The latter limitation is of particular interest to the wider cryptocurrency segment, according to Armstrong.

"DeFi and Dapps are a major area of innovation in financial services that has seen rapid growth lately. They let people get access to a global credit market to get a loan or earn interest, for instance," Armstrong said in a tweet. "Dapps or DeFi apps are fundamentally just websites that you can access through any browser. So Apple is essentially saying you can't provide users with a list of websites they can visit through an app."

He goes on to note the potential impact Dapps and DeFi apps have on emerging markets and, more pointedly, underserved communities. The technology can, for example, provide an alternative source of funding and loans in parts of the world where banks are not available or otherwise inaccessible.

For Armstrong, Apple's rules on cryptocurrency smack of anticompetitive strategies Microsoft employed -- pushing Windows users to Internet Explorer -- more than 20 years ago. Those tactics led to government scrutiny and an antitrust case that initially sought to break up the software monolith.

"Forcing users to use the App Store instead of Dapps (websites), or IAP instead of crypto payments, reminds me of what Microsoft did back in the day (forcing users to use IE if you were on Windows) which led to all their antitrust issues," Armstrongs says.

Armstrong points out that many cryptocurrency apps are missing features because they are being "censored" by Apple.

The Coinbase CEO plans to submit a formal challenge to Apple's App Store guidelines under a new review process the tech giant announced in June.

Today's Twitter thread on App Store cryptocurrency restrictions arrives amid heated debate over Apple's handling of third-party apps. A number of developers have openly criticized the company over its revenue sharing policies. In August, Epic Games filed a private antitrust suit against Apple over App Store fees and restrictions barring third-party app stores, while an ongoing U.S. congressional investigation seeks to determine whether the tech giant breached antitrust laws.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 55
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    They're all just copy-pasting the same response now.
    tmayanantksundaramCuJoYYCpairof9larryjwDnykjpRfC6fnBsRayz2016StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 55
     '"Forcing users to use the App Store instead of Dapps (websites), or IAP instead of crypto payments, reminds me of what Microsoft did back in the day (forcing users to use IE if you were on Windows) which led to all their antitrust issues," Armstrongs says. '

    No Mr. Armstrong.  Windows had a monopoly (okay an overwhelmingly dominant market position) in desk/laptop OSes.  iPhone doesn't even have a majority of the smartphone market.  Your analogy doesn't apply.  Complaining that Apple is a monopoly because it is the sole seller of Apple iPhones is like accusing Audi of monopolizing the market for Audi cars.  It's stupid talk.

    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?

    Frankly, cryptocurrencies have not proved their value to society.  Even on a conceptual basis no one has made a credible case yet on how you can stop criminals from using it to conduct illegal transactions.
    edited September 2020 mistergsftmaymike1macseekerchiadhawkins541rotateleftbytemuthuk_vanalingamMplsPwilliamlondon
  • Reply 3 of 55
    tundraboy said:
     '"Forcing users to use the App Store instead of Dapps (websites), or IAP instead of crypto payments, reminds me of what Microsoft did back in the day (forcing users to use IE if you were on Windows) which led to all their antitrust issues," Armstrongs says. '

    No Mr. Armstrong.  Windows had a monopoly (okay an overwhelmingly dominant market position) in desk/laptop OSes.  iPhone doesn't even have a majority of the smartphone market.  Your analogy doesn't apply.  Complaining that Apple is a monopoly because it is the sole seller of Apple iPhones is like accusing Audi of monopolizing the market for Audi cars.  It's stupid talk.

    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?

