Apple and Google Face Growing Revolt Over App Store ‘Tax’ • Hacker News Board

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

#431

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 3:40 PM UTC

Buge wrote: post #362

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.

Just because they've already been compensated to some degree doesn't mean they've been fully compensated. Video game consoles are sometimes sold at a loss in order to make money on games.

The richest company in the world, with the largest cash reserves in the world, is not being fully compensated for their efforts?

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

#432

Post by kartan » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 3:59 PM UTC

1123581321 wrote: post #257

kartan wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Comparing distribution of physical goods is a poor analogy as the variable costs are high, and low or zero for App Store developers. We know from tariffs that a 30% fee on mining or manufacturing increases costs and reduces trade, but despite Apple’s 30%, the cost of an app has been driven down. This suggests that a high revenue share of a software sale is viable in a way that a high revenue share of a truck load is…

> This suggests that a high revenue share of a software sale is viable in a way that a high revenue share of a truck load is not.

This is a good point. But I would rather see this apps more highly taxed than to allow monopolistic empires to grow.

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

#433

Post by ergothus » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 3:59 PM UTC

mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #363

nielsbot wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My opinion is that everyone should get rid of 1-5 stars in favor of "thumbs up/thumbs down" ratings... Wonder if there's any research to support this suggestion...

In terms of impact on conversions the star rating has a powerful impact. People are highly receptive to the stars. I doubt that system is going away any time soon.

So we move towards a 5 star system, where anything other than 5 is considered a failure. Last time i looked lyft wanted their drivers to have a 4.8, and I've heard similar expectations from waitstaff and customer service call centers.

That's ridiculous, and only helps inflation to be normalized. For me, I've found it means it is hard to give credit for truly exceptional service. When I have to give 5s to those that just do the job like I wanted, I have few options to highlight when someone truly goes above and beyond.

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

#434

Post by logfromblammo » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 4:04 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #197

avar wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really screwed up even as a consumer. E.g. for things like Uber I've taken to always rating 5 stars regardless of my experience, because even if I have something bad to say do I really want to so nonchalantly be a cog in the machine of potentially robbing someone of their livelyhood?

Yeah, the way Uber ratings work it seems like there are only two ratings: "I had an acceptable experience" or "This person should lose their job".

I want to value 5-star ratings like this: 1 star = -3, 2 star = -1, 3 star = 0, 4 star = +1, 5 star = +3. Works the same for restaurant tipping: $0.02 = you should be fired and this place should be closed, 0% = you suck and I won't ever come back, 10% = you blew it this time, 15% = median performance, 20% = you did better than most, 20% and yes we will also order booze and/or desserts = you're at least 98th percentile.

I dislike systems that end up being like this: 1 star = -8, 2 star = -4, 3 star = -2, 4 star = -1, 5 star = 0.

I need to be able to express when things are good as well as when things are bad. When everyone and everything has a 4.5-star average rating, there's no way to tell when anything stands out as being better than similar things. You can only see when things are significantly worse.

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

#435

Post by 1123581321 » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 4:21 PM UTC

kartan wrote: post #432

1123581321 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparing distribution of physical goods is a poor analogy as the variable costs are high, and low or zero for App Store developers. We know from tariffs that a 30% fee on mining or manufacturing increases costs and reduces trade, but despite Apple’s 30%, the cost of an app has been driven down. This suggests that a high revenue share of a software sale is viable in a way that a high revenue share of a truck load is…

> This suggests that a high revenue share of a software sale is viable in a way that a high revenue share of a truck load is not. This is a good point. But I would rather see this apps more highly taxed than to allow monopolistic empires to grow.

Sorry, are you saying you’d like App Store software taxed enough that sales are low and it’s not viable for Apple to make money, forcing them to allow an unregulated open market if they want a meaningful number of apps on their phones? It’s an interesting idea, but I think the opportunity cost early on would have been that entire software market. And the opportunity cost now would be killing a large percentage of businesses that sell software to that market that can’t afford to handle distribution themselves. This quickly gets into the debate about whether it’s better to have large and many small companies or no large and few small companies.

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

#436

Post by logfromblammo » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 4:37 PM UTC

jolmg wrote: post #252

sp527 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We as a society need to start thinking about how we rate people. Right now we all shop for that 5-star rating and punish anyone with 4. We need to mature beyond that as it grows increasingly impossible to maintain perfect ratings. I couldn't disagree more with this sentiment. The answer is not to intentionally sabotage competitive market forces that are driving better outcomes for consumers. That's the equivalent o…

I didn't downvote, but I think cptaj's point was to "unsabotage" the rating system. Ideally, the 5-star rating system should work like: - 1-star means Awful - 2-star means Bad - 3-star means OK - 4-star means Good - 5-star means Excellent That means no one should have any problem using something rated 3 or above. However, by "[shopping] for that 5-star rating and [punishing] anyone with a 4", the rating system ends u…

Deciding what star level to accept should not be the rating-reader's problem.

The reviewers need to have their own ratings statistically analyzed, so that their median rating is adjusted to 3 stars out of five for the purposes of averaging across multiple reviewers.

