161–170 of 398 posts
Netflix only needs apple for distribution because apple has locked down the system so much that you are forced to go through them. Apple has added very little value and we had better systems before where you could just visit a URL and view content without needing Microsoft for distribution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, a company town is also a good analogy. Maybe even a better one, though it is a lot easier and cheaper to switch mobile platforms than it is to pick up your whole life. To expand your analogy, nothing stops you from owning homes in two different towns at the same time. (Nobody is forcing you to carry just one mobile phone, even though most people do.) And in this company town, yes they own all the stores and play…
> though it is a lot easier and cheaper to switch mobile platforms Try telling that to your customers. "Yeah sure just sell your phone and buy an Android device to use our app". And having them use Safari? Yeah right. Apple doesn't even provide push notifications for web apps. Have you ever wondered why that is? The fact is, if your customer has an iOS device, you must include Apple in the transaction and pay them 30…
As for push notifications—it's not surprising that Apple doesn't allow the HTTP version because it would be chaos for battery life. Besides, any website can offer a totally free native app that simply performs push notifications for your site. You don't need to give up 30% of anything to Apple for that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Apple adds is non-zero. As the parent comment points out, Apple offers discovery, billing, and distribution. The App Store is a single (theoretically trusted) place for iOS users to search for apps. Let's not forget that, at least in theory, Apple curates the App Store. Neither Chrome nor AT&T does that in any substantial way. Furthermore, Apple's business model is different from Google/Android's. Android can be…
I'd agree - Apple handling payments/fraud/refunds and all the rest has value. Where they don't have a value proposition is with the larger providers of content. People turning up and wanting to buy your product (and not caring how it's provided to you) Same issue has been seen within PC gaming for many years - most consumers would quite happily add games to their Steam library - but Ubi, EA, Blizzard, Bethesda, Rocks…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before Apple came out with the iPhone, the carriers had complete control over the apps on your phone, and their access to the network. Even initial iterations of the iPhone limited video streaming to WiFi only. Apple blazed the trail enabling millions (billions?) of hours of Netflix viewing. Apple devices are a primary use case motivating my initial Netflix subscription for kids to watch in the car on the iPad. Furth…
While carrier app stores were a thing, it was quite common to download apps from other sources before the iPhone. There were Java apps, Windows mobile apps and others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever thought about the situation as being analogous to a wholesale market like Costco? Consumers pay for a Costco membership card, similar to the iPhone as it grants access to the store, then sells products in the store at a marked up rate (Apple tax as you call it). Consumers actually choose to shop at Costco because it’s a great experience for them just as consumers choose to buy iPhones and use the App St…
It is different. When I shop at Costco I know I shop at Costco and that is what I paid for. But when I buy Netflix subscription, I am paying to Netflix, not Apple. Does Apple making Netflix as a service any better? I didn't quite see that. And since this is a recurring fee, which makes it even funnier, that I am constantly paying Apple for to essentially ALLOW me watch Netflix. And don't forget this result in a highe…
There are other arguments to be made about the store fees, but Costco is pretty much like apple store and vendors don't even have the option of saying "hey they will not stock it but you can pick it there anyways", which is what Apple allows you to do by having an app that can be registered / paid for elsewhere.
I’m devaluing this disagreement. Tell me one reason that we at the consumer level should care whether Apple or Netflix win this one? At my level, I see the smartphone market dominated by Apple and Google. If you don’t like what those two do then you can’t buy a smartphone. They own something like 99.9999% of the market. This is basically super large corporation vs large corporation. Wake me up for the fight to break…
> Tell me one reason that we at the consumer level should care whether Apple or Netflix win this one? A 30% fee generally translates into 30% higher prices for all customers. You see this with credit cards: because there's a ~3% fee and merchants are generally not allowed to have a credit card surcharge, prices as a whole rise ~3%. If you pay cash you might get a questionably-permissible discount from some places. Ot…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but in the case of the cruise ship, you can just wait until the cruise is over and buy things at your usual store at home. So the analogy falls down at a pretty fundamental level. It's more like you're living in a company town, and there's no openly advertised non-black market alternatives to the company shops.
Yes, a company town is also a good analogy. Maybe even a better one, though it is a lot easier and cheaper to switch mobile platforms than it is to pick up your whole life. To expand your analogy, nothing stops you from owning homes in two different towns at the same time. (Nobody is forcing you to carry just one mobile phone, even though most people do.) And in this company town, yes they own all the stores and play…
So now we're getting somewhere. This is the height of the wall around this particular walled garden. Now let me ask this: What percentage of the population would even consider owning two smartphones? That's how close to an idealized monopoly this walled garden is. So granted, it's not a monopoly in an idealized sense. But we now quantify how "monopolish" it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, a company town is also a good analogy. Maybe even a better one, though it is a lot easier and cheaper to switch mobile platforms than it is to pick up your whole life. To expand your analogy, nothing stops you from owning homes in two different towns at the same time. (Nobody is forcing you to carry just one mobile phone, even though most people do.) And in this company town, yes they own all the stores and play…
> though it is a lot easier and cheaper to switch mobile platforms Try telling that to your customers. "Yeah sure just sell your phone and buy an Android device to use our app". And having them use Safari? Yeah right. Apple doesn't even provide push notifications for web apps. Have you ever wondered why that is? The fact is, if your customer has an iOS device, you must include Apple in the transaction and pay them 30…
This is false.
What Netflix and Epic are doing is completely within the terms Apple has laid out. The only thing they can't do is direct their iOS app customers elsewhere for the purpose of a monetary transaction.
And it's not limited to big corps. There are countless examples of small developers doing the exact same thing. For example, I subscribe to 1Password for use on my iOS device, and Apple doesn't get a single cent of that subscription fee.
I’m devaluing this disagreement. Tell me one reason that we at the consumer level should care whether Apple or Netflix win this one? At my level, I see the smartphone market dominated by Apple and Google. If you don’t like what those two do then you can’t buy a smartphone. They own something like 99.9999% of the market. This is basically super large corporation vs large corporation. Wake me up for the fight to break…
The duopoly is false since google does not control android the same abusive way apple does. there are android forks that arent google controlled. most of googles software thats useful has open source cores that dont have anything to do with googles ad machinery or other pet peeves people have with google. there is no smartphone duopoly and you are extremely off base.
No phone manufacturer outside of China and developing countries can hope to sell a phone without Google Services.
Until earlier this year, Google would not license Google flavored Android to phone manufacturers unless they agreed not to sell phones based on Android forks.
The Apple Tax is especially hard on Spotify since Apple launched Apple Music (previously, Spotify passed the 30% on to customers, but $13 vs $10 for similar services doesn't work). Both services are $10 per month. It's well-publicized that Spotify pays out 70% to labels, leaving nothing to run the service. Full disclosure: I used to work for Spotify. My personal take on the fee was that 2%-3% is the floor (credit car…