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

361–370 of 408 posts

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

#361

Post by screwycaboose »

basch wrote: post #233
oillio wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

There should be a difference between a 30% cut of an app (of which apple can say their toolkits and os development are part of the product offering) and a 30% cut of a subscription, especially a multiplatform subscription. if you could buy netflix with applepay, but then 90% of your netflix usage is not on apple devices, apple collects on that entire subscription. Subscriptions should be priced more like a credit car…

There is a difference. Subscriptions only pay 30% of the first year. Every year after drops to 15%.

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

#362

Post by screwycaboose »

fastest963 wrote: post #247
zaroth wrote: post #236

This looks like the free market at work to me. Google policy explicitly permits apps like Apple Music to charge for subscriptions outside the App Store and for them to not allow taking subscription payment through the App Store. Apple has a similar policy for “Reader” apps on their own App Store for apps which are used to access content that you subscribe to, which Apple reasons that “Hey” does not qualify for. That’…

Spotify definitely pays 30%. See https://timetoplayfair.com/timeline/ I assume that Hulu also pays the same 30%.

it's only 30% of the first year if you allow subscriptions in app, then 15% the following years

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

#363

Post by Razengan »

wildfire wrote: post #158
LeoPanthera wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apple" is not a single monolithic entity. The engineers who will be working their asses off to create and present WWDC have absolutely nothing to do with the business decisions of the App Store. Do not bully them, and do not waste the time of other participants who will have genuine engineering questions.

Those engineers enabled this outcome. It is perfectly reasonable to ask why they facilitated immoral actions. There is a code of ethics all computing professionals should use to consider their actions. https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics#:~:text=The%20Code%20incl... .

> It is perfectly reasonable to ask why they facilitated immoral actions.

Should you be held accountable for everything any company you ever worked at has done or will do?

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

#364

Post by Tehdasi »

bduerst wrote: post #309
notatoad wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is wrong. Monopolistic behavior is anti-competitive behavior that doesn't require having a market monopoly okay, sure. but it's only illegal when you have a monopoly.

In the U.S. E.U. does not require a dominant market share to fine companies for monopolistic behavior.

It does, but: "In the AKZO v Commission case,[79] the undertaking is presumed to be dominant if it has a market share of 50%. There are also findings of dominance that are below a market share of 50%, for instance, United Brands v Commission,[74] it only possessed a market share of 40% to 45% and still to be found dominant with other factors. The lowest yet market share of a company considered "dominant" in the EU was 39.7%.If a company has a dominant position, then there is a special responsibility not to allow its conduct to impair competition on the common market however these will all falls away if it is not dominant." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

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

#365

Post by Razengan »

rydre wrote: post #22

Boycott 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.

I must politely decline your invitation to participate in the pitchforkings. Apple is still better than Google or Microsoft for me.

As a user I still think Apple is the least evil. As a developer I still prefer their platforms.

Your recent comment history is full of negging on Apple and I think this is one of those neg-waves that magically appear just before every WWDC, every year, like clockwork. Only 3.5 days to go, and I couldn't be more excited!

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

#366

Post by dirkgently »

snowwrestler wrote: post #50
gamblor956 wrote: post #30

Note 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 lawyer…

Obviously if Apple owns one platform, and Google owns the other platform, it is not actually the same situation. 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. In fact it's arguable that a free marketplace encourages and depends on different companies taking different approaches to meet cu…

Apple's bitch.

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

#367

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#368

Post by [deleted] »

screwycaboose wrote: post #361
basch wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should be a difference between a 30% cut of an app (of which apple can say their toolkits and os development are part of the product offering) and a 30% cut of a subscription, especially a multiplatform subscription. if you could buy netflix with applepay, but then 90% of your netflix usage is not on apple devices, apple collects on that entire subscription. Subscriptions should be priced more like a credit car…

There is a difference. Subscriptions only pay 30% of the first year. Every year after drops to 15%.

[deleted]

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

#369

Post by happymellon »

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…

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

Err, Apple does charge to develop for their platform.

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

#370

Post by shuckles »

In these discussions, the focus seems to be on the cost to Apple for providing App Store as a service (billing, fraud prevention, tax compliance, etc.). However, presumably there is a reasonable argument to make that developers should compensate Apple for creating iOS itself as a platform. There are many platform capabilities developers argue for as a fundamental right. Spotify has said Apple must make Siri extensible for voice control, others have wanted SPI to be API. All this work is meaningful investment, both financial and technical.

Are there proposals for a more incentive aligned business model for Apple as a platform provider? Would it make sense for Apple to, e.g., charge a percentage of all of Tile's hardware sales? After all, Apple dedicates resources to maintain the location and bluetooth APIs Tile depends on. Is it sufficient to say all these benefits must be capitalized into the cost of an iPhone purchase? But what about the customer who's overpaying for Tile's theoretical support who never uses the product itself? Maybe a better business model would lead to a world where there is less speculation ahead of WWDC: the developer's needs and Apple's finances are so aligned that we can guarantee the new support they're ready to announce!

Post reply on HN