For example:
- You MUST use Apple’s own apps (iMessage, Phone, etc.) as well as Apple’s own App Store
- To be fair, the EU is doing work to solve this particular issue…but most of the reforms are only for EU customers
- You have to use WebKit when developing a browser for
macOSiOS and iPadOS, you can’t use Gecko or Blink - iOS apps must be developed using XCode IF YOU WANT TO PUBLISH IT ON THE APP STORE, which is only available on MacOS…
That last one is weird. Why can’t you compile Swift outside of MacOS (i.e. third party IDEs)? Why can only XCode do it?
edit: Gecko and Blink based browsers are available on macOS. I learnt something new today. Not for iOS or iPadOS though. Also, Xcode is only a requirement for publishing in the App Store. You are able to compile Swift in any OS. You’ll just need to distribute the app via sideloading and/or third-party app stores (in the EU)
did license macOS out several decades ago. There were issues between hardware and software so they quit and brought it back under their umbrella so it’s integrated. That’s my understanding. was nothing much when the iPhone came out.
Global anti-trust efforts are simply not very strong and never have been. They make for boring political platforms and are constantly under attack by corporate actors.
Ideally no business should ever be allowed to grow to the point of being able to exert political influence at all let alone rival the power of small nations, but here we are.
Any rational enterprise will employ all and any anti-competitive practices that it can come up with - if it can get away with them. And the more influence the business exerts, the more it can get away with.
I find it really weird that some of this is even possible. How do they only let you make MacOS/iOS apps in XCode???
That’s false (or a lie because you seem to know a lot about tools). macOS is a Unix system with a lot of compilers. You can also write iOS applications with React or Kotlin.
Last but not least, they are not a monopoly, they make money with expensive phones. You’re free to buy another brand.
Edit: downvoted for stating simple facts, feels like good old reddit.
You can compile iOS apps other ways… But IIRC to publish them on the app store you’re supposed to use XCode
Yes but OP is trolling in easy mode and forgot a lot of details.
I’ve always heard that you need XCode + macOS to develop iOS apps. Maybe I’m wrong. Who knows?
As an app dev im pretty sure you cannot actually compile an iOS app on let’s say windows. Although you are free to use things like flutter or KMP and yes your code can be built for iOS on any OS you want, the compiler (the thing that turns code into binary to run on the platform) only exists on MacOS.
So at the end of the day you will need a Mac to be able to actually run your code on an iphone.
Because america is for the companies, not its citizens
Funny enough, apples behavior was enabled by microsoft setting really shitty precedents in the 90s. oh whoops!
Seriously though microsoft was a force in the 90s and early 2000s. If you weren’t around for it you simply don’t realize how insane it was for something like computing to have come around and quickly take over the world with microsoft being the thing. you only had a pc (or maybe laptop). That pc ran windows over 90% of the time, and you used internet explorer over 90% of the time. Like I’m not making this up, IE, the worst browser of all time, peaked at 95% market share in 2002.
Nowadays edge is a minor contender but a distant third (chrome about 70%, safari about 17%, edge about 5, Firefox 2.5). Windows market share still dominates on PC but has fallen significantly from 90+% in the 1990s to 75ish% for windows 10 and falling. Plus nowadays people don’t use PCs nearly as much. I’m on a phone right now, which is the dominant computing device (and windows phone was a joke)
Anyway in true American capitalistic fashion when they had this undeniable monopoly apple was a joke at the time and Linux was for extreme hobbyists and servers and such. So what did microsoft do? Destroy competition, destroy any political machinations that could threaten their future with hefty lobbying, destroy open standards in favor of their own proprietary bullshit, etc. Europe attempted some antitrust stuff against them similar to what is happening to google now (to forcefully break off IE from windows) but it was unsuccessful
So when you’re frustrated about the fact that tech does not play nice together? Does not adhere to open standards, forces proprietary bullshit on you, open displays anti competitive and anti consumer behavior? Blame microsoft and politicians that were grossly ignorant to a rapidly changing world (although to be fair you don’t have to be a tech genius to understand that computers being forced to work with each other and have transparency in how they work is beneficial)
And the next time you see some dork praising bill gates for being the “cool billionaire” because he has a charity remember that his wealth is built on these destructive practices. He lead microsoft through this period and this doesn’t even touch on how he destroyed countless businesses that dared to compete by leveraging the size of his company (eg draining their resources with lawsuits) rather than competing fair and square.
