Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 474 posts

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#231

Post by michaelchisari »

damon_c wrote: post #209
cptaj wrote: post #135

And they should. We are fast approaching a world where all markets are walled-in by a few international companies. I've had clients of mine go under because Amazon decided to close their accounts and they depend on the platform to sell their wares. Imagine how hard it is to sell stuff online if you're barred from ebay and amazon... and there is no legal recourse to appeal those bans. Same goes for app stores, what ha…

My GF and I recently moved from NYC to Los Angeles and an Uber driver once asked her "Are you from NY?", "Yes, why?", "Because your rating is so low and people from NYC usually have really low ratings." We checked her rating and it's 4.5 or so. But it's funny, she looks like a deadbeat here because of more discerning/critical NYC Uber drivers who gave her 4 stars 50% of the time.

Los Angeles has serious grade inflation across the board wrt social ratings.

Their yelp reviews are completely unreliable, everything is 4 or 5 stars. I'm used to Chicago where even a great restaurant can have 3 stars because everyone is so picky, and the 4 or 5 stars are reserved for the truly extraordinary.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#232

Post by cgriswald »

dkonofalski wrote: post #220
cgriswald wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the absence of any alternative methods of developers getting their apps into users hands, it is difficult to say whether "search, promotion, distribution, and analytics" offered by Apple are really valued at what Apple is charging for them. It is also difficult to separate these things from things Apple is doing for its own sake, since they increase sales which benefits Apple directly. I strongly suspect that, giv…

You're completely ignoring the hit to both the brand and experience that something like that would cause. There's a big reason why iOS users tend to spend more money on the platform than Android users do on the Google platform and a huge part of that is the trust built by Apple with their users. You can go into the Google Play store (which most people would think was the "official" and "safe" method of getting apps)…

You seem to be suggesting the only alternative to the App Store is a janky Apple-run Open App Store. All Apple has to do to offer an alternative is let people install Apps on their phones outside the App Store just like they can do on their Macs. People will still trust the App Store, but maybe a competitor comes along and maybe Netflix/Amazon etc use them or maybe they don’t.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#233

Post by greedo »

kartan wrote: post #192
rlanday wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple adds no value there Other than inventing the modern phone, writing the operating system and developer tools, running the store, manufacturing the phones people are consuming Amazon's product on and convincing people to buy them...you can argue about what's "fair," but Apple's certainly adding value.

> but Apple's certainly adding value. Do roads add value? Should trucks pay a 30% of their cargo retail price in road tolls? I agree with your point that Apple adds value. I just do not see that as a justification to take a 30% share of all apps that run on their devices.

Trucks pay fees based on the load they're carrying...

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#234

Post by DmenshunlAnlsis »

stale2002 wrote: post #167
DmenshunlAnlsis wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, and WalMart has a “monopoly” on WalMarts, but that’s not actually a monopoly. If they had a monopoly on supermarket, that would be a legal issue. Apps is the space for competition, and Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on apps, or phones. In fact you can almost always get the same apps on multiple platforms. People just want something they can’t have, so they play word games to make themselves sound righteous rath…

No, Walmart owns those stores. Phones, on the other hand, are owned by the people who purchase them. And those people who own the phones have the full right to do whatever they want with them.

You can do whatever you want with your iPhone too, including rooting it, or throwing out of a moving car. Apple can then choose to support it, or not. In the same way that you can buy a given make and model of car and mod it into a dragster, or a tractor if you want to. Apple sells iPhones, and own their store which you can choose to access from your iPhone, or not if you prefer. In addition you can get all of the benefits of “phone” and “app” from another platform if you prefer.

I can buy a Mercedes, and if I want to I can pay a Merc dealership $1400 parts and labor for an ignition coil when the similar part andlabor for a Toyota would be $200. I can also go to a non-Merc shop and seek repairs (and take some risks) for less money. What I can’t do is buy a Mercedes, then turn around and demand that Mercedes sell their parts at Toyota rates and claim that Mercedes has a monopoly on Mercedes.

I mean I could, but I’d rightly be an object of scorn and ridicule. To go back to the WalMart analogy, they have their own store brands as well, and they’re only sold in WalMarts. Why not force them to sell from other outlets, since they’re a monopoly in your fantastical estimation? It’s legal and frankly ethical to restrict sales that way, and a world of other options exist; it’s not WalMart mayo, or no mayo ever again.

