Agree with comments. Apple is about shareholder value, like it or not. They are not a non-profit agency.
So what if underage slave labor is employed? Share holder value #1.
Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
21–30 of 408 posts
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#22Boycott WWDC everyone. Trillion Dollar companies don't play by the fair rules.
Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google Play's 30% cut. Apple has accused Match, Epic, and Spotify of wanting a 'free ride' while taking one themselves.
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#23Unless google has a similar rule, which states DIY in app purchase solutions aren't allowed, I dont see what's the fault of Apple here? What kind of a business wants to give away free money? I don't see hypocrisy unless they're breaking TOS.
Fault hypocrisy.
You can be blameless and still be a hypocrite. Is Apple at _fault_ for this action? No. Corporate entities are gonna corporate entity. Does this reek of hypocrisy? Yes.
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#24Could someone give more context? The screenshot isn't telling that much...
The point is that lately Apple has been applying their own rule that disallows payment workarounds resulting in a few of high profile (for HN) cases. On the other had it seems Apple itself is using the same type of workarounds for their apps in other platforms (Google's in this case).
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#25The roles of arrogance and loophole finding has changed recently. Apple (2020) has become Microsoft (1998) and Microsoft (2020) has become Apple (1998).
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#26We need to stop using android and iOS and move to pinephone and librem
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#27Unless google has a similar rule, which states DIY in app purchase solutions aren't allowed, I dont see what's the fault of Apple here? What kind of a business wants to give away free money? I don't see hypocrisy unless they're breaking TOS.
Yes absolutely. As with the exceptions on iOS (Netflix is outside the iOS payment system) i suspect it's a case that certain apps are large enough that kicking them off the store for not paying the 30% tax isn't feasible. >Developers offering products within a game downloaded on Google Play or providing access to game content must use Google Play In-app Billing as the method of payment. https://play.google.com/about/…
Actually, there seems to be an exception that sounds relevant here:
> Developers offering products within another category of app downloaded on Google Play must use Google Play In-app Billing as the method of payment, except for the following cases:
> . Payment is solely for physical products
> . Payment is for digital content that may be consumed outside of the app itself (e.g. songs that can be played on other music players).
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#28People keep writing about businesses like they are surprised they aren't moral entities with consistent moral logic. Businesses take whatever action or position they can to maximize their results. The more power the business has, the more they can leverage that power to get what they want. This should just be the default assumption at this point and we should talk about if that is ok for society, not keep feigning su…
This faulty logic is deeply ironic, since it's an expression of irrational negative emotion, which is what it's accusing others of. It's so common and so unchanging, I can paste an old comment I wrote about it (just substitute "corporations" for "wealthy and powerful people"):
The "why are people surprised" line is a huge red flag for me that a person is not arguing in good faith. Accusing people of being "surprised" as an implication of naivete seems to be a very common tool of redirection when people are defending something perceived by others to be immoral or otherwise harmful. I'm not sure why such a particular angle became so common, since it seems so obvious to me that what they are calling "surprise" is indignation/anger. It seems to be exaggerated from the general notion that the stronger a reaction is, the newer it is, but obviously that's faulty. I may hear the same story of wealthy and powerful people behaving badly every day, but it doesn't make the behavior any more acceptable with each occurrence, and so my anger does not subside, no matter how un-surprised I am.
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#29We need to stop using android and iOS and move to pinephone and librem
Feel free to
Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut
#30Note to the people asking why this matters:
Legally, if you take a position in federal court on X (i.e., that it's okay to ban external transactions by apps using your app store), and you are found to be doing not-X in an analogous situation (i.e., setting up external transactions to avoid fees in your competitors' app store), the court can rule against you in the original case...and then sanction you and your lawyers for wasting the court's time proclaiming X...and then legally bar you from asserting X in those proceedings, or related proceedings.
Courts are generally okay with some form of alternative arguments, (i.e., I didn't do Y, but if I did Y it was legal for me to do so), but they absolutely will not accept contradictory arguments by the same party (It's okay for me to do Z but I won't allow others to do Z in the same situation).