    Frankly, cryptocurrencies have not proved their value to society.  Even on a conceptual basis no one has made a credible case yet on how you can stop criminals from using it to conduct illegal transactions.
    I still don't fully comprehend how Bitcoin works let-alone "cryptocurrencies".
    guymanchestermwhitewatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 55
    mistergsf said:
    tundraboy said:
     '"Forcing users to use the App Store instead of Dapps (websites), or IAP instead of crypto payments, reminds me of what Microsoft did back in the day (forcing users to use IE if you were on Windows) which led to all their antitrust issues," Armstrongs says. '

    No Mr. Armstrong.  Windows had a monopoly (okay an overwhelmingly dominant market position) in desk/laptop OSes.  iPhone doesn't even have a majority of the smartphone market.  Your analogy doesn't apply.  Complaining that Apple is a monopoly because it is the sole seller of Apple iPhones is like accusing Audi of monopolizing the market for Audi cars.  It's stupid talk.

    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?

    Frankly, cryptocurrencies have not proved their value to society.  Even on a conceptual basis no one has made a credible case yet on how you can stop criminals from using it to conduct illegal transactions.
    I still don't fully comprehend how Bitcoin works let-alone "cryptocurrencies".
    Bitcoin is covered by the catch-all phrase “cryptocurrencies”. Not all cryptos are created equal, however. For one to succeed these days it must deliver value to the holder beyond just being a commodity for speculative investment.

    There are many educational resources on the web which explain in the broad and fine details what these are and how they differ.

    Here are a few:
    https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/01/02/cryptocurrencies-explained-in-plain-english.aspx

    edited September 2020 mistergsfmuthuk_vanalingamGG1doozydozen
  • Reply 5 of 55
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,133member
    "Forcing users to use the App Store instead of Dapps (websites), or IAP instead of crypto payments, reminds me of what Microsoft did back in the day (forcing users to use IE if you were on Windows) which led to all their antitrust issues," Armstrongs says.

    Fucking idiot.  Microsoft were telling outside computer manufacturers making their own hardware and forcing its will on them.

    Apple sells to no one and makes the entire widget so what Apple wants to do on its own hardware and software is no one else's business.  If this clown really believes it's the same thing then I would love to sell a bridge to him.

    These whiners are really coming out of the woodwork.  

    What these people are realizing is that the Android model makes them little to no money, so they're going after the closed system with loyal users that actually spend money.

    Assholes.
    mike1mikeybabesBeatschiaguymanchesterwilliamlondonCuJoYYCGG1Rayz2016robaba
  • Reply 6 of 55
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,628member
    There must be the smell of blood in the water. 

    Personally I think its a given that Apple will end up modifying the AppStore developer terms. Voluntarily would be the best way but I'm suspecting ti's too late for that with the sharks circling and antitrust investigations underway around the globe. As the App Store goes so will Google Play.
    edited September 2020
  • Reply 7 of 55
    gatorguy said:
    There must be the smell of blood in the water. 

    Personally I think its a given that Apple will end up modifying the AppStore developer terms. Voluntarily would be the best way but I'm suspecting ti's too late for that with the sharks circling and antitrust investigations underway around the globe. As the App Store goes so will Google Play.
    If, and it's a BIG IF, developers are allowed to have their own app stores and payment processing, are they going to follow the same stringent guidelines for reviewing apps that are sold in their app stores?

    Call me a sheep but I really value the feeling of security that Apple provides in determining what apps get on my iPhone. They're not perfect but at least I have trust in their process. I also like the fact that I can easily get a refund when something goes wrong with my purchase or the app does not work as advertised.

    All the talk has been about Apple's 30% cut being unfair and stifling innovation because you can't get on the iPhone unless you go through Apple. Are developers going to help keep malware and data harvesting apps from getting on my iPhone? Is their payment system going to be run directly by the developer or another third party company?
    guymanchesterGG1DnykjpRfC6fnBsrobabaStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 55
    mistergsf said:
    tundraboy said:
     '"Forcing users to use the App Store instead of Dapps (websites), or IAP instead of crypto payments, reminds me of what Microsoft did back in the day (forcing users to use IE if you were on Windows) which led to all their antitrust issues," Armstrongs says. '

    No Mr. Armstrong.  Windows had a monopoly (okay an overwhelmingly dominant market position) in desk/laptop OSes.  iPhone doesn't even have a majority of the smartphone market.  Your analogy doesn't apply.  Complaining that Apple is a monopoly because it is the sole seller of Apple iPhones is like accusing Audi of monopolizing the market for Audi cars.  It's stupid talk.

