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

321–330 of 781 posts

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#321

Post by sprafa »

MR4D wrote: post #313
immigrantsheep wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instagram and TikTok have been found guilty on collecting an absurd amount of data against user's wishes. How did Apple's policy prevent that? Also I don't see Apple banning TikTok or Instagram.

Let's go with this for a start: https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/07/30/facebook-says-app... Also, notice that FB has done everything possible to gather information. Frankly, the NSA should just hire FB to do their work - it'b be faster and cheaper. Locking stuff down is hard. Doing it with multiple app stores will be impossible.

Isn’t PRISM basically using FB to do NSA work for them anyhow?

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#322

Post by dwild »

ericmay wrote: post #280
danShumway wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to heavy push back against both-sides-isms here. > I think Epic's real motivation here is to run their own App Store Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, but maybe we haven't been clear enough. For the record, we want there to be multiple app stores on iOS. > build a bigger moat and get the profits…

> Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, maybe we haven't been clear enough though. Right, and the rest of us don't want that, and I also don't want games or apps that don't adhere to Apple's rules. You want another option of App Stores because you want don't want to pay for the user base that Apple created and…

And how does having multiple app store would stop anything that you want? It wouldn't stop the Apple app store from existing with theses restrictions, they would still be there. You would still have access to the apps that Apple consider fine for their stores, without installing another app store. Win-win for everyone.

> You want to embed permanent location tracking in your apps, abuse user data, and not have to have your crappy practices out in the open when Apple shows the "nutrition scorecard" for your app.

How about stopping theses practice on the OS side of the device? Apple already do that there... I agree completely that it's crazy when an OS allow stuff that we don't want to allow, it's not curation that solve this, it's actually a secure system that does.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#323

Post by y7 »

enragedcacti wrote: post #287
ericmay wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, maybe we haven't been clear enough though. Right, and the rest of us don't want that, and I also don't want games or apps that don't adhere to Apple's rules. You want another option of App Stores because you want don't want to pay for the user base that Apple created and…

...just don't use other app stores? Honest question, what do you lose by other people having the option?

Because it leads to fragmentation.

If developers have a choice of app stores, then users have to install ALL app stores if they want access to the entire market. This happened with streaming services as well: when Netflix was the only prominent one, only that subscription was enough. Now you also need Amazon, Hulu, etc.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#324

Post by kuschku »

eyesee wrote: post #149
nemothekid wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume their costs are just, Credit Card Fees, Infrastructure Fees (Bandwidth, Storage), Reviewers Salary. Not sure this adds up to 30%. I think the real reason is that when the Apple store was started, they looked around at the current prices for "software distribution". Retail was like 70%, and other app stores; for example the Danger Hiptop / T-mobile Sidekick charged 60% for their apps store, and the carriers w…

CC processing fees may exceed this. Just using Stripe [1] as an example, 2.9% + 0.30 per transaction means $.329 for retail CC pricing. Surely Apple gets a discount, but it's price of competitive alternative that matters. Part of the problem with this whole market is that we're talking about zero marginal cost goods. Taking away frictional costs of transaction, distribution and support, the economic argument is for p…

The German GiroCard payment system is 0.125%.

The EU just limited credit card inter bank exchange fees to 0.2%.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#325

Post by Slartie »

ericmay wrote: post #280
danShumway wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to heavy push back against both-sides-isms here. > I think Epic's real motivation here is to run their own App Store Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, but maybe we haven't been clear enough. For the record, we want there to be multiple app stores on iOS. > build a bigger moat and get the profits…

> Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, maybe we haven't been clear enough though. Right, and the rest of us don't want that, and I also don't want games or apps that don't adhere to Apple's rules. You want another option of App Stores because you want don't want to pay for the user base that Apple created and…

> Right, and the rest of us don't want that

Please stop speaking for others. I would certainly like to have the ability to install other sources for apps. Since I am part of "the rest of us", for any kind of "us" that came to my mind while reading your posting ("iPhone users" or "Apple customers" or "HN readers"), your statement is patently false.

> That's not what I want on my iPhone.

Then don't install additional stores. I also don't want most of the apps currently available in Apple's app store on my iPhone, but I'm far from demanding that they are to be banned and other people who want to use them should be prevented from doing so.

Also it's too sad you conspicuously skipped over danShumways question regarding the "bigger moat" - because I indeed would be interested in what moat you are imagining there, too.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#326

Post by danShumway »

enra wrote: post #302
danShumway wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to heavy push back against both-sides-isms here. > I think Epic's real motivation here is to run their own App Store Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, but maybe we haven't been clear enough. For the record, we want there to be multiple app stores on iOS. > build a bigger moat and get the profits…

I think Apple clearly has their moat, but it's not the App Store. The whole stack, from hardware and OS, is their moat and one that makes them unique. Maybe I'm a fan, but the moat actually makes the user experience better. Epic's Store moat likely won't make anything better for anyone, expect for Epic. I personally don't enjoy the experience of managing my PC games in 5 different libraries which all log out almost e…

> I personally don't enjoy the experience of managing my PC games in 5 different libraries which all log out almost every day, need to be updated every week, push ads, newsletters, free stuff, crashes etc.

