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

Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

appfairness.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#111

Post by dragonwriter »

vonwoodson wrote: post #80

But, can we just say: f ck Fortnite. This is the wolf calling for homes to be built of straw. We hate “free to play”/“pay to win” and in-app purchases. We HATE* them. Thank god that Apple is taking a stand. I haven’t been so happy with a company since they refused to unlock that dude’s phone in California a few years back. (Which, I know, the lawsuit ended the same day an iOS “security” patch came out.) Seriously. If…

> We hate “free to play”/“pay to win” and in-app purchases.

While I'm not a Fortnite player, I thought Fortnite was known for not being pay-to-win, with IAP being for cosmetic options, not in-game advantages; basically selling digital collectibles you can show off while playing.

I think there is a pretty big ethical differentiation between that and F2P games that have you pay for in-game advantages (with the Wargaming.net model where you pay for in-game options that are mostly not competitive advantages but broaden the scope of play choices [because most of the competitive advantage is compensated in matchmaking] somewhere in between.)

Not all F2P + IAP models are the same.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#112

Post by Apocryphon »

doublerabbit wrote: post #2

"The Coalition for App Fairness", I cannot not laugh. On the stage you have: Epic - Trying to be the next Valve/Steam. Happy to rip off their customers via in-game transactions. Spotify - Who rip off artists by either failing or paying very little in royalties. Tinder - Sells sex. None of these companies have any care for the actual developer; who are the folk trying to make a living from their creations.

Basecamp, Tile, Protonmail are also some big names listed in the site. Even Prepear, the fairly obscure company that ran afoul of Apple’s aggressive trademark protection actions, is a founding member.

I wonder if Telegram will join next. It’s as if they rallied together every company that’s had a news controversy with Apple this past year, at least the ones smaller than FANG.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#113

Post by strig »

vonwoodson wrote: post #80

But, can we just say: f ck Fortnite. This is the wolf calling for homes to be built of straw. We hate “free to play”/“pay to win” and in-app purchases. We HATE* them. Thank god that Apple is taking a stand. I haven’t been so happy with a company since they refused to unlock that dude’s phone in California a few years back. (Which, I know, the lawsuit ended the same day an iOS “security” patch came out.) Seriously. If…

Completely disagree. Although I don't play Fortnite, their monetization model is fine. There is no pay to win (don't conflate that with free to play), the only things you can pay for are the battle pass and cosmetic skins. Apex and many other games use this model and it's ultimately good for the consumer in my experience.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#114

Post by burlesona »

AlexandrB wrote: post #86

From https://appfairness.org/our-vision/ > No app store owner should prohibit third parties from offering competing app stores on the app store owner’s platform, or discourage developers or consumers from using them. I don't disagree but does this mean Sony should allow, for example, Steam to be installed on the PS5? Or is the definition of "App Store" used here narrow and arbitrary?

Yes, it means Sony has to add Steam to PS5 or else it is narrow and arbitrary.

To me the iPhone is a console, end of story. If you like the console experience, it’s a great device. If you don’t, there are a million android and even alternative OS based phones out there which are more like a PC. If you want your phone to be a PC, you should do what most people around the world do and buy one of those.

Instead we have these companies who are trying to force Apple to sell PCs instead of consoles. It’s in their business interests, so I get it. But I hope it doesn’t work, because there are a lot of us (myself included) who really LIKE the console experience, both on iPhone and on PS4, and don’t want a PC experience on those devices.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#115

Post by karpierz »

grahamburger wrote: post #49
karpierz wrote: post #19

If I build an operating system + hardware, should I be legally mandated to provide tooling to make it easy for users to find and install arbitrary software?

There's quite a lot of grey area between "legally mandated to make it easy " and "legally mandated to not make it impossibly difficult."

I agree, but the fundamental question is do you want the government to regulate what kind of OS interface should be legal?

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#116

Post by izacus »

temp667 wrote: post #97

Haha - this illustrates WHY the app store is so popular. You've got Match.com (owns tinder). Repeat FTC offender (most scammmers never get the FTC slap on the wrist). "Match Group also allegedly makes it too difficult to cancel a subscription through “confusing and cumbersome cancellation practices.” The FTC claims users must click through two pages of survey questions and cites a 2015 internal presentation that note…

Interesting how there's so many posts here attacking the companies behind the action (ad hominem style) by specifying actions that have nothing to do with the abuses Apple and AppStore do.

Is this targeted?

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#117

Post by damnyou »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #67
izacus wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a great time to make sure we ban all the closed ecosystems and reestablish free market at its best.

A free market is mutually exclusive with a ban on closed ecosystems. You are arguing against a free market.

You are talking past each other. Markets can be free in principle but not in practice for various reasons (oligopolies, monopsonies, etc).

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#118

Post by sithadmin »

danShumway wrote: post #11

Can we just link directly to the advocacy group's page ( https://appfairness.org/ )? I'm not certain the article is adding anything. ---- I'm generally supportive of at least some of Epic's arguments towards Apple, and I do believe that Apple (and multiple other FAANG companies) are engaged in anti-competitive behavior that's currently hurting the market. But a lot of the arguments I'm reading on the App Fairness sit…

Your cereal aisle analogy is a bad one, for two reasons.

For one, everything about the merchandising of a particular product in a big box store is agreed upon in advance between the retailer and the manufacturer before the product is placed in the store: the product placement on the shelves; what kind of manufacturer incentives (e.g. coupons) the retailer will honor for the product and how renumerations will be made from the manufacturer to the retailer for them; what kind of sales volume is required to trigger volume discounts, etc. These agreements are highly bespoke in a way that couldn't be scaled with the sort of volume that's on app stores.

Second - physical retailers are compensated by the manufacturer when they accept a manufacturer's coupon. The transactions are logged, summarized, and traditionally the physical coupons were collected and sent to the manufacturer. Barring a pre-negotiated agreement to accept less than face value in exchange for a coupon, the retailer isn't losing revenue on the deal. However, when an app publisher offers a means to circumvent the app store payment system, Apple/Google DO in fact face a loss of revenue.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#119

Post by return1 »

temp667 wrote: post #97

Haha - this illustrates WHY the app store is so popular. You've got Match.com (owns tinder). Repeat FTC offender (most scammmers never get the FTC slap on the wrist). "Match Group also allegedly makes it too difficult to cancel a subscription through “confusing and cumbersome cancellation practices.” The FTC claims users must click through two pages of survey questions and cites a 2015 internal presentation that note…

That s pure whataboutsm. Nothing stops apple from vetting apps without charging an extortionate 30% tax. They have plenty of money to do that. Or do you imply that apple’s tax deters scammers? Then , how are these companies accepted in the app store?

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#120

Post by [deleted] »

izacus wrote: post #116
temp667 wrote: post #97

Haha - this illustrates WHY the app store is so popular. You've got Match.com (owns tinder). Repeat FTC offender (most scammmers never get the FTC slap on the wrist). "Match Group also allegedly makes it too difficult to cancel a subscription through “confusing and cumbersome cancellation practices.” The FTC claims users must click through two pages of survey questions and cites a 2015 internal presentation that note…

Interesting how there's so many posts here attacking the companies behind the action (ad hominem style) by specifying actions that have nothing to do with the abuses Apple and AppStore do. Is this targeted?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN