This kind of garbage is eventually going to attract legislative scrutiny. The iPhone is the single most popular mobile device in at least the USA, and Apple has a complete monopoly on applications for that device.
Indeed it will certainly attract needed scrutiny. Both by the lawmakers and by the courts.
The presumption by all of these vendors who operate their own app store is that they are legally protected in tying their hardware product (their smartphone, for example) to their online store.
But there is a history in both the written law and from the courts that makes these 'company store' policies illegal.
There is no technical reason whatsoever that prevents a smartphone/tablet vendor from allowing their smartphone/tablet from accessing anybody's online store. An Amazon tablet should be able to visit the Apple online store (if they sold Android apps) just as easily as an iPhone should be able to visit the Android marketplace (if they sold iOS apps.)
Imagine the outcry if Chevy could force you to only buy tires or gas for your Malibu from their store. Or if Mattel could force you to only buy outfits for your kid's Barbie doll from their store. Or if Dell could force you to only buy software for your laptop from their store.
The law has long been clear that this type of market coercion is illegal.
The only reason that today's device vendors are still getting away with this is because the threshold for an outcry hasn't yet been passed. But the more stories we read like this, the louder the volume is from the everyday consumer.
> Imagine the outcry if Chevy could force you to only buy tires or gas for your Malibu from their store. Or if Mattel could force you to only buy outfits for your kid's Barbie doll from their store. Or if Dell could force you to only buy software for your laptop from their store.
Or if Apple could "force" you to only upgrade/fix your laptop at their store? Or if they could "force" you to develop iPhone apps on a Mac? Or if Tesla could "force" you to only buy a replacement battery from them?
I can't imagine any of these companies "forcing" these things, however, unless they're colluding with the government to make alternatives illegal, and then regulations aren't going to help anyway. They can make things inconvenient, which is quite different, and the market has a history of customers going to the competition when the inconvenience factor is high enough. Why invoke legislation at all, especially when the market under consideration is already competitive, which it is with smartphones? (If competition is stagnant and it's a difficult market to enter, then perhaps you have an argument to use government power to remove barriers to entry (often caused by the government) or to level the playing field or to provide incentives to make the market easier to enter.)
The expectation that customers should act in a way to basically create the conditions for a perfectly free market is misguided. Not invoking legislation just makes things painful for everyone. Sure, I can switch to Android - but the cost of buying everything again is rather high. Tomorrow I might have to switch back for similar political reasons.
Aren't you supposed to buy the tires for a Bugatti Vayron directly from Bugatti? If a country buys an F-16, they are also committing to buy all the weapons and ammunition from Lockheed.
And besides, as it stands now, you can buy from other stores, for example, Cydia. Of course, you have to jailbreak your phone, but that is legal in the US, so there is no argument any more.
If you want to keep your warranty, you have to use the App Store.
> And besides, as it stands now, you can buy from other stores, for example, Cydia. Of course, you have to jailbreak your phone, but that is legal in the US, so there is no argument any more.
> If you want to keep your warranty, you have to use the App Store.
