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

Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

support.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 408 posts

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#281

Post by frosted-flakes »

kevincox wrote: post #200
chongli wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is effectively overcharging cash customers for the availability of a service that they don't use. Cash isn't free for stores to handle either. They need to pay employees to count up the cash at closing time, put it in the safe, and periodically distribute cash to registers so they don't run out of change. Additionally, stores typically contract with security companies to pickup and deliver cash to/from the store…

Those are good points, and maybe I picked a bad example. But my point is if that Apple claims that the security and convince is worth 30% we should let the market decide. This is to an extent what Google Music is doing and I think it would be healthy if more companies did this.

A common argument is that Apple is effectively a monopoly, in which case "the market" can't decide. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with this viewpoint, but Android and iOS are two separate markets because the cost of switching between them is so high, users are subjected to so much lock-in that switching is almost not an option, and users can only use one market at a time. The difference is that while Apple has a monopoly on iOS with its app store, Google does not have a monopoly on Android with the Play Store because of the existence of competing stores (Galaxy Store, F-Droid, sideloading APKs etc.).

There are analogies to be drawn with game consoles, but there are some key differences: game consoles are not general purpose computing devices necessary for everyday life; users can own multiple consoles at once; there are more than two competitors; and the cost of switching is relatively low.

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#282

Post by filleduchaos »

archildress wrote: post #35

Given the strong emotions around the topic, I've been a bit afraid to ask this question - is what Apple does really that different than traditional retail? In FMCG there are difficult hurdles to jump over to get on the store shelves. The stores don't have an obligation to put anyone's product on the shelf. They can also module what the cut of the revenue is. I'm not sure I have an opinion on what Apple is doing, but…

Leave even traditional retail aside, is it that much different than what pretty much every gaming console does? I am aware that there _are_ people who are ideologically consistent in disliking the walled gardens of both iOS devices and popular consoles, but I have never actually seen the level of heat/vitriol that Apple gets targeted at, say, Sony or even Microsoft for the PlayStation/Xbox ecosystems respectively. I suppose it's due to people seeing games as "frivolities" even though the PlayStation Network for example pulls in the same ballpark of revenue as the App and Play Stores.

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#283

Post by ses1984 »

ehutch79 wrote: post #185
SkyBelow wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't sound right, so let me try to form an example to get at what is the issue I'm seeing. Let X be "It is okay for me to ban my customers from using discounts." Let not X be "It is okay for me to use discounts offered by another restaurant." This doesn't feel like a particularly contradictory situation. Maybe the issue is that we skipped a few too many steps, because there isn't anything particularly illegal…

I THINK the situation is more... Let not X be "It is okay for me to use discounts at another restaurant that bans discounts."

Does Google ban bypassing their stores on Android?

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#284

Post by kelnos »

fortytw2 wrote: post #243
goopthink wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the issue is, "I created a set of rules and ban users who try to bypass them, but I recognize how bogus/harmful to a business those rules are because I do my utmost best to bypass those exact same rules when I'm in the position of a user on someone else's platform." The contradiction is in trying to support the rules with one hand while resorting to the same bypassing tactics they decry when they're in th…

I'm pretty sure google allows you to do this though, so Apple isn't bypassing any "rules" on android.

Perhaps the parent's use of "contradictory" wasn't so great; I would say "hypocritical" would be better. This isn't about doing anything legal or illegal, or violating or not violating anyone's terms of service. It's simply pointing out that Apple, when given a choice, would rather use an external payment processor (in order to pay lower fees) when building an app for a platform they don't control... while at the same time denying people the ability to do that on their own platform.

To me, that sounds like a compelling argument in a hypothetical anti-trust suit against Apple where a plaintiff is claiming that Apple's requirement to use Apple's in-app payment system for all payments in iOS apps is anti-competitive behavior.

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#285

Post by kyriee »

baxtr wrote: post #253
actuator wrote: post #232

I really don't understand why people are defending Apple on this. It seems shameful of a $1.5 trillion company to do this to developers. Even more so when they themselves don't abide by their philosophy. They are extracting out a competitive advantage from this on other services like Spotify or Netflix( even without this they have a big one at app discovery and pre installs on iOS). Kudos to Google for allowing the d…

Imagine for a second distributing an app in 175 countries around the globe including all the tax details. I think it's fair to participate on such a global platform and a price for it.

There is a difference between distributing an app and forcing people the developer to pay for the underlying service it offers.

Especially if you opt to not use any of said platform services.

App distribution != online services. They are two distinct markets.

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#286

Post by spullara »

KillerDiller wrote: post #245
spullara wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone could get a developer account and compile the code and deploy it to their phone if the app owner released the source code.