If you only rate things as 5 stars, you have no dynamic range. I want your reviews to all be 3 stars in the average I see.

Another optimization could be to change the aggregation function such that reviewers that rated well the same things I rate well, and who rate poorly the same things I rate poorly, and those reviewers I explicitly mark as having helpful reviews, would be weighted more heavily in the number I see. That would effectively filter out bots that rate their brand as 5 stars and competitors as 1 star, because that pattern is so dissimilar from normal consumer behavior. The bots see cheap white-label crap as 5-star because the recommendations of their fellow ratings-gaming spam-bots dominate their own aggregate rating. If you rate a microwave oven as 1-star because it shipped in 3 days rather than 2, I don't really want your reviews polluting my averages. If you rate a cheap-ass USB cable as 5-stars because it "works good i had no problems", I don't want your reviews polluting my averages. If you rate a USB charger as 1-star because it "Violates USB 3.0 spec and will probably burn your house down; I am an electrical engineer and here's how I figured that out..." then you're danged right I want that reviewer's reviews to have more weight.

I don't see how a system like that would be any more complex than Google's ranking algorithms for search. If they can discover the most useful sites and weed out SEO gaming attempts by analysis of links and traffic, so too could Amazon put an actually useful rating value on the products it ships, and so too could Uber show you what drivers and riders are really like.

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

#437

Post by AnthonyMouse » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 4:50 PM UTC

zaroth wrote: post #428

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You want to make it illegal for someone to make a piece of hardware that can only run binaries signed by the manufacturer? I'm not sure why this is supposed to be controversial. It's not a prohibition on checking signatures, it's just a requirement to give the user the option of doing something else. Once you sell something it's not yours anymore. Companies shouldn't be allowed to stick up everyone in an ancillary…

>> Consumers have spoken, and spoken extremely loudly, that they like Apple’s approach. > This is not really supported by the evidence ... This isn’t about Apple vs Android or market share. The success of iOS speaks for itself, and in particular the success of the App Store speaks for itself. It is self-evident from the billions of dollars that apps have earned (is it tens of billions now?) that the model is successf…

> The success of iOS speaks for itself, and in particular the success of the App Store speaks for itself. It is self-evident from the billions of dollars that apps have earned (is it tens of billions now?) that the model is successful and widely used both by developers and consumers.

Requiring everyone to use something and then claiming that everyone wants to use it because everyone uses it is a bit circular, isn't it?

> This is partly demographics, but also partly the security, reliability, and trust provided by the walled garden.

But why do you need the walls instead of just a sign that says "now leaving Apple's garden"? If being in Apple's store means you're trusted and make more money then go be in Apple's store. That still doesn't explain why it should be prohibited for a user to install an app outside of it. And then we would find out which factors actually make the difference, instead of claiming it's this and then taking an action inconsistent with it -- if nobody wanted to install apps outside the store then there would be no reason to prohibit it because no one would be trying to do it.

> As long as apps that are not sold through the Apple Store do not use any Apple APIs to operate, that would be fair.

They don't even allow that. If they did you would soon have alternate APIs from Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Canonical, Mozilla or others. But Apple encouraging that would be like Microsoft encouraging use of Sun Java. Apple gets more from people using their API than the people get from using it instead of an alternative.

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

#438

Post by imgabe » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 5:33 PM UTC

fjsolwmv wrote: post #327

imgabe wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the way Uber ratings work it seems like there are only two ratings: "I had an acceptable experience" or "This person should lose their job".

What else matters when choosing a car hire?

I'm not opposed to it being a pass/fail rating, but that should be made explicit. It's perfectly reasonable for a user to think that a 3/5 star rating means "I had a perfectly fine experience, no problems, nothing exceptional" when in reality if a driver gets too many 3 star ratings they are booted from the service.

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

#439

Post by ppeetteerr » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 6:34 PM UTC

foepys wrote: post #358

ppeetteerr wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Credit cards take up to 5% and they only cover the transaction.

The EU capped it at 0.3% for credit and 0.2% for debit cards.

How much is $0.30 + 3% on every transaction for a $0.99 cost the seller?

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

#440

Post by m_fayer » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 6:38 PM UTC

HeadsUpHigh wrote: post #420

m_fayer wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would add: we as a society need to start thinking about how to halt the service-ization of everything. The smartphone is a general purpose handheld computer that's been captured and turned into a rent-extraction device by being re-conceptualized as a "service." And the service-bug is spreading. Laptop and desktop computers are in the crosshairs, as are cars and various home appliances. Do we want to live in a world…

>we as a society need to start thinking about how to halt the service-ization of everything. People don't care unfortunately. Services are convenient and offer a better bang for the buck in the sort term. At some point though you lose your job and your music library is gone, you have nothing to watch because everyone streams and thus the movie/show selling market was never forced to solve it's copyright issues. You h…

I'm curious about what a respectful and user-controlled smart household appliance looks like and how it's built. Thanks for pointing out that there is a non-BS vision of IOT, hard to remember that sometimes.