He personally fucked the landscape of technological advancement for generations on top of that because he had the arrogance to think that microsoft knew how best to handle it. Now it’s blown up and he doesn’t care because he got his bag. His charity is the same problem: he holds his wealth and decides what causes are worthwhile, like a king. Fuck him, and fuck all the technocrats that have no sense of ethics aside from “make me more money and do whatever I want”.
windows phone was a joke
No. It was leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else. They just sat on their hands and didn’t do anything with it, allowing Google, RiM and Apple to steamroll them.
And to blame Microsoft (which – don’t get me wrong – is hugely evil and truly is the cause behind many of the problems you properly identify) for all of the tech problems without a hat tip to IBM is missing some important details. IBM showed the tech world that if you use your war chest to drag out a legal battle long enough, you will eventually get a president in power (Reagan) that you own enough to dismiss all claims. That’s how Microsoft got off without even a fine for all their antitrust violations. They played the long game and George W. waved a hand, making the enforcement effort go away.
woah ms did a lot of things
tldr: if Apple does something bad, blame Microsoft?
at no point did I deny apples practices are shitty and anti consumer
but the history of how we got here is that microsoft spent time lobbying hard to make sure that companies like apple could do exactly what they are doing
apple is far from the only one who does it as well? Basically every modern tech giant flexes their anti consumer muscle every day. the one defense of apple is that you can basically avoid their shit by not buying it, as opposed to a company like google who are actively vying to utilize their extreme dominance in browser market share to change the internet forever to make adblocking impossible (very similar to 90s microsoft behavior)
Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it, etc etc
Sorry you were challenged to read what was roughly 3/4 of a page. Maybe this is more digestible for you
Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem blaming both Apple and Microsoft. Corporations are not my friends 😁
Missing the news lately?
A billionaire bought the white house.
Enjoy Oligarchy! 🫠
Because the political right doesn’t actually like functional markets.
Free markets are mostly a myth.
entirely free markets result in facebook, google, amazon, but worse, where they have absolutely no restrictions. a. iddle ground is needed, that we don’t have currently
How is it allowed? That’s the American way, baby!
How is it possible? People buying Apple products. Their walled garden seems to be a point of pride amongst many users. Not many people actually need Apple products, it’s a choice.
Apple isn’t a monopoly.
In personal computing and smartphones, Apple has competition. Because Apple has competition, even if it is only one other major company, Apple won’t be forced to unbundle services.
Do you at least concede that it has the behaviors similar to that of a monopoly.
Yeah, but the law genuinely treats (near-)monopolies differently from their competitors. What’s legal for a small company does not have to be for a company which dominates the market.
The thing is, laws are supposed to bring the greatest benefit to a society. In most cases, fairness aids that goal. But that’s not the case for competition laws, which is why they’re relatively unintuitive.
Monopolies are not the only thing that governments are supposed to prevent. Anti competitive practices are supposed to be illegal regardless of monopoly status. The same is true of cartel behavior.
Regulations on cartel behavior is usually linked more to price fixing, not industry practice. Also, there is consumer choice on being forced into a single app store, get an Android phone.
And Apple has been forced to allow for in app purchases, the most cartel like behavior between the two stores.
Corruption
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
While I broadly agree with your sentiment,
Why can’t you compile Swift outside of MacOS
You can compile Swift on Windows and Linux. There are other tools required to build macOS and iOS-apps bundled with XCode that prevents building those on other platforms, but Swift itself is available standalone.
Swift compiles anywhere.
If Apple were the only player on the block, at least in Europe they would be under a lot more pressure. But they’re not. There are other OSs (although only one really matters), there are other phone makers.
Antitrust is more reactive. There is a market, a dominant player, said player plays unfairly, the authorities react. That reaction takes years to go through all the levels of courts available. By the time we get a final ruling, the market has long moved on. The corporations know that too. As long as the lawyers are cheaper than the money they stand to lose they will carry on.
And in Apple’s defense: the mobile operating system market is not that old. And it’s not clearly defined. And as long as there is wiggle room they can do whatever they want. Part of the problem is that the legislation dealing with antitrust on either side of the Atlantic is like copyright law: no longer fit for purpose.