This could be a crucial argument in that it distinguishes between the essential freedom of device owners to decide what software to run, and the freedom of device manufacturers to decide which apps to sell in their stores and at what terms (still subject to anti-trust laws). Unfortunately, the $99 annual fee per developer account nullifies any possible mass-market sideloading possibilities. (Imagine what could happen…

Makes sense for Apple to make developer accounts free while publishing to the store cost money.

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#287

Post by cwhiz »

filoleg wrote: post #211
cwhiz wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is a minority player in every single market in the world, including the US. You can't have monopolistic behavior without a monopoly. You can't be a monopoly if you are not the market leader. People want this to be a legal issue but it's just a market issue. If people don't like these policies they shouldn't buy Apple products or release apps on Apple devices.

>Apple is a minority player in every single market in the world, including the US. While I heavily agree with the rest of your reply whole-heartedly, this specific part isn't entirely correct. You are correct that Apple (when it comes to smartphones) is a minority player worldwide, but it isn't the case in the US, where it sits at a comfortable 58% smartphone market share [0], thus making it a majority player. 0. htt…

That link does not load for me and it contradicts Statista[0] so I am not sure exactly what to believe.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/266572/market-share-held...

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#288

Post by kelnos »

oillio wrote: post #181
gamblor956 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Analogous != same. It means its very similar factually. The law does not require that Google and Apple run their online stores the same way, or that Apple interact with Google's store the same way they choose to run their own store. That's correct. But the law does require them to run the stores in a way that does not violate antitrust laws. Apple is violating antitrust laws by forcing companies to use Apple Pay as a…

> plus a 30% cut for doing nothing It's not nothing. Maybe not worth 30% but it is worth something. They run the store, buy the servers and pay for the bandwidth. Pay the engineers to develop and manage the infrastructure. Run the app certification process. Maintain the security of the platform. etc. If they can't charge their 30% cut, they will need a different business plan. Possibly charging app developers directl…

You're nitpicking a particularly irrelevant point the parent made in support of the overall argument, which doesn't work.

I agree that running a payments platform is not nothing. The issue is that there is zero competition in the space of iOS payments (very convenient for Apple that they get to make the rules and also benefit from them). That harms consumers because sellers will often charge more to account for Apple's 30% cut (and if Apple bans charging more on only their platform, the seller has to raise prices for everyone, which hurts their non-iOS user base). An alternative payments processor might charge 20% or 10% or even less. Healthy competition in that space would benefit consumers, while forcing Apple to charge a fee more in line with the actual cost of what they provide.

(There are certainly downsides; Apple has done a lot of work to ensure the security and privacy of their payments solution, and other processors may not do as good a job. And without restrictions, it's the seller who decides what processors to support, not the buyer, so the buyer doesn't get to -- for example -- choose to pay a little more to keep their information in Apple's care.)

Perhaps a good compromise would be for Apple to require that apps support Apple's in-app payment system, but allow other payment methods in addition, and also allow sellers to charge more to users who use Apple's system. If customers don't value whatever Apple is providing for the extra fee, Apple will be incentivized to charge less.

> Possibly charging app developers directly for access to the app store.

They already do this, via the yearly developer fee.

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#289

Post by kevincox »

frosted-flakes wrote: post #281
kevincox wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are good points, and maybe I picked a bad example. But my point is if that Apple claims that the security and convince is worth 30% we should let the market decide. This is to an extent what Google Music is doing and I think it would be healthy if more companies did this.

A common argument is that Apple is effectively a monopoly, in which case "the market" can't decide. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with this viewpoint, but Android and iOS are two separate markets because the cost of switching between them is so high, users are subjected to so much lock-in that switching is almost not an option, and users can only use one market at a time. The difference is that while Apple has a m…

I'm pretty sure if many popular services charged 30% more if you subscribed on an iPhone the word would get around pretty quick. The other option in this case is purchasing the subscription from your browser which is awkward, but viable, even with Apple's authoritarian ToS.

Re: Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details to avoid Google 30% cut

#290

Post by cwhiz »

bduerst wrote: post #205
cwhiz wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is a minority player in every single market in the world, including the US. You can't have monopolistic behavior without a monopoly. You can't be a monopoly if you are not the market leader. People want this to be a legal issue but it's just a market issue. If people don't like these policies they shouldn't buy Apple products or release apps on Apple devices.

>You can't have monopolistic behavior without a monopoly This is wrong. Monopolistic behavior is anti-competitive behavior that doesn't require having a market monopoly. Think of it as a pattern of behavior that moves you towards having a monopoly.

It is not wrong. It's not monopolistic behavior without a monopoly. Anticompetitive behavior can lead to a monopoly and that type of behavior can be considered illegal. However, this behavior from Apple is not an illegal attempt to control more of the market. If anything it is net negative for Apple and their marketshare.
Post reply on HN