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

Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 338 posts

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#161

Post by scarface74 »

realtalk_sp wrote: post #134
Despegar wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The simple fact is that Apple is injecting itself as an intermediary in the payment process and extracting a comically oversized commission for no meaningful added value. Frankly anyone who says this with a straight face is being absurd. Apple's commission isn't for "payment processing", promotion, any particular API, or service they provide on their platform. That they do all of those things makes it an attractive…

> They charge 30% because they've amassed 1 billion extremely valuable users who are willing to spend money on apps in their marketplace. Apps that are made up to 42% more expensive (NOTE: the 30% fee applies to all in-app purchases and the first year of subscriptions) in a way that's entirely opaque to those users. The fact that you think this is okay is the only thing I find absurd. You also seem like someone who i…

Would they also be unhappy if they knew the markup for every store? The markup for soda and drinks in a restaurant? Is there anyone who doesn’t know that retailers markup goods?

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#162

Post by scarface74 »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #100

The problem is, Apple taking a cut from service where they don't own the device (you bought it from them; you own it) don't provide the network (you contract for that yourself) don't provide the content Its just some kind of strong-arm tactic - they do it because they can. Like some bouncer outside a club who demands money, but is not employed by the club nor the act. Just standing in the door and demanding money, an…

And the console makers? Google Play? The movie theaters? Amazon? Spotify?

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#163

Post by s800 »

realtalk_sp wrote: post #120

Some people here seem to be responding to all of this inappropriately. The simple fact is that Apple is injecting itself as an intermediary in the payment process and extracting a preposterously oversized commission for no meaningful added value. And it's easy to see that Apple knows what they're doing is wrong. They strictly prohibit developers from signaling that there's an extra cost for purchases made through App…

Anyone know what console makers charge developers these days? My experience is from several decades ago, and is comparable to what Apple charges in its store.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#164

Post by scarface74 »

ballenf wrote: post #66

If apple would just insist on taking it's cut from ads and indirect revenue from surveillance and spyware, so many of these problems would go away. Apple currently effectively subsidizes the surveillance of its users with adware and spyware apps getting free ride. The only problem with this approach is that it's basically completely unworkable. But other than that minor issue, it's a great idea. Maybe the ad revenue…

Are people actually asking Apple to get in the ad business? It’s already a step too far that they sell ads on the App Store.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#165

Post by realtalk_sp »

scarface74 wrote: post #157
realtalk_sp wrote: post #120

Some people here seem to be responding to all of this inappropriately. The simple fact is that Apple is injecting itself as an intermediary in the payment process and extracting a preposterously oversized commission for no meaningful added value. And it's easy to see that Apple knows what they're doing is wrong. They strictly prohibit developers from signaling that there's an extra cost for purchases made through App…

The simple fact is that Apple is injecting itself as an intermediary in the payment process and extracting a preposterously oversized commission for no meaningful added value. You mean like every retail store - digital and physical?

You're describing stores that exist in a competitive ecosystem with price variation. The analogy breaks down because "buyers of products" doesn't map one-to-one with "owners of iPhones" and because distribution of physical goods actually has significant costs.

Assuming you are in fact in the tech industry, you should know that near-zero marginal distribution cost is one of the core principles underpinning software economics.

I'm also not arguing that Apple shouldn't pass some of the costs it incurs to provide apps (e.g. APN, engineering costs, etc) on to developers and by extension on to consumers. But it should be priced fairly and transparently.

A flat 30% fee without the ability to itemize that for customers or signal the existence of alternative payment methods is just wanton, nefarious extortion.

The 'right' solution would be to charge a specific, itemized "Apple device usage fee" that's separate from and in addition to the primary fee for a service itself. Apple deserves to take a portion of revenue specific to the provision of a service to its users. I can't see an argument where it deserves to take a portion of all revenue developers receive.

But Apple is not permitting this because it would pull back the curtain on their rapacious practices and their customers, having already paid a significant amount of money for their devices, would almost certainly be quite angry about it.

Spotify is a good example of the distortion occurring because of this misguided system. They're charging customers $12.99 if they subscribe through the App Store instead of the $9.99 they would pay outside of it for exactly the same service. So, right now, some Spotify customers are being needlessly pillaged by Apple when, unbeknownst to them, they could get the same exact service at less cost. Spotify apparently had plans to email affected subscribers to alert them about this nonsense situation, but I don't know what became of that.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#166

Post by scarface74 »

benologist wrote: post #55
pcwalton wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This IAP policy has nothing to do with security though.

And the many stores we can trust are more important than hypothetical abusers. Hypothetical abusers can be addressed in other ways, for instance Microsoft shuts down malicious servers and entities using lawyers and law enforcement.

Law enforcement will do a lot of good if the author isn’t in the US....

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#167

Post by zaroth »

e_y_ wrote: post #110
zaroth wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here you go; https://developer.apple.com/programs/enroll/

The developer agreement states that you're only allowed to sideload apps that you're responsible for developing yourself. Maybe if it's open source you could make an argument for that being allowed, but it's not a general purpose install path for consumers.

Technically true.

> “Application” means one or more software programs (including extensions, media, and Libraries that are enclosed in a single software bundle) developed by You in compliance with the Documentation and the Program Requirements, for distribution under Your own trademark or brand, and for specific use with an Apple-branded product running iOS, watchOS, tvOS, or macOS, as applicable, including bug fixes, updates, upgrades, modifications, enhancements, supplements to, revisions, new releases and new versions of such software programs.

> “Provisioning Profiles” means the files (including applicable entitlements or other identifiers) that are provided by Apple for use by You in connection with Your Application development and testing, and limited distribution of Your Applications for use on Registered Devices and/or on Authorized Test Units.

However in practice, for example, I use the Apple Developer Program with Cydia Impactor to build and install apps like Spike and xDrip on my kids iPhones (they are both T1D). It's basically point and click. [1]

[1] - https://spike-app.com/install-spike-using-cydia-impactor/

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#168

Post by scarface74 »

realtalk_sp wrote: post #165
scarface74 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple fact is that Apple is injecting itself as an intermediary in the payment process and extracting a preposterously oversized commission for no meaningful added value. You mean like every retail store - digital and physical?

You're describing stores that exist in a competitive ecosystem with price variation. The analogy breaks down because "buyers of products" doesn't map one-to-one with "owners of iPhones" and because distribution of physical goods actually has significant costs. Assuming you are in fact in the tech industry, you should know that near-zero marginal distribution cost is one of the core principles underpinning software ec…

Let’s talk about console makers then.....

How many stores actually “transparently” tell you their markup?

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#169

Post by scarface74 »

subdane wrote: post #123

Apple has an abusive relationship with developers. I bet this harkens back to Jobs being pissed about jailbreaking and having to open up the platform. I think the culture still reflects that basic misunderstanding at the company. It's ironic, because it's the apps and developers that made the iPhone what it is - case in point, "There's an app for that," which they actually went and trademarked. https://www.cnn.com/20…

You have no idea about how Nintendo and all of the console makers treat developers. Roku won’t let commercial streaming apps on their platform without making a deal with them.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#170

Post by davidivadavid »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #100

The problem is, Apple taking a cut from service where they don't own the device (you bought it from them; you own it) don't provide the network (you contract for that yourself) don't provide the content Its just some kind of strong-arm tactic - they do it because they can. Like some bouncer outside a club who demands money, but is not employed by the club nor the act. Just standing in the door and demanding money, an…

That's a pretty obvious straw man. They take a cut for the marketplace. Which is the service apps rely on.
Post reply on HN