The problem is that people can easily be induced to install software that negates the benefit of Apple’s hardware. Apple can’t deliver their hardware benefits without also controlling the operating system.
> Apple can’t deliver their hardware benefits without also controlling the operating system.
Nobody is talking about loading something besides iOS on Apple mobile devices. The argument that "The OS is everything" failed over 20 years ago in US v Microsoft.
So you mean how WeChat and Alibaba do it, and are allowed to do so by the App Store. Then why hasn't Meta done that? Perhaps they don't care to? Not that the Facebook app isn't already hugely overstuffed.
Because Apple bent down for WeChat and Alibaba, but Apple won't do it for Facebook?
I'm 100% sure that if Facebook could have an iOS app store, they would start one. It's worth all the work for the improved tracking alone, as app download ads are a big part of Facebook's mobile revenue.
The GP is talking about Meta embedding its own app store within the Facebook app, not about Facebook creating its own iOS app store. An "internal" app store would still be subject to the same restrictions and security that the actual Apple App Store already has. I don't believe the mini-apps within WeChat or Alibaba's apps can flout those regulations, but it's China and those are big apps so who knows.
From a technical perspective, I'm not sure how hosting littler apps within your own app, which is already on the Apple App Store and subject to its review process and rules, would allow you access to improved tracking.
On the subject of a Meta third-party app store independent of Apple's control- yes, there is motivation there to do that, but I am dubious of how much of a threat that is to the end user because:
1. Apple still maintains control of iOS and can restrict invasive tracking from the OS level.
2. I'm not actually convinced that Meta, Google, Amazon, et al are really capable of executing successful alternative app stores. They would need to make it a sufficiently seamless and friction-free experience, and offer enough incentives for users to overcome having to sign up for yet another service just to use the apps they already have access to.
> The problem is that people can easily be induced to install software that negates the benefit of Apple’s hardware. Apple can’t deliver their hardware benefits without also controlling the operating system.
Apple is less concerned about this than profits.
They could make their hardware ecosystem more open, that's easy, but that wouldn't make them a significant amount of extra money, so why would they?
Again, even if that was true, and I believe you are conflating profits and revenue here, it has nothing to do with my comment, which was about Apple refusing to make the ecosystem more open because it wouldn’t bring any significant financial profit.
It is true. It’s not hard to check it. If you want to proceed with this line of discussion, you should do some googling rather than persisting with false claims.
"Apple CFO Luca Maestri said that Apple's install base of devices hit a new all-time high as well, which helps drive services growth."
"Cloud services, Apple Music , advertising, video, and payments saw all-time revenue records, while the App Store saw a new June quarter revenue record."
"Services brought in $17.5 billion during the quarter"
It’s as simple as that.