Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes • Hacker News Board

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

#191

Post by temp667 » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

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?

Is it the job of the DOJ to help scammers make money? Or can anti-trust be about some type of consumer protection?

Apple has carved out a small but lucrative area which is basically pretty consumer attentive. I think google assistant is way better, but I just like having a hassle free experience with apple too much to switch for what might be a better spec'ed product. I get my phone for 3 years, get applecare+ on it, and away I go. I've actually used AppleCare once, I was in and out in something like 15 minutes with a new phone. I've had apple remind me to cancel app subscriptions when I delete an app if I won't be re-installing! You get a notice before renewals on subscriptions, the terms are always clear and in dollars, consistent interface to cancel and get terms (ie, no FREE 1 month (and then fine print - $50/month after)).

The irony is that these are the sleezeballs - the EXACT folks that make doing subscriptions online so annoying and illustrate what apple is trying to create with their platform - TRUST.

They make games for Xbox - I'm sure microsoft wants a cut. Playstation I'm sure does the same.

This has everything to do with the apple eco-system from the consumer standpoint. I realize the issue here is that folks like tinder can't run whatever scam they want on the apple platform. Why is this a crime again?

Don't like it? There are tons of other phones out there, apple doesn't have close to a monopoly in smartphone sales.

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

#192

Post by notsureaboutpg » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

Razengan wrote: post #186

crazygringo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this illustrates WHY the app store is so popular No it doesn't. The app store is "popular" because Apple users don't have a choice. It's "popular" because they're forced to use it. I'm neither defending it or criticizing it... but let's not pretend like consumers are choosing the app store. Users in general are choosing Apple vs Android primarily for reasons that have nothing to do with an app store (i.e. hardware,…

> Apple users don't have a choice. It's "popular" because they're forced to use it. Do you have a minute to talk about our Lord and Savior, Android? People do choose iPhones or Androids based on what apps they know they can run.

Very few people do this. most popular apps have a version on both stores.

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

#193

Post by kevincox » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

dpratt wrote: post #103

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…

This is a flawed analogy. The correct one would be Cheerios printing "If you buy me at Costco, I cost $1 less" on the outside of the box. No rational retailer that isn't Costco would carry that product.

However the flaw in your analogy is that there is very little lock-in to particular retailers where is there is a huge lock-in to a phone you just bought.

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

#194

Post by jpambrun » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

kemiller wrote: post #155

izacus wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

No... many people actually appreciate the walled garden as consumers.

Allowing other stores doesn't mean you have to use them. You could still have your curated experience on the Apple store. Why do you want to impose your views on others?

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

#195

Post by sempron64 » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

danShumway wrote: post #82

dimitrios1 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling a company that has ~13% of the market share in mobile devices is quite the take. It will never hold up in court.

Apple holds ~40% of the US smartphone market[0], and >50% of mobile revenue from app store purchases[1]. Apple is one half of a duopoly. The citations of global mobile device market share are deceptive. It is not necessary for US regulators to prove that Apple has a monopoly in India to prove that they are engaged in anticompetitive behaviors in the US. If you want to make money as a mobile app developer, deciding no…

> You don’t really have a choice

Why do you not have a choice? If your product is not stocked in Walmart or Amazon, who make up the bulk of U.S. retail, can you not make money? Having your app exclusively on Android can make plenty of money. Epic makes plenty of money on other platforms. Many game publishers