    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?

    Frankly, cryptocurrencies have not proved their value to society.  Even on a conceptual basis no one has made a credible case yet on how you can stop criminals from using it to conduct illegal transactions.
    I still don't fully comprehend how Bitcoin works let-alone "cryptocurrencies".
    I have a feeling I'm going to get flamed for this but IDGAS. 
    I have looked into them. I do understand them. I saw them appear over a decade ago and watched them grow. I stayed well clear from them because they are a scam.
    Basically a bitcoin is an imaginary bag of nothing. It is worth what the other people with these bags of nothing to pay, but there is in fact nothing there. 
    People who mine them with other people's electricity might come out ahead. The people who set up this scam did great, because they set it up so the nothings were easy to mine early on. The people who come later find it much harder to mine them, so they pay real money for these nothings. The people who set these schemes collected their money and got out. People who put real money into them are likely going to lose everything.
    Can you say Ponzi Scheme?
    So I'm very happy with Apple not allowing Coinbase to keep doing their racket. 
    edited September 2020 mikeybabeschiarotateleftbytemuthuk_vanalingamGG1tobybeaglemwhitethtrobabawatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 55
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,299member
    The blockchain technologies are interesting from a secure transaction perspective, and yes currency is worth what people believe it is. Like any modern currency. USD$1 is worth USD$1 until it isn’t. Same with these crypto currencies.

    from a blockchain perspective, the app transaction is with Apple, not the purchaser I guess, and Apple isn’t telling. So that places a limit on how secure the chain is. Very secure from Apple’s perspective, and secure for the app developer, but not enough transparency for their desire. It also limits monetisation fir them. Boo hoo.
    edited September 2020
  • Reply 10 of 55
    larryjwlarryjw Posts: 1,036member
    Cryptocurrencies are the biggest delusions on planet today. 


    williamlondonmacseekercommentzillawatto_cobratokyojimu
  • Reply 11 of 55
    Basically: how are we going to scam our customers if your business model continues to be a pro-privacy one?
    DnykjpRfC6fnBsmattinozwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 55
    DAalseth said:
    mistergsf said:
    tundraboy said:
     '"Forcing users to use the App Store instead of Dapps (websites), or IAP instead of crypto payments, reminds me of what Microsoft did back in the day (forcing users to use IE if you were on Windows) which led to all their antitrust issues," Armstrongs says. '

    No Mr. Armstrong.  Windows had a monopoly (okay an overwhelmingly dominant market position) in desk/laptop OSes.  iPhone doesn't even have a majority of the smartphone market.  Your analogy doesn't apply.  Complaining that Apple is a monopoly because it is the sole seller of Apple iPhones is like accusing Audi of monopolizing the market for Audi cars.  It's stupid talk.

    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?

    Frankly, cryptocurrencies have not proved their value to society.  Even on a conceptual basis no one has made a credible case yet on how you can stop criminals from using it to conduct illegal transactions.
    I still don't fully comprehend how Bitcoin works let-alone "cryptocurrencies".
    I have a feeling I'm going to get flamed for this but IDGAS. 
    I have looked into them. I do understand them. I saw them appear over a decade ago and watched them grow. I stayed well clear from them because they are a scam.
    Basically a bitcoin is an imaginary bag of nothing. It is worth what the other people with these bags of nothing to pay, but there is in fact nothing there. 
    People who mine them with other people's electricity might come out ahead. The people who set up this scam did great, because they set it up so the nothings were easy to mine early on. The people who come later find it much harder to mine them, so they pay real money for these nothings. The people who set these schemes collected their money and got out. People who put real money into them are likely going to lose everything.
    Can you say Ponzi Scheme?
    So I'm very happy with Apple not allowing Coinbase to keep doing their racket. 
    I’m not going to flame you for your post, because it’s a common misperception. Cryptos are still in their growth and development phase and because there are so many of them (besides the mother of them all, Bitcoin) people who haven’t seriously investigated them in all their variety see them as a scam. Yes, some are rather scammy. But the beautiful thing about all of them is the robust competition among their creators to offer something of value that will be used and trusted. The cream of the crop attract R&D money and their ‘coins’ are purchased and held.

