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

Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

timetoplayfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 865 posts

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#671

Post by nevir »

NyxWulf wrote: post #650
nevir wrote: post #238

Apple did the same thing to Kindle for iPhone back when it launched. We submitted the original version to Apple with a fully functioning store built into it—and were then stuck in submission limbo. Two weeks later, Apple announces their intent to build in-app purchasing. The kicker: Apple wanted a 30% cut of every book sold on the store …and at the same time, had negotiated with book publishers that the publishers MU…

I've used the Kindle app ever since it launched, and have followed this fiasco. The trouble for someone like me is I would rather purchase my content from Amazon since I can read it on any device, not just an apple device. p.s. Do you know how I would go about recommending someone add the ability to have green or amber text on the black background?

> p.s. Do you know how I would go about recommending someone add the ability to have green or amber text on the black background?

If you're on Android:

1. go to Settings -> Info -> About

2. Draw a lowercase h on the screen (anywhere), and you'll see a "special color mode enabled", and should get amber on black. another letter gives you green on black, but I forget which :( . There's a bunch of hidden color combinations there :)

I'm not sure that exists on iOS, though

---

For requesting it: help & feedback -> contact us -> give feedback is your best bet. I'm out of touch w/ the Kindle team, but at least several years ago many of the devs would obsessively read customer feedback (that wasn't deemed sensitive/PII)

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#672

Post by iav »

jhall1468 wrote: post #612
peruvian wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be more likely to consider Spotify an underdog if they weren't a VC-fueled, still-not-profitable startup.

I'd like to think comparing a VC-funded company to one of the largest public companies on earth the very definition of underdog.

Spotify is public

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#673

Post by oh_sigh »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #648
GeekyBear wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify has already turned off the ability for new accounts to pay to upgrade to a premium account inside their iOS app last year. You pay for your account on Spotify's own web site, which bypasses Apple getting any cut at all. https://support.spotify.com/us/account_payment_help/subscrip... Netflix has done the same thing. https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/8471988/spotify-... In my book, the problem is that…

It's not just those two, it's standard practice: Audible, Google Play video, Amazon video, Amazon music, Playstation Video, Vimeo, Sky Store video, and YouTube Premium/Google Music (same subscription with different marketing). Deezer music went another route: you can pay for your subscription through an iOS device, but you'll pay a higher price. [0] I'm surprised Apple permit this. All this strikes me as a clear indi…

> Deezer music went another route: you can pay for your subscription through an iOS device, but you'll pay a higher price. [0] I'm surprised Apple permit this.

This is what Spotify used to do (charging $13 instead of the normal $10 to give apple their cut), but they stopped when apple started making apple music available at $10 (since they didn't need to pay their own tax)

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#674

Post by hxegon »

gigatexal wrote: post #533
gurpreet- wrote: post #126

Personally, as an app developer, I think Spotify is taking the right stance here. I believe that Apple should take some cuts but not as high as 30%. I believe for some categories like microtransaction based apps Apple should take maybe 5%. Plus, I think that if Apple has a competing service, then it should waive the tax altogether. It's only fair. If the only function of the App Store (or Play Store) is to provide ho…

Try telling the IRS you think their tax rates are too high. Apple owns the sandbox with the most valuable customers and if you want to play in it you gotta pay. Personally I love letting Apple handle my subscriptions and subscribing through iTunes is one of the things it does well.

Do you think apple's subscription feature is worth paying 30% more for spotify?

Do you think spotify should just suck it up and take the hit to keep prices the same because apple is providing a service (access and subscription handling) worth 30% of the price? Not even Amazon charges that much.

