Apples idea of the future is one I no longer want any part in.
Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
271–280 of 338 posts
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes a console less of a “General purpose computer” than a phone? Again. Just like consoles and the Roku - the console makers get a cut of every game sold - even physical games. At one point, Nintendo limited the number of titles third party companies could publish and force them to use their manufacturing facilities. No retailer just sells things at a markup that covers costs.
A video game console isn't used for programming, video production, writing, homework, etc. You know what I mean. The fact that they are specially packaged PC parts is beside the point. You keep bringing up video game distribution though, so let's roll with it. Pretend all of software was like video game distribution. How much worse would software be for users? Imagine FOSS on that.
Well, taking in account that a console is a computer, running an OS, I would call it a general computer. Just because people don't port emacs to it doesn't make it less than a computer.
And in effect, I did create a editor for scripts to run on the Xbox 360 many years ago so QA could tweak things, so it is possible, but developers just publish games. If the only 'apps' developed for the iPhone were games, would it stop being a general purpose computer then?
Also, didn't the PS3 have an official linux bistro for a while? Blue something?
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
They do, in fact, make agreements with merchants to lock out other forms of payment. It isn't universal, true. They also contractually forbid merchants from taking actions that could make the fee more apparent to consumers, which drives up prices for non-credit customers, although there isn't a direct analog for Apple I can think of.
> They also contractually forbid merchants from taking actions that could make the fee more apparent to consumers Has this changed over time, though? I often see a lot of brick-and-mortar merchants advertising different prices for cash/debit vs. credit. I probably see it most often at gas stations, but I see it in regular retail stores and restaurants sometimes as well. I moved to a new house earlier this year and ev…
A lot of the 'discount' for cash is not really because of the credit card fees but if only 10% of the folks that pay cash don't ask for a receipt, they are pocketing serious money that isn't taxed (at least it is in my country)
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is like saying McDonald's have a monopoly because you can only buy McDonalds in a McDonalds restaurant... go somewhere else if you don't want the McDonalds menu.
Your analogy is just blatantly incorrect from the developer's perspective, very user-centric. You can't choose not to sell "patties" "McDonalds" if you want to actually sell your "patties". And as I said, people were just as free to install other browsers than IE on Windows and Chrome on Android, but it was still considered bad monopolistic behaviour and they got punished for it.
> And as I said, people were just as free to install other browsers than IE on Windows
Check the ruling against Microsoft: they were slapped down for this because they had a monopoly in the field of PCs / computers, and they (tried to) leveraged that monopoly into a monopoly for browsers.
Android is the dominant smartphone platform (per units shipped), so Google is closer being considered a monopoly. Apple does not have a monopoly in smartphones or computers, so I'm failing to see how any parallels here.
The best argument you can hope to make is that a duopoly exists between Android and iOS, and the duopoly together should be treated as monopoly for practical purposes.
But claiming monopolistic behaviours and associated restrictions on a company that has 20% of the market is silly.
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
They sell their devices at a healthy margin. Their financial interest in the device should stop at the till. If they want to sell additional software and services then they can prove their value on a competitive level playing field. Right now they are double-dipping, not because of value they are adding, but because of the power they have given themselves over the consumer/developer relationship.
So is Amazon “double dipping” on the Kindle are the console makers? Are grocery stores for marking up products and having slotting fees? The App Store is a service.
I disagree, it's a market.
If you allow 3rd parties to sell something, you create a market. That market should be free and competitive.
If you want to keep it a service, don't allow 3rd parties in.
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Depending on the developer / publisher but the standard deal is about the same. Same goes for Steam.
Steam is a counterexample though. You don't have to deliver your PC game through Steam, and many of the big publishers have opted not to.
Both Apple and Steam provide discovery and network effects, which help to justify their cut, but, as Jason Fried mentioned[1], you can't opt-out of these discovery benefits with Apple.
[1]:https://twitter.com/jasonfried/status/1273655616897273858?s=...
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have a specific section in the rules for "Reader" apps like Netflix and Spotify. It's not unclear, it's been there since 2018.
How is "reading my email from the hey server" different from "reading a video from the netflix server"? Neither app functions without a separate, non apple subscription. The main criticism of Hey, from apples perspective, is that the app doesnt just work when you download it, but the same applies to netflix. I personally think Hey could get around it by adding some other kind of feature to the app, like a way to read…
>How is "reading my email from the hey server" different from "reading a video from the netflix server"?
Because Netflix is the dominant one in the relationship, an iPad without Netflix is a broken iPad to the sort of people who buy iPads.
and email service without an iOS app is a broken email service so Apple intends to take advantage of that.
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that exactly the problem here though? A big business like, say netflix has enough clout to get what they want. A smaller business or an individual has no option but to get screwed by apple because they have no power. Shouldn't we be fighting for a level playing field?
That depends on ones philosophy. It's a driver vs passenger issue. Big companies such as Netflix, Disney etc. are drivers, they have impact on the user base. If Netflix stopped working on Apple's devices we would see huge outflow of users. Hey on the other hand is a passenger. Sure, they might have 50k users in the queue, but them not being on Apple's platforms will probably shrink this number significantly. It's unl…
And this is why anti-trust laws exist.
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#279The 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?
Google Play is a bad example here because you can absolutely use app stores like F-Droid or Amazon to get content onto your device.
Arguably, they have problems as well, but it's not an apples to apples (no pun intended) comparison.
One has a completely locked down ecosystem that people are worried to speak against lest they lose access to it.
The other has alternatives, albeit ones without huge traction. It does allow you to make decisions about whether Google Play gives value (discovery, etc).
Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes a console less of a “General purpose computer” than a phone? Again. Just like consoles and the Roku - the console makers get a cut of every game sold - even physical games. At one point, Nintendo limited the number of titles third party companies could publish and force them to use their manufacturing facilities. No retailer just sells things at a markup that covers costs.
The difference is that the video game developer has priced the console-maker's cut into the cost of the product, and that's the only way it can be sold. Spotify charges a lower monthly price if you sign up on their website (and then go and sign in on iOS) than if you sign up through the iOS app. Whether or not this hurts Spotify isn't at issue here; there are Spotify customers who are paying more than they have to be…
I think this is the only reasonable way to deal with this. You can't expect Spotify to take the hit. Apple demands extra money for users who sign up through the iOS app, so it's only reasonable to let the users who choose to sign up that way, pay the additional cost that comes with it.
Of course this would be entirely reasonable if it was a conscious choice by those users, but Apple is intentionally keeping the market non-transparent, screwing their own most loyal users.