    The person (or people) who created Bitcoin did so because they opposed central banking and the fact that it was so easy for people to manipulate fiat currencies and destroy value for the people who are legally required to use that money. Bitcoin was a means to transmit money anywhere in the world, not centrally controlled.

    Here’s a site where the most popular ones are tracked:  https://www.cryptocompare.com/

    But if you really want to learn the nuts and bolts of these things, read the white papers that are commonly used when a new crypto is offered to investors during their ICO (Initial Coin Offering).

    Also, you might want to familiarize yourself with new concept in cryptos, like Hedera Hashgraph, which don’t rely on energy intensive mining the way Bitcoin does. Or read up on Filecoin, which is a means of securely storing nearly limitless amounts of data among computers scattered across the world.

    ————
    *Full disclosure, I hold a small amount of Chainlink (LINK), and I am loosely to moderately well-informed about a number of cryptos. I am not an expert, nor am I offering anything approaching investment advice.
    edited September 2020 dhawkins541GG1tommikele
  • Reply 13 of 55

    larryjw said:
    Cryptocurrencies are the biggest delusions on planet today. 
    One might counter argue that fiat currencies are the biggest delusion on the planet. All paper money not backed by something of value or subject to “printing” at the whim of a government authorities is less valuable than assets backed by the public ledger that is the blockchain and the more established cryptos cannot simply be “minted” at will. They rely on math for their scarcity and stability.
  • Reply 14 of 55
    If decentralised solutions can't get any traction at all without active support from Apple they're not much of a solution to anything.

    What's happening here is that instead of innovating themselves towards something functional they rather think that they already have the greatest thing ever, but are being persecuted by a society keeping them from liberating the people. (And that's about the honest ones; the rest just want to make easy money from fools believing the hype of cryptocurrencies or are paranoid and don't trust "money".)

    Aaand… on a more technical note: These decentralised apps are a huge failure because everything about using them is a convoluted mess as far as the average consumer is concerned, so what those skimming money of cryptotransactions wants to do is to crack the App Store open such that they can provide the "decentralised" apps in a format that is basically that they run their own appstore within their own app, which they still want Apple to host for them.

    That's not just about the money, but about the (lack of) usability and security for the Apple customer.

    I absolutely support the work towards more decentralised solutions; but that doesn't mean that anyone yelling about decentralisation is owed a payday by existing traditional businesses.
    GG1StrangeDays
  • Reply 15 of 55
    tundraboy said:
    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?


    This is kind of a disingenuous statement because it fails to acknowledge the legitimate users of cryptocurrencies. For instance I blog using the Hive and Publish0x platforms, both of which award posters with cryptocurrencies - Hive and ETH/BAT/LRC respectively.

    When, and I mean When, cryptocurrencies go mainstream then you'll see more normal people using cryptos all over the place. It's a matter of which currency will be used. It pretty much operates the same as a normal currency only it's not controlled by any one entity unlike say the New Zealand Dollar or the US Dollar, etc. As such you can easily buy and sell using crypto anywhere in the world without an exchange. The only time you will need an exchange is if you want to change to another currency either another crypto or a physical currency such as NZD or USD etc.