Apple actually open sourced Swift language, and it’s available for other operating systems as well: https://www.swift.org/
Xcode is the app you need to use, if you want to submit your app to macOS or iOS App Store. You can build macOS apps with other tools, but you can’t distribute them in the App Store. There are developers who sell their apps through their own websites, or through other marketplaces, such as Steam. And while you can build iOS apps with other tools as well, it’s mostly pointless as you can’t distribute them, because iPhone doesn’t support sideloading. Jailbroken iPhones are an exemption to that.
ah that makes sense. So you need to use Xcode if you want to be on the App Store. So you can still use third-party apps, but you’ll either need to distribute via sideloading or an alternative app store (in the EU)
You don’t have to jailbreak to sideload apps on iOS and this hasn’t been the case for a long time. The problem is that if you’re not in the EU, it’s still not as straightforward as it really should be. But it can be done.
Because it’s the top American company. US protects Apple and allies can’t work against that. Now that US and EU relationship is deteriorating we’ll see loads of lawsuits against Apple pop up in Europe.
How do you define ‘top company’?
Probably market cap
And cultural impact. Americans are super patriotic about Apple and don’t even notice it.
Eh, they’re perceived as more “lefty” than most of the stereotypically “patriotic” corporations of the US.
There are a couple of reasons for this: (1) Steve Jobs has/had a “crunchy granola” reputation (despite likely being a crypto fascist) due to likening himself to civil rights leaders and other “woke” people and living in California, and (2) they have a large amount of usage by people in the creative arts such as music producers, visual artists, and other people who the right would call “woke” without blinking an eye.
I think it’s all perception, and they are easily just as fascistic as the rest of the corporations. But they try to stay on the good side of a lot of people that care deeply – or at least claim to care deeply – about eroding democratic norms, and the rolling back of people’s rights and that produce a lot of the cultural artifacts the right largely hates, but are broadly-speaking massively popular.
What the hell rock have you been living under? Apple has been an abusive walled garden for many years.
I’m just interested to know how they’re able to make it so that you HAVE to use XCode (which is only available on MacOS)
Why wouldn’t they be able to? Acceptance to their App Store requires that apps be built with a trusted tool chain. Their reasoning is that it’s harder to built malicious apps that might make it past review if you’re using their tools.
Also: Money
You don’t really; a cross compilation with a compiler that can generate the ARM instructions for Apple’s ARM CPUs should largely just work.
However, it’s impossible to test the produced app without using an iPhone or MacOS’s tools to simulate running on an iPhone. You also are just going to have way less of an uphill battle using Apple’s tools and you’re likely to get better optimized binaries.
You also don’t have to build iOS apps with Swift; C++ and things like Qt can be used.
Also the iOS SDK isn’t freely available, so you’d have to copy that out of an Xcode installation… but given enough time and effort, you could almost certainly hack together a cross-compilation config for Clang that compiles an unsigned iOS app on Linux. Signing it might in fact be the bigger issue, since I’m not aware of any tools that sign Mach-O binaries on Linux.
Something to implement signing given the key to sign with could almost certainly be created.
I think the biggest reason this stuff hasn’t really happened is … there’s not much motivation and Apple will likely respond to such efforts unkindly so you might need to be a bit of a curious masochist (or at least in strange circumstances) to attempt such an effort 😅
The walled garden is the appeal to many of their customers.
To whom is it abusive?
Just because people like being abused doesn’t mean it’s not abuse.
Developers get shafted pretty hard by Apple, if nobody else.
I don’t use iOS anymore but users don’t complain about the walled garden, or they would buy an Android. They want their phone to work reliably like a washing machine with a few buttons, and it’s an acceptable personal choice.
Edit: now you’re downvoting the fact that people have different preferences than you. Pathetic.
That’s right.
I’m 46, I just want my stuff to work. Couldn’t care less about all the customisation arguments.
I’m not a software hobbyist anymore. I don’t want to spend hours doing research and trying to de-enshittify my new phone. I know Apple is ripping me off, but if one believes that time is money, it’s actually tolerable. Then there’s the UI, which I believe is the best in the market.
I’m not a fan of Apple’s walled garden, but for me, it’s the lesser evil. If someone goes with Samsung or something, though, I’d be a dick if I was a snob about it. Use what you like!