I don't know if the anti-competitive practices mentioned are illegal, but they're certainly scummy. The company that owns the walled garden shouldn't be bullying spotify to try and prop apple music up.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#675

Post by foobarchu »

veritas20 wrote: post #645
gurpreet- wrote: post #126

Personally, as an app developer, I think Spotify is taking the right stance here. I believe that Apple should take some cuts but not as high as 30%. I believe for some categories like microtransaction based apps Apple should take maybe 5%. Plus, I think that if Apple has a competing service, then it should waive the tax altogether. It's only fair. If the only function of the App Store (or Play Store) is to provide ho…

Not sure that I completely follow your logic in regards to the "tax" here. With any product, you have two main things: production of the product and distribution of the product. Spotify doesn't NEED to be on Apple devices (they started off on the web), but they WANT to be on Apple devices (and Android devices) because they are great distribution channels for its product. That said, how much is distribution worth to S…

The practice of stores like Walmart strongarming producers into reducing prices and quality is a well established problem with a number of articles and documentaries around it already.

In either case the difference between a store doing this and Apple doing this is that Best Buy is not the one of two practical ways to access the product, and consumers are not compelled to go only to Best Buy simply because they chose to go there once.

Figuring out the proper practices for phone app markets is difficult right now, because we really can't compare them to anything that already exists. Physical markets just aren't the same thing.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#676

Post by nevir »

gnicholas wrote: post #611
baby wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasted so much time trying to figure out how to get books in the iOS kindle app. When I finally figured out that I had to use my laptop, I was still confused at so why the iOS app was not saying anything about anything.

Technically you can use your iPad/iPhone, but you have to use a web browser instead of the Kindle app. A funny thing happens when you do — the website redirects you to the Amazon app, which then redirects you back to the website. Honestly, I don't know how Amazon does purchasing through the Amazon app without giving 30% to Apple, but it seems that they don't let you purchase books this way.

The 30% fee only applies to digital goods, not physical ones. It's part of why there's all the awkward hoops that the main amazon app goes through when you run into digital goods, but everything else is mostly sane

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#677

Post by aylmao »

sixstringtheory wrote: post #610
aylmao wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory that's an easy problem: anyone could make an "App Store", especially considering they wouldn't have to host binaries or deliver updates. 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.

But crucially, they’d have no way to moderate for bad actors. You can’t just kick a webpage off the net. Things like Reddit style voting can be gamed, just like app store search and reviews are today. Whoever has the most resources wins, not necessarily who has the best product.

> But crucially, they’d have no way to moderate for bad actors. You can’t just kick a webpage off the net.

Yeah. You could technically still kick them off the store for the sake of maintaining trust— like a forum.

> Things like Reddit style voting can be gamed, just like app store search and reviews are today. Whoever has the most resources wins, not necessarily who has the best product.

Wait, isn't this like current App Store ratings though? I wouldn't be worried about this. It is already the case that many people invest a lot of resources in trying to game the App Store. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#678

Post by 3327 »

gurpreet- wrote: post #126

Personally, as an app developer, I think Spotify is taking the right stance here. I believe that Apple should take some cuts but not as high as 30%. I believe for some categories like microtransaction based apps Apple should take maybe 5%. Plus, I think that if Apple has a competing service, then it should waive the tax altogether. It's only fair. If the only function of the App Store (or Play Store) is to provide ho…

DOJ - SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME (SORRY FOR CAPS) HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT FROM USA vs. MICROSOFT (besides the obvious).

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#679

Post by d35007 »

dysfunction wrote: post #630
CraneWorm wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kindle for iPhone You put a walled garden... in another walled garden. On a more serious note: I get it; among Apple users are the most happily paying people that you can find on this planet and if you have a product you want to make it available to them. No wonder they think it their right to take a massive 30% cut.

At least the Kindle and Kindle app can read books from other sources, they don't force you to buy from Amazon.

Can you clarify what you mean by "At least"? It looks like you might be implying that Apple's Books app forces you to buy books from Apple book store.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#680

Post by asdffdsa »

mertd wrote: post #639
berbec wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was about to argue with this and rage against Apple, but then I remembered a very similar situation everyone deals with and no one complains about: Supermarket Generics. "How is it fair for Price Chopper to undercut Rice Crispies with a similar, cheaper product?" no on says this...

Because your choice of phone brand does not tie you to a specific grocery where you can buy rice crispies. You can simply cross the street and shop at a competing grocery.

Yeah, theres different smart phones just like theres different grocery stores
Post reply on HN