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

Apple, Epic, and the App Store

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 781 posts

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#31

Post by rileymat2 »

jtokoph wrote: post #5
kanobo wrote: post #2

"This case asks us to draw the line between anticompetitive behavior, which is illegal under federal antitrust law, and hypercompetitive behavior, which is not." I feel this contradiction within me when I find myself promoting and praising the growth hacks and 'doing whatever it takes' mentality startups employ and then subsequently realizing that at the same time I would probably shame and criticize the same tactics…

Uber is the prime example of this. They broke many laws and regulations in order to provide a better product/user experience without much punishment to get to where they are today. If Uber started breaking more laws today they would be shot down very quick.

Besides for the employee/contractor stuff, I thought Uber was mostly exploiting a legal loophole for cars for hire v. hailed taxi distinction.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#32

Post by braythwayt »

baby wrote: post #26
noncoml wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some customers buy into the Apple ecosystem because of its walled garden. Not despite of it.

Really? Who?

Not my sole reason, but since you asked, here I am. I give my children iPhones. I like having certain family controls over what they use, and further controls over what appears in the app store to begin with.

I like having a single vendor for all my software purchases, that I can trust to issue refunds and discontinue subscriptions promptly.

I spend all day thinking about computers, I don't want to also be my own IT professional and security team, especially for a slab of glass I hold in my hand. I accept that I have to do some IT and security thinking about my iOS devices, but the more the walled garden provides, the less is on me.

I understand that with this "safety" comes a loss of "liberty," but I find that an acceptable tradeoff for consumer hardware in my personal life. I don't automatically assume that the right tradeoffs for me are also the right tradeoffs for everyone else.

If someone wants to sideload apps and/or develop their own custom apps without some kind of special developer status, I have no problem suggesting they buy something else.

I accept that I am not the typical HN reader.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#34

Post by lilyball »

wmf wrote: post #23
orliesaurus wrote: post #14

Okay this is going to sound stupid but maybe someone else feels like me about it: I don't understand why Apple has to take such a big chunk from transactions of in-app purchases? Similarly Google. Why 30%? Why not 5%? That feels like it would be more honest. Is it just because "they can"?

Partly because they can but also to prevent developers from gaming the system. Imagine a free app with an IAP to unlock features but Apple only takes 5% from the IAP.

Exactly this. If IAP was a different cut, all apps would go "free" overnight and require an IAP purchase to unlock most of the app.

Apple could try something like giving "consumable" IAP a different cut, but I'm sure devs would still try to game that too (e.g. having a consumable that unlocks the app for a set amount of time, rather than a permanent unlock).

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#35

Post by bluedevil2k »

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #11

A pretty well-thought out article, given the inflammatory nature of the subject matter. I think Apple is right on the line. But I don't see a good argument as to what their doing is being anti-competitive. ~2 million apps are on the app store. Charging a fee for giving developers a huge market that spends money is not exactly unfair. And the rules of engagement are generally applied equally to everyone - the exceptio…

actual harm => consumers end up paying more for the apps because the app developers have to increase their price to cover Apple's cut (which is more like a shakedown).

I don't see any reason why a company needs to pay any percent of their revenue instead of a flat fee. You pay a % of revenue when someone is your partner or an investor in your company. Apple is neither. In fact, they've shown to be the opposite of a trusted investor/partner as they've copied successful apps and integrated them into their own platform.

The App Store should be a fixed fee, something like $19/month, for your app to be on sale there.

On another note, regarding your first comments, in the late 90's Microsoft went through DOJ depositions and demands for breaking up simply because they bundled Internet Explorer with their operating system. It didn't charge Netscape money for access to Windows and IE wasn't generating any income. But the furor at the time was huge and the anti-MSFT attitude has prevailed to this day. Why not the same feelings for Apple who's made this far more extreme and far more anti-competitive.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#36

Post by badsectoracula »

baby wrote: post #26
noncoml wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some customers buy into the Apple ecosystem because of its walled garden. Not despite of it.

Really? Who?

People who do not know better and people who make money out of people who do not know better.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#37

Post by asutekku »

jasode wrote: post #6

In the spirit of this particular story, I'd like to ask HN the following question: Should closed hardware (that owns its entire stack) even be legal to sell? Yes, it's legal today but should we make it illegal? To try another example besides Apple iPhone, consider the $35000 Prima Cinema movie server to play 1st run movies at home on day of release: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22prima+cinema%22&source=ln... In m…

I'm really happy with my closed hardware as the tightly controlled environment promises the customer that the software run in it will be high quality and on some level will be vetted before allowed to the platform. This also attracts other developers to create high-quality software, as those good enough will be highlighted by the platform owner, which in turn means increased sales.

And I really can't say the same about open platforms, which usually UX-wise are awful and for that I'm willing to give away the "freedom" some other platform might provide.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#38

Post by benbayard »

orliesaurus wrote: post #14

Okay this is going to sound stupid but maybe someone else feels like me about it: I don't understand why Apple has to take such a big chunk from transactions of in-app purchases? Similarly Google. Why 30%? Why not 5%? That feels like it would be more honest. Is it just because "they can"?

Part of the reason is that Apple & Google don't charge credit card processing fees. So for a $1 app, 30% is ~ their cost. Of course, that logic doesn't scale to things like $9.99/mo subscriptions and the like.

Apple could take out credit card processing fees and then charge 5%, but up until now they haven't had a reason to change. Perhaps we will see change here, who knows?

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#39

Post by baby »

A 30% just seems wrong to me. It just screams: we have a monopoly, if you want to build something that everybody around can you use, if you want to be a successful startup, you’ll have to give us a third of what you charge. There’s no other way: we’ll be your middle man forever.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#40

Post by baby »

braythwayt wrote: post #32
baby wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Who?

Not my sole reason, but since you asked, here I am. I give my children iPhones. I like having certain family controls over what they use, and further controls over what appears in the app store to begin with. I like having a single vendor for all my software purchases, that I can trust to issue refunds and discontinue subscriptions promptly. I spend all day thinking about computers, I don't want to also be my own IT…

Should a parent really get their children iPhones?
Post reply on HN