From a practical standpoint, it’s hard to picture apple permanently preventing google from e.g. dogfooding Google Maps for iOS. I suppose it’s within the realm of possibility, but I don’t see it as likely.
I wouldn’t even look at it from an anticompetitive angle or anything like that. This is a matter of what’s best for apple and its users. They should absolutely do what’s needed to ensure that their terms are obeyed. But permanently banning google is not “what’s needed.” What’s needed is merely to demonstrate that the behavior will not be tolerated going forward. I imagine discussions between corporate lawyers and perhaps a reasonably sized bond would be sufficient to demonstrate google’s sincerity in not repeating the error.
Dogfooding is possible via TestFlight, and Apple moderates it to ensure they aren't breaking the rules before the builds go out, I believe. Enterprise certificates are for pushing applications written for internal use only, like the Facebook lunch app or Google's bus schedule.
Anything that smells anticompetitive is kind of a dangerous dance- by preventing two of their largest competitors from developing on their platform I think they'd be inviting some regulatory scrutiny (even though FB/ Goog DID violate the agreement).
The reality, though, is that this sort of behavior in VERY large, VERY influential companies is going to draw way more scrutiny than a small company getting crushed by one of the big guys.
"Competition" doesn't have to be narrowly defined.
In general, Apple, Google, and Facebook are 3 of the largest technology companies in the world. In general, they have areas where their interests overlap (messaging as one good example of this).
Hindering the ability of Google/ FB to develop on iOS could absolutely be seen as an anticompetitive measure by Apple.
No, Facebook/Google internal apps fall into two categories:
- Utilities that are only useful to employees of those companies (cafeteria menus, shuttle schedules, resources for salespeople on the go, etc.).
- Pre-release/testing (aka dogfood) versions of the apps they distribute to the public, for employees to use and find bugs on before they make it out to normal users.
Neither of those are pools that Apple wants to play in.
...and I guess there's a third category:
- Apps used gain "competitive intelligence" and spy on users.
By making this problem last long they aren't doing anything useful either.
- Bad case, they never restore certificates to G/FB and they end up losing all their employees to Android, with likely ripple effects in their tech sphere of influence.
- Worst case, G/FB retaliate by removing their apps from iOS and it's all out war with everyone losing.
- Best case, they restore them tomorrow with some fanfare and handshakes, but thousands of smaller companies now have been reminded Apple may actually shut them down if they misbehave.
I wouldn’t even look at it from an anticompetitive angle or anything like that. This is a matter of what’s best for apple and its users. They should absolutely do what’s needed to ensure that their terms are obeyed. But permanently banning google is not “what’s needed.” What’s needed is merely to demonstrate that the behavior will not be tolerated going forward. I imagine discussions between corporate lawyers and perhaps a reasonably sized bond would be sufficient to demonstrate google’s sincerity in not repeating the error.