By contrast for a real illegal monopoly see Standard Oil or AT&T. If I wanted to use the phone lines, I could pay whatever they wanted or train carrier pigeons. My access to “phone” was entirely a function of whether I was willing to play their game. It wasn’t a matter of having different choices of providers and platforms and marketplaces, it was have a phone with AT&T, or don’t have a phone.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#235

Post by scarface74 »

MBCook wrote: post #211
enitihas wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may work for Amazon only because their own brand is also directly known to the user, and a lot of users would also be visitors of their website. But for a newcomer trying to sell digital goods via an app, good luck

They may have some sort of ‘free pass’ due to their size/influence. It’s eqsy to say that Amazon’s content is meant for Kindles too, and just happens to work for the iPhone. But if you have an iOS only app? Good luck arguing your way out of the rule.

Udemy works the same way. You can buy content either in the app store or outside and it still works.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#236

Post by adrinavarro »

gg3 wrote: post #212
cptaj wrote: post #135

And they should. We are fast approaching a world where all markets are walled-in by a few international companies. I've had clients of mine go under because Amazon decided to close their accounts and they depend on the platform to sell their wares. Imagine how hard it is to sell stuff online if you're barred from ebay and amazon... and there is no legal recourse to appeal those bans. Same goes for app stores, what ha…

Can we discuss alternative to these big platforms? This is the only long term solution to the problem. Decentralization is need of the hour. Why isn't etherium based solutions gaining traction even after repeated backlash by these big platforms on multiple fronts.

Unless you're thinking about the next Silk Road, then, you're not solving the real problem here.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#237

Post by dkonofalski »

giovannibajo1 wrote: post #84
jimbokun wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, if you already have a subscription for Amazon Video through the web, then download the Amazon Video app and login to your existing account, Apple doesn't get anything. Which is why the article emphasized Netflix trying to get customers to sign up through their web site, and not the app.

Correct. Apple gets a cut if a customer subscribes through the in-app one-click subscription, which is extremely convenient for any iPhone user (and thus app publishers) because it’s a single click rather than having to insert credit cards, 3D secure and whatnot. In this case the cut is 30% on the first year and 10% afterwards. If the user subscribes through the website, Apple gets nothing. I find this fair. What is…

This is 100% what I'm saying. I think that it does fully justify the rule that people are saying is "unfair". I have yet to hear a good argument that doesn't amount to something totally incorrect like "Apple doesn't provide any value and is just a middleman" or just an opinion like "Apple shouldn't take part of the purchase just because they own the platform" because while it may be a valid opinion, it looks at the situation from only the perspective of the 2 companies in question (Apple and whoever) and not the end-user.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#238

Post by binomialxenon »

ZeljkoS wrote: post #68

In my modest opinion, progressive app store fee would make much more sense: https://svedic.org/philosophy/why-app-stores-need-progressiv...

This seems like a pretty good idea. I'd be curious to see how many apps are sold for prices over $20 USD, as my impression was that the vast majority of paid apps were competing at lower price points.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#239

Post by rohit2412 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #199
FireBeyond wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Other than inventing the modern phone Come on now. > writing the operating system Which OS, iOS, that the phone purchaser inherently paid for? Or macOS, that the computer purchaser inherently paid for? > developer tools Which you need to purchase a developer license for to be useful. Apple is adding value, AND double dipping. Most of your examples are things they've already been compensated for.

Come on now. They invented the app ecosystem, which is far more important than just inventing a phone. Without Apple, the application market would still be controlled by Sprint and AT&T and Verizon. Not defending Apple or attacking it, just pointing out the facts.

And how is Apple's walled app store any better than the alternative of at&t controlled app store?

They can keep their 30% cut if they allow me to sideload apps from external sources.

Re: Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’

#240

Post by dkonofalski »

gameswithgo wrote: post #55
rlanday wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple adds no value there Other than inventing the modern phone, writing the operating system and developer tools, running the store, manufacturing the phones people are consuming Amazon's product on and convincing people to buy them...you can argue about what's "fair," but Apple's certainly adding value.

Anything is fair, but I don't like things that only allow app stores as a first class way to get software on my machine. I have voted with my wallet. But it is getting harder to do so, soon only linux will be left.

That's fine but you're not really the intended market for the App Stores. App Stores are for the people that click "Yes" to everything and end up with Internet Explorer as a strip of their screen because they have 42 toolbars installed. Those people undoubtedly like app stores precisely for being the only way to get software on their machines.
Post reply on HN