Live data from Hacker News

Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

theverge.com

241–250 of 387 posts

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since being apartment-bound due to COVID, I've switched to doing most of my development on my desktop machine, so there hasn't been any urgent need for me to have a new laptop. I still have my late-2013 MBP, one of the last non-Butterfly / non-Touchbar laptops Apple made, which I use on rare occasions. I've looked at the Windows laptops extensively though, and will likely get a ThinkPad X1 Extreme G2 or G3, or a Dell…

> I've looked at the Windows laptops extensively You can also take a look at linux vendors like System76. Check their line-up here: https://system76.com/laptops Among Windows laptops did you consider the ASUS Zephyrus G14?

Thanks, I wasn't aware of those Linux laptops, and will definitely check them out. I hadn't seen the Zephyrus G14 either. How great to have so many choices!

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#242

What ultimately made me pull out of the Mac App Store was the fact that publishing with Apple meant “app with customizations to accommodate stupid rules”, and $EVERYWHERE_ELSE meant “upload and be done with it”. If you haven’t checked lately, the Mac App Store is a pathetic ghost town for the most part. On iOS I guarantee that if the App Store had even one alternative, many apps would do the same and bail on Apple, a…

> the Mac App Store is a pathetic ghost town for the most part

This definitely resonates with me. If you want to see what a good app store could look like, check out SetApp [0]. They charge a monthly fee for access to a curated list of paid apps, they offer a 7-day trial IIRC. I initially subscribed for their two email clients, then stopped using them as they were both shit (slow, glitchy, poor UX, etc.). I am still subscribed just because I like the idea and just how many apps they offer.

0: https://setapp.com/

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use F-Droid everyday to install and manage apps outside the Play Store and it works out fine for me. Android is also open source. If I don't like the way something is done then I'm free to change it, and there are multiple ROMs that I can choose from as well.

Good luck with the “open source” version of Android and running apps that depend on Google Play Services.

Like what apps? If I need something that depends on Google, there is always this:

https://opengapps.org/

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can’t take 0, the service isn’t freee to develop

They can take 0, that's Google's cut on Google Pay.

Of course they’ll take 0. You do realize that Google is in the business of harboring as much data about you as possible. It’s much more worthwhile for them to know what you’re buying than for them to take a cut from using Google pay.

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#245

I find the group think here to be incredible, and you all will likely be very disappointed when the legal system winds up supporting Apple. Regulating retailers because you don’t like their cut is price controls, which is completely contrary to a free market, and ultimately undermines the end user experience of having a trusted, secure store. Perhaps Google or Apple’s power is so strong as to warrant regulation - but…

> I find the group think here to be incredible, and you all will likely be very disappointed when the legal system winds up supporting Apple. You partially addressed it in your edit, but I'm pretty doubtful that the legal systems of every major state support Apple forever. It's really just a matter of time before some country gets the critical mass of popular opinion and legislative support for the idea that app stor…

I’m all for people convincing their governments to enact legislation in the public interest. I think there are huge misunderstandings with the current case, however:

1. People are suggesting there is no need for new legislation, that current antitrust law covers Apple’s behavior. I think this is, politely, wishful thinking.

2. People really underestimate the consequences of government intervention in the form of a consent decree or industrial regulations. They can be very good or very bad, and it usually takes many years of tinkering to figure it out.

Like: once you regulate the app stores, you’ve effectively enshrined them as a state-sponsored enterprise for a generation or longer. The %cut might get lowered, but now adjusting it is like fighting over taxes, and is wrapped up in all the other ideological problems of the day.

3. People underestimate the unintended consequences of breakups or forced arrangements.

Say the stores are forced to be spun out of their parents. How do we know this will lead to a lowered cut%? If you regulate that cut, what does the company get in return? Indentured servitude isn’t generally looked upon with favor. What about mergers and acquisitions, like, could the spun out google and Apple stores eventually merge, creating an actual monopoly? If not, why not, and for how long? Now we are back to enshrining a business as a state-sponsored enterprise.

Of course I’m sure that some kind of regulatory arrangement in the public interest could be dreamt up, but let’s remember that the AT&T split took 8 years to sort out into a consent decree. Microsoft’s trial and second consent decree took 3 years - finalized in 2001. If the antitrust law isn’t enough to tackle Apple and Google (and I doubt it is), crafting the legislation alone could take up to 5 years or maybe longer. The US communications act took 60 years to get revisited. Are we so sure there’s not some kind of alternative on the horizon that will disrupt Apple and Google in the next 10 years? The web browser disrupted Microsoft once, maybe some successor with WASM and other goodies will make native apps a moot point? Doesn’t seem that way now but 10 years is a long time.

