171–180 of 865 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The issue of the 30% cut alone is enough for further investigation, Not really, it's 30% for everyone, not just Spotify.
Unless "everyone" also includes Apple Music, then it's anti-competitive.
This exemplifies some of the reasons proprietary app store lock-in is bad for consumers. Progressive Web Apps -- web apps that are installable and available offline without any app store -- are a viable alternative, and ultimately a threat to Apple's app store racket. It's likely why iOS Safari continues to drag it's feet on PWA support.
I agree with that. However, what worries me about PWAs is discoverability. How can I find a catalog of available PWAs to download? Is there a way?
Something mimicking today's stores would essentially be links you can rate and comment on. Kind of like Reddit, but with a different UI and no direct user submissions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are significant costs associated with the app store, no? Part of the reason users gravitate towards the iPhone is because you can download high quality apps without malware, viruses, etc. That should be covered by the one time fee that developers pay to Apple in order to publish apps into the App Store. I am not sure if a simple binary needs a 30% cut of the entire Spotify profit to keep up with the costs of…
I would be upset because I bought the hardware and they arbitrarily won't let my music from Spotify play on it while their own music does. Remember it's my device, but theirs. Not apples. If they are going to allow third party apps then do so, but there's no technical reason to not allow the service. Imagine Ford says you can only use a certain brand of tires on your new car, or can only buy tires through the dealers…
That's the reason I don't buy Apple stuff to begin with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple deliberately leaves those features unbuilt in order to give itself a market position that others can't compete with There's a vast gulf between "Spotify was blocked" and "Apple didn't spend time and money building a service that Spotify wanted".
This is for the lawyers to make sense of, but in electing to be a platform provider, they should be held to higher standards in my opinion. They did indeed have "the service" in question, it was just limited to Apple's own offering. It's a scenario not unlike net neutrality: an infrastructure provider that is also a content provider can put themselves or select customers in a position where free market forces are hin…
Again, there's a difference between "Siri can talk to our music service" and "We have a stable public API that 3rd party vendors can hook into to connect up to a music service". They're not the same thing, and one is a lot easier than the other.
Just as Microsoft were stopped from shipping a browser with their OS, vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. You cant move to another platform without losing access to all your "purchases" - there is no free market. They have monopolies within ecosystems they created. They should be FORCED to have an open platform, with users able to access multiple 3rd party storefronts on multiple pla…
>Just as Microsoft were stopped from shipping a browser with their OS, vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. That comparison doesn't really work, because MSFT had an effective desktop monopoly. By contrast, Apple is a minority player in the mobile market. >They should be FORCED to have an open platform, Just because YOU want this doesn't mean the Apple users want it. I'm utterly conten…
That's Apple's magic trick. They only own the top 20% of the market (evading monopoly attention) but they extract almost 100% of all profit in the smartphone market. No idea how you'd legislate against that though..
Just as Microsoft were stopped from shipping a browser with their OS, vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. You cant move to another platform without losing access to all your "purchases" - there is no free market. They have monopolies within ecosystems they created. They should be FORCED to have an open platform, with users able to access multiple 3rd party storefronts on multiple pla…
>Just as Microsoft were stopped from shipping a browser with their OS, vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. That comparison doesn't really work, because MSFT had an effective desktop monopoly. By contrast, Apple is a minority player in the mobile market. >They should be FORCED to have an open platform, Just because YOU want this doesn't mean the Apple users want it. I'm utterly conten…
Apple sold 47% of the all smartphones shipped in the US in Q4 2018
https://www.counterpointresearch.com/us-market-smartphone-sh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. So then how would a novice user get apps the first time they boot up their phone? They would have to know where to get apps from. That seems like an easy way for users to end up downloading a bunch of malware because they think it's the official Apple or Google app store when it's just a random website. Having a built in app store has huge advant…
Microsoft were pushed to add a screen to the Windows installer asking the user which browser they wanted to be the default. That would work perfectly well for app stores.