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

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

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 387 posts

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

#351

Post by parasubvert »

romanoderoma wrote: post #326
parasubvert wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft’s case was about parlaying their monopoly in Windows to the browser space by making Internet Explorer an intrinsic part of Windows. This is completely different from the #1 and #2 smart phone marketshare players charging a 30% cut as the exclusive software reseller to their own platform. The original At&T was allowed to be a monopoly for 80+ years because it was in the public interest. The 1982 breakup was…

> Microsoft’s case was about parlaying their monopoly in Windows to the browser space by making Internet Explorer an intrinsic part of Windows. Nope, they have been accused and sentenced of abusing their dominant position by forcing OEMs to pre install IE on Windows, before the integration started. The way MS force them was with restrictive licenses that practically threatened OEMs to do what MS ordered or face legal…

When Apple starts OEMing iPhones, get back to me.

The cases are not even close to being in the same league.

Microsoft didn’t force OEMs to preinstall IE: it came with the Plus! pack in Win95 which was optional. IE shipped preinstalled on the OSR1 distributions in late 1995. OEMs couldn’t uninstall it. MS saw IE as a feature, nor a product. The DOJ disagreed. And yes, the API arguments were the other factor of the consent decree violation.

Apple:

- has no consent decree to violate

- is not being anticompetitive by taking a retail cut on a store for its own platform (ISVs are free to go exclusively Android); Google is free to drop its retail cut, 3rd party stores on Android exist, and also the browser exists and is arguably completely unrestricted.

- should be allowed the freedom to admit apps on its platform to better the consumer experience.

Interfering with this collapses the whole security and curation value add of the App Store, or relegates it to a 3rd party with different incentives, or declares that Apple’s store is the only one where ISVs make money and therefore must become a utility because ISVs want more margin.

Good luck with arguing this. It will take 5+ years or more to legislate properly, and I suspect parliaments have bigger problems to deal with.

If one wanted to chase Apple for anticompetitive behavior it would be to do some amazing stuff in-browser with things like WASM, streaming, etc. and argue that Apple is blocking those innovations with its Safari mandatory policy to force people to use its App Store and native APIs. That’s the closest where I can see this argument holding water.

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

#352

Post by smnscu »

Terretta wrote: post #324
smnscu wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

The ideal app store on the Mac is https://brew.sh/ “App” inventory: https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/

Oh, for sure, and you have brew cask for an awesome collection of free/oss apps. https://formulae.brew.sh/cask/

That's more on the nerdy side, I was thinking more in the sense of the fancy/fun/quality feeling the Mac app store selection should evoke, instead it's just a ghost town with expensive bullshit and ass UX (at least based on what I remember - I haven't opened that damn app in ages lol).

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

#353

Post by parasubvert »

romanoderoma wrote: post #320
scarface74 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So now you expect Congress to force Apple to sell you an iPad at the same price it sells to a corporation that buys 1000s? Of course Apple is going to make a deal with Amazon when Amazon can offer it another sales channel.

> So now you expect Congress to force Apple to sell you an iPad at the same price it sells to a corporation that buys 1000s? I honestly expect the congress to remove Apple powers as gatekeeper If the Apple Store is the only store for iOS devices, they have to allow any app in and let the authorities handle misbehaviour Apple is not a National State, so it shouldn't act as the ruler and dictator of the State. I expect…

Amazon absolutely has the right to do that. As does Apple.

Government forcing companies to sell other company’s products is a terrible policy and completely contrary to the free market.

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

#354

Post by hn_check »

hartator wrote: post #113
7tsfmCAusrQ wrote: post #36

As an app developer myself, with apps on both the Google Play Store and the App Store with over 250K monthly active users, I have become so frustrated with Apple's arbitrary and capricious enforcement of its App Store regulations, its bullying and coercion of developers, its extortionate fees, and its monopolistic anti-competitive practices, that I have stopped updating my apps on the App Store. I wonder how many oth…

> My next laptop will be a Thinkpad or Dell. Why haven’t you switched yet? Competition is not that good unfortunately.

Because the story is an absurd lie. The guy has gotten 100+ upvotes for that hysterically dumb bit of fiction.

HN has proven to be outrageously gullible time and time again, and this one takes the cake.

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

#355

Post by lilbopete »

romanoderoma wrote: post #341
scarface74 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CEO of Google refused to use an Android device for years.... https://9to5google.com/2013/03/21/google-chairman-eric-schmi...

at least Eric Schmidt did it because he was used to Blackberry, which was better than iOS and Android when they both came out Steve Jobs didn't let his kids around an iPad because it was dangerous for them In an interview he said: “Actually we don’t allow the iPad in the home. We think it’s too dangerous for them in effect.” I think we can trust Steve Jobs when he talks about his (baby) products

Reading the article above, it looks like it was from 2013. Android and iOS has both been out for awhile by then and Blackberry was falling being.

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

#356

Post by romanoderoma »

lilbopete wrote: post #355
romanoderoma wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

at least Eric Schmidt did it because he was used to Blackberry, which was better than iOS and Android when they both came out Steve Jobs didn't let his kids around an iPad because it was dangerous for them In an interview he said: “Actually we don’t allow the iPad in the home. We think it’s too dangerous for them in effect.” I think we can trust Steve Jobs when he talks about his (baby) products

Reading the article above, it looks like it was from 2013. Android and iOS has both been out for awhile by then and Blackberry was falling being.

AFAIK as a former blackberry user (my job required to use one to adhere to our clients' security protocols) 2013 was the peak year for Blackberry

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

#357

Post by xenospn »

7tsfmCAusrQ wrote: post #142
xenospn wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so weird. I've removed and added in-app subscriptions to my app multiple times and never had any problems getting it approved. Even now my app is redirecting users to my website to purchase subscriptions, and never had an issue getting past the review process.

Watch out, you are sitting on a ticking time bomb. It's just a matter of time.

I'm selling physical products so I'm not too worried.

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

#358

Post by nodamage »

apatters wrote: post #321
nodamage wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't an antitrust claim against Apple likely fail if the plaintiff cannot establish they actually have market power in the smartphone market?

IANAL, but if the lawsuit was about selling smartphones, then yes I think so. If the lawsuit was about selling some popular class of app in which Apple leveraged its monopoly over app distribution, I think the plaintiff could have a pretty strong case.

Do you think that a court will permit a plaintiff to claim Apple has a "monopoly" over app distribution without an examination of its market power in the greater smartphone market?

Keep in mind that even if Apple only had 1% market share in the smartphone market they would still have a "monopoly" over app distribution on their own phones.

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

#359

Post by ficklepickle »

This is what we would have if AOL won in the 90's. That round of walled gardens failed, but this round is much better funded.

We need protocols not platforms. The longer this goes on, the more they will ratchet up the pressure. The open internet has always won out in the past, but this round of walled gardens has a strangle hold. More people conflate Facebook with the internet than ever did AOL or CompuServe.

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

#360

Post by nodamage »

zerocrates wrote: post #343
nodamage wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key point in the Kodak case was that Kodak changed their policy on selling repair parts after people bought the original product, and the change in policy is what led the Supreme Court to decide that the market for repair parts was a separate and relevant aftermarket, because the people that bought Kodak copiers lacked information at the time of purchase about Kodak's repair policy and therefore were locked-in to…

Yes, the specifics of the case don't match up perfectly, but the context of the question was "show me a case where a single company had antitrust liability without a majority of the market," not "prove with a single citation that Apple will lose."

Fair enough, my comment was intended for people who were unfamiliar with the case and might misinterpret it to apply here.
Post reply on HN