    You have to remember most of those illegal entities were making tonnes of money using legitimate currencies BEFORE cryptos came on the scene so your arguement about enablement can be said the same for real world currencies can't it.
    edited September 2020 williamlondonGG1SpamSandwichtommikeleStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 55
    stukestuke Posts: 123member
    Wow, all the whiners are coming out now.  Let's gang up on Apple, who created a universe in which all these companies experienced new revenue streams/businesses, and now slam them when they need to continue to pay for that service.  Just pathetic.  The only way you can lobby for increased profits for your shareholders is to blame the very platform on which you created your business.  Why not innovate yourself, the way Apple has for decades?  Why not create something that everyone else needs from you so you too can charge for the service/product you provide to them?  Why not focus on your own capabilities rather than complain, I mean jump on a bandwagon of complainers, and cry foul...I have to pay for this service (App Store)?  That's unfair!  Poor me.  Jeez, you are all a clear bunch of whiners!
    williamlondonCuJoYYCrotateleftbytetobybeagletommikelemontrosemacsStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 55
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 4,027member
    tundraboy said:

    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?

    Frankly, cryptocurrencies have not proved their value to society.  Even on a conceptual basis no one has made a credible case yet on how you can stop criminals from using it to conduct illegal transactions.
    This is my biggest objection to crypto currencies. There may be legitimate investors and speculators, but there are very places that actually use them as payment for goods and services (I.e. a currency’s primary purpose.) Their main use appears to be to allow a save transaction for ransomware, terrorist organizations, etc. 

    As for being an illusion, all currency is an illusion to a certain extent. The difference is dollars, euros, etc are backed by a government. Crypto currencies are backed by nothing. 
    williamlondonRayz2016watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 55
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,930member
    Apple is careful to introduce,allow any technology, Apps that is safe for customers and does not create unnecessary issues in public domain. For example, Facebook don't care long as it makes money of people's misery.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 55
    MplsP said:
    tundraboy said:

    Besides, why would Apple, or any other private company, want to promote a currency and technology that enables drug dealers, cyber criminals, tax evaders, terrorist organizations and all other sorts of nefarious characters?  Why should any private company that is not a monopoly or a public utility be compelled to enter into a line of business that it does not want to be in?  Why is it a private company's obligation to promote a technology that it doesn't want to be involved in?

    Frankly, cryptocurrencies have not proved their value to society.  Even on a conceptual basis no one has made a credible case yet on how you can stop criminals from using it to conduct illegal transactions.
    This is my biggest objection to crypto currencies. There may be legitimate investors and speculators, but there are very places that actually use them as payment for goods and services (I.e. a currency’s primary purpose.) Their main use appears to be to allow a save transaction for ransomware, terrorist organizations, etc. 

    As for being an illusion, all currency is an illusion to a certain extent. The difference is dollars, euros, etc are backed by a government. Crypto currencies are backed by nothing. 
    The US dollar used to be backed by the gold reserve. It’s backed by nothing now. Did you know that the value of a dollar has fallen by 98% since the Federal Reserve was created? Part of that is the planned inflation which is part of the mission of the Federal Reserve, but much of that has happened due to the manipulation of the currency to achieve political ends, such as minimizing unemployment (a completely insane goal, IMO). The USD will eventually collapse because of its valuelessness, never mind the alleged value of the backing of the US government.

    In the case of Bitcoin and other competing cryptos holders have determined are valuable, they’re not “backed by nothing” they are backed by the public ledger, the blockchain. They are scarce resources. Federal Reserve notes are not a scarce resource. They may be increased at any time for any reason.
    edited September 2020
  • Reply 20 of 55
    I find it hilarious the repeated term “stifles innovation”...so what exactly is your business model that it hinges on an “open” App Store?! I mean is Facebook, Instagram, Fortnite, and others really unable to improve their products due to the App Store as it has been for more than a decade?

    (and let’s be honest, Facebook and Instagram are only pissed cuz Apple is giving the users an option to get rid of ads in their apps...an innovative feature!)
    Rayz2016watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.