But, do you enjoy having 5 times as many games? Do you enjoy having a ton of games from GoG updated and running on modern Windows? Do you enjoy having DRM-free options for many indie titles? Do you enjoy that it's at least possible now to buy some console-exclusive games like Journey for the PC?

People get really bent out of shape about the idea that sticking to one storefront means they might need to skip games. But getting rid of the storefronts doesn't mean you'll get all of the games. It means those games that were made possible because of the other storefronts won't exist.

You are already skipping games on iOS, because those games aren't being made.

> Epic tries to make this some kind of crusade of freedom and developer rights, while their clear intention is actually get in to kingmaker position

Correct, and my point was that these are not exclusive goals. Allowing multiple stores to fight over users is explicitly the outcome that we want.

It's not a surprise to anyone advocating for developer rights that Epic wants to make a store and compete with Apple, because that is what we want them to do. None of us care about whether or not Epic is going to make any money in the process.

> which they're already trying to do on the PC market

I know that gamers hate Epic right now, but understand that when you look at the overall market and you talk to the developers themselves, Epic has been unambiguously good for the PC games market.

You want to talk about kingmakers -- it is good that the entire success or failure of a PC game doesn't need to rely on Steam's decisions. It is good that Steam is being forced to negotiate better terms for developers right now. It is good that Epic is funding indie games that otherwise would not have been made.

I don't like the exclusives either, neither as a developer nor as a gamer. But the exclusives are nothing compared to the amount of good Epic is doing right now for the PC game's market. If you're an indie developer and suddenly you can halve the cut that storefronts are taking from you? That's huge.

But, to circle back around to my main point:

> So I have very little sympathy for Epic

You don't need to have sympathy, you need to have self-preservation instincts. You don't get the luxury of choosing who the champion is to take on Apple, nobody who fits your moral criteria is powerful enough to do the work.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#327

Post by tantalor »

tc wrote: post #41

Here's the thing. Even if you're OK with Apple (or whoever) controlling what you can run on your computers, this is a centralization of power that will be co-opted. Let's say that Australia wants to ban consumer encryption. This would currently be difficult to enforce for PC software. But on mobile, this is easy. Just make Apple and Google enforce it! Make them ban such apps from their stores. Now you've achieved per…

> ban such apps from their stores

You could always use a website instead. Why is an app necessary?

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#328

Post by jdminhbg »

kelnos wrote: post #307
ericmay wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, maybe we haven't been clear enough though. Right, and the rest of us don't want that, and I also don't want games or apps that don't adhere to Apple's rules. You want another option of App Stores because you want don't want to pay for the user base that Apple created and…

I don't own an iPhone in large part because I cannot install an alternative app store or install non-Apple approved apps. > Right, and the rest of us don't want that, and I also don't want games or apps that don't adhere to Apple's rules. Why do you care? If you don't want to install a third-party app store, then don't. The games available on Apple's store will continue to adhere to Apple's rules, and if you want tha…

> Why do you care? If you don't want to install a third-party app store, then don't. The games available on Apple's store will continue to adhere to Apple's rules, and if you want that curation, you still get it.

Apple users care because if non-App Store distribution methods are banned, then developers are forced to go through Apple's process to get access to them. You can see complaints around this thread about how bad Epic's store on PC is. On iOS, they're forced to use Apple's purchase UI, subscription rules, privacy rules, etc.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#329

Post by fungos »

sercand wrote: post #316
bluedevil2k wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

> consumers end up paying more for the apps because the app developers have to increase their price to cover Apple's cut. I don’t think so. When we determined our app’s monthly price we have A/B tested several price like $5/month, $8/month, $15/month. And we have chosen the one that we earned most (It was the expensive one). If the Apple’s cut will become 10%, we won’t change our price because would earn less. Theref…

Nice to know, so they can happily charge 95% from your app?

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#330

Post by aaanotherhnfolk »

Simplest compromise I've heard so far is for Apple's cut to scale with size of IAP/subscription.

30% cut starting at $0.99 purchases. As mentioned this barely covers processing fees.

20% cut starting at $9.99.

10% cut starting at $49.99.

Not only does this fix the Epic, Netflix, Hey, etc issue where high value or high volume txns get unfairly middlemanned by Apple. It also incentivizes developers away from the "race to the bottom" effect that made everything a crummy $0.99 microtransaction in the first place.

Post reply on HN