Sixteen years ago today, Apple announced the original iPhone. It was a very limited device that did just a couple tasks. While Apple called it the first real smartphone, it really wasn’t. As of the original release, the iPhone was very much a feature phone. It became the platform everyone wanted it to be about a year and a half later with the release of iPhone OS 2.
While this is a nice little stroll down memory lane, there is actually a point to this. iOS was not intended to be a developable platform. Apple wanted it to run web apps. The hacking of the device and unauthorized apps outside their control forced Apple to re-examine everything and create one of the most successful computing platforms in history. History is about to repeat itself.
The DMA
Sorry Trekkies, the Dark Matter Anomaly isn’t making an appearance in a tech blog. At least not for another 1200 years or so. By that time, everyone not named Lynda Carter will be long gone. Instead, the European Union made this acronym important in another way, The Digital Markets Act requires Online Gatekeepers, and Apple would almost certainly qualify as a gatekeeper, allowing for competition by March of 2024. Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman is reporting that Apple is already working on implementation.
Yes, the DMA legally only affects the European Union and the 447 ish million people of its member states. However, the chances of this being isolated to the EU are remote. You know those online cookie notifications? Those started with EU legislation. Why are they everywhere? Because the tech industry correctly assumed that once implemented for Europe, enough places outside the EU would copy and paste the EU law. Implementing it worldwide was a far easier option than keeping up with individual laws. Essentially this became a template law. It is likely that the DMA and the USB-C charging law will similarly become templates.
One of those states that adopted a variation of the EU Cookie law was Apple’s home state of California. With a significant portion of the US population and the 4th largest economy in the world on its own, where the Golden State goes, the rest of the United States tends to follow.
What Does This Means for Apple and Developers
First, there’s a very good and practical reason Apple would be working on this now. Apple has a very distinct flow when it comes to OS updates. All new updates to the development process are announced in late spring or early summer at WWDC along with the new operating systems. The new operating systems are then released in usually October/ November. This could be held back for a point release, but it would probably be rolled out well in advance to avoid any chance of missing the deadline due to technical challenges. Missing that deadline would result in some very hefty fines for Apple.
Upcoming competition is also likely a reason for Apple’s recent updating of App Store Price Points. For developers, there are additional opportunities, but nothing comes for free. To recoup App Store commissions, Apple is very likely to increase developer fees. As Tim Cook said, Apple would get its commissions one way or another.
What This Would Look Like
For iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV users, we already have a point of reference of how this would work from the Mac, Gatekeeper. More than likely it would be ported over to these platforms. The standard setting would be App Store only. This would be the easiest for normal users who just want to use the platform. The next setting would App Store and Identified Developers. These would be tested and notarized by Apple just as any App Store app would. The third setting would be for non-notarized apps. Non-notarized Apps would previously be available on Intel Macs, so this would presumably make a return to Apple Silicon Macs as well as other platforms.
For high-profile app stores, there may not need to be a side-load at all. Apple made a deal with Amazon a few years back for Prime Video. A special deal could also be offered to high-profile app stores. Valve’s Steam or EA could pay either a lump fee or a smaller percentage and then have their store available on the Apple App Store like any other app. You would then be able to use that app store without any setting changes.
So what advantages would the consumer get? Potentially quite a few. For the general iPhone or iPad user, what will change? Potentially not a whole lot. The vast majority of users are content with the status quo. If Twitter or Netflix were to remove their apps from the Apple App Store, any additional revenue they would receive would be greatly offset by a giant drop in users. This would mainly be for specialized types of software and users. One example would be games. Steam, Epic Game Store, and the EA Store formerly known as Origin are some of the apps and stores you are likely to see.
Apple’s own silicon and OS enhancements like Metal 3, Metal FX, and in-OS controller support have made their devices better platforms for gaming. However, the Mac App Store team, which treats games as apps instead of entertainment, has so far failed to seal the deal in any substantial way. Valve’s Steam has repeatedly. The ability to treat the Mac, iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV as essentially a single platform makes ports significantly attractive for game developers. After all, the processors in most iPhones made the last 3 - 4 years, and the latest iPads and Apple TVs are power powerful than what’s in a Steam Deck.
An Epic Deal
Yes, we had to go there. Epic isn’t only a developer of games, they have their own store. Epic’s ban was their own fault, though Apple’s attempt to ban the Unreal Engine, which powers many games and apps was incredibly indicative. It would be a sign of good faith to regulators if Apple and Epic were to come to an agreement. Let’s be honest, the Apple - Epic battle was the spark that lead to the DMA. Getting a deal done would be closure. You’ll never see Epic on stage with Apple again, but it getting them to do business again would be of benefit to everyone.
Bottom Line
So will allowing alternate app stores and side loading be a revolution to Apple’s platforms. Yes and no. The vast majority of users will see no difference. They are fine with the way things are. They won’t use app subscriptions, play AAA games, or use specialized professional apps. This is the way it works on Android. The control and money Apple would be losing is stuff they haven’t done a whole lot with themselves. Having other options may actually help Apple realize its platforms better than it could have alone.
Comments
Post a Comment