[healsdata]

Why is that? If an App Store is cruel to the app developers, either through terms or actions, why should developers be forced to support them?

This is particularly important for stores like Amazon which dictate things you're allowed to do with your app outside of the Amazon store. (i.e., you can't charge a lower fee outside of Amazon regardless of what Amazon is charging you.)

[pchristensen]

Because the App Store acts as the user's agent. I have no ability to force Facebook not to track me, but Apple can. In the GP's comment, think of the App Stores as a jurisdiction and set of rules that the app maker and user agree on. Maybe Facebook doesn't want to follow Apple's rules, but I don't want to use Facebook on Android's terms.

[DougWebb]

So... don't install Facebook unless it's from the Apple App store. Problem solved, right?

[filoleg]

That's why the grandparent comment said "I'd support this if app developers were also required to release their apps on all the available stores".

Without that clause, your approach wouldn't work, because what incentive would Facebook even have to release it on the Apple App Store and follow Apple's tighter privacy/anti-tracking rules, when they can just release it on the Facebook App Store for iOS (or whatever else they decide to call it or, alternatively, another third-party app store)?

Sure, having third-party app stores helps smaller devs. But it also unchains all the anti-tracking and privacy shackles from the tech giants like FB who don't care which app store they are on (as long as they can set their own rules), because FB/Instagram/etc. users will follow to whatever app store their app is on (no matter how much or how little privacy protection that specific app store is willing to enforce on FB).

[rahkiin]

Facebook might not be the best example of course, but I shudder when thinking about apps I truly need… WhatsApp in Europe is 90% of friend communication. Banking apps and other 2fa apps are required to do any banking.

[michaelmrose]

Why ought a developer be forced to accept all terms on offer?

If I released an app store that forced you to offer the app for the lowest price it's available elsewhere while charging the dev 1/2 of the profit and inspired users to use it by giving them a rebate equal to 30% of the cost I presume I could get some takers.

After all if it's 10 bucks on the apple store it's 7 on mine.

3rd party stores aren't a check on unreasonable terms if developers are legally forced to do business on the oems terms no matter how unreasonable.

[llukas]

User bought platform that requires app to comply with do not track me request from the user. It is property of each app.

Do not want to respect it but still be on the platform? Please gtfo…

[stale2002]

> Do not want to respect it but still be on the platform? Please gtfo…

You don't have to install those apps, lol. You can feel free to tell Facebook to GTFO off of the phone that you own, by merely not installing it.

But why should one think, that they should control someone 'elses' phone? If someone else wants to install facebook, on that other app store, let them do it.

[LadyCailin]

That has nothing to do with the App Store, but rather the platform which the app runs on.

[pchristensen]

The App Store is an important part of the platform - what 3rd party dev can and can't do, and how I as a user interact with them. My experience as a user it better because of the rules Apple forces app developers to follow.

[LadyCailin]

Yeah, but that’s just laziness on Apple’s part. They could easily move those restrictions to the OS itself, rather than the App Store. Then, it would be consistently applied, since it wouldn’t be done by human review.

[fhood]

because most pc steam competitors are 1 step removed from malware and yet I am virtually required to install them. Or take the moral high ground, but that sucks.

[michaelmrose]

Why are you required to install them?