← Back to context

Comment by bardak

2 years ago

The most compelling argument I can see is that due to its market share businesses cannot avoid dealing with the app store and it's fees.

15 comments

bardak

Reply
endisneigh  2 years ago

But they can though, there are plenty of apps that are android exclusive.

  • madsbuch  2 years ago

    Would it be OK for your bank to exclusively support Android? Would it be OK for government apps to only support Android.

    Of course not.

    • endisneigh  2 years ago

      What’s the relevance of that? If that were the case the law should be to make everything available by the web which is inherently interoperable, which I think we both agree with, but still doesn’t have anything to do with Apple.

      2 replies →

    • danaris  2 years ago

      No more than it would be OK for government apps to support only iPhone.

      What's your point here? AFAIK, there aren't any important government apps or bank apps that are exclusive to the iPhone, nor is there any pressure Apple is putting on banks or governments to be exclusive to them.

      It sounds like you made a completely unjustifiable leap from "because of the popularity of the iPhone, governments and banks need to make sure they have iPhone apps (because it's discriminatory and irresponsible of basic services like these not to support a widely-used computing platform)" to "Apple is forcing governments and banks to exclusively support iPhone".

  • zmmmmm  2 years ago

    You don't think losing access to ~50% of the market is a disadvantage for a business?

  • cush  2 years ago

    No they can’t because consumers have already made that choice. It’s done. We are talking about this moment in time, not some fantasy world where everyone ditched their iPhones.