This is the trouble with antitrust law or new industrial regulatory law: unintended consequences, or being too late to be effective. The better way is to promote entrepreneurs to topple this regime. It’ll take 10-15 years either way, but I think the latter approach has the chance of a better overall consumer experience.

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#246
post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conveniently ducking that they 100% control the market of software for their phones. And anyway, I didn't say that case was equivalent. You asked for a case where a company with less than 50% was subject to an antitrust ruling and I provided one. And I'll remind you, I'm not a lawyer. Technically, zero lawyers is a good number of lawyers, so I must insist that makes me a good lawyer. Just, I'd suck in court.

A company that was subject to antitrust because it colluded with other companies in the market has nothing to do with what’s going on in the app market. Collusion is always illegal -except for the sports leagues. Yes and consoles makers have control of their consoles, Roku has control of their platform, as does LG with their WebOS based TVs. Yet and still when you were challenged to come up with an analogous example,…

I can't speak for what other people have posted, but there's, to my mind, a quite analogous case for this situation: Kodak v. Image Technical Services.

The case involved Kodak refusing to sell parts for its copiers to outside repair shops, and they were sued by the shops who claimed this was anticompetitive behavior.

Kodak made a claim that since there was robust competition in the market for copiers, they couldn't have market power in the aftermarkets for "Kodak copier parts and service." The Supreme Court rejected that argument, holding it was possible to show that there was market power (and therefore antitrust liability) in a secondary market even if the primary market is competitive.

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really shoddy behaviour. Is it just laziness on their part or is there a benefit to them to keep developers guessing?

There are definitely some benefits. If people are trying to sneak stuff past you if benefits you to not explain what you found or how you found it when you reject things. If someone submits an app containing shady things X, Y and Z and you just respond "no dice", now they have to either remove all of the shady things they were doing, or try to guess which one(s) were detected. They can proceed by trail and error, but…

this seems like the non-cynical answer. thanks. don't know why i'm being downvoted for a reasonable question, but there you go.

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#248
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the biggest issues with Google play store review is they won't actually tell developers which rule they're breaking, as you point out. This is so incredibly developer-hostile that the fact developers keep using the play store pretty much helps make the case they're acting in an anticompetitive manner. It certainly is interesting to note Google removed the title "Non-competition" from clause 4.5 of their develo…

I absolutely agree that from a developer point of view, this is awful, but just to play devil's advocate here, the reasoning generally given for these is that bad actors tend to tweak their apps to bypass rules a lot faster and efficiently if you always tell them exactly what to fix to get unbanned. I agree developers shouldn't be treated like this, but it still is true that malicious apps are a real problem and bad…

This is basically the "security through obscurity" argument that has been so heavily criticised and largely shown to be false. If they (and apple etc.) Open sourced their approval algorithm and allowed pull requests people with an interest in having a high quality app store could try and poke holes in it and make it more robust. I know there are humans in the mix making judgements, but those judgements are largely of the "does the app meet this tick box criteria" type.

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#249
post #209
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the equivalent would be that you can only use an apple car to go shopping in the apple store, and you can't use that apple car to go shopping anywhere else.

so in fact what we have here is a vertical lock-in. lock-in is just as bad as a monopoly, as it removes the ability to choose competitors. i believe the EU has a law for interoperability, it only applies to API's as far as i know, but one could see the phone as a device with an API that allows apps to run on it. it could therefore be considered that now allowing any app to run on the phone is a violation of that law.

That's an interesting point. They forced the end of every manufacturer using unique charging cabled for their phones, forcing a universal app API would be a great step. The phone would literally just become a platform and you could have a healthy competition about who builds the best platform.

Re: Apple apologizes to WordPress, won’t force the free app to add purchases

#250
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have is that you make it sound like you have a right to release software for their platform. They opened their platform for devs to make apps. You accepted that offer, read their terms, agreed to those terms, and are now complaining about those terms? I get it that you want to make 100% of the price made from each sell, but that's not realistic. If you sell your product at a brick&mortar store, you don'…

30% of the app price is high, but not insane. They're handling 100% of the distribution, installation, verification, and payment processing. 30% of recurring revenue is highway robbery, because they offer NOTHING to subscription content.

30% cut from one-off payments is highway robbery. On top of that...

> They're handling [...] payment processing.

That has a tone-deaf shade. This piece of news is particularly volatile because Epic and Apple are now going to court over Apple expressly forbidding a developer doing their own payment processing. These are mafia-like tactics.

I've said it before: 30% is way, way too much. A very good agent gets 15%, and they actually arrange their clients with profitable opportunities. The app stores have set themselves up as gilted gatekeepers, demanding a commission twice as high.

> 30% of recurring revenue

During feudalism 1.0 the peasants were raked for 10%.[0] In this brave new world of 2.0, that would apparently give the monarch an insufficient profit margin.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tithe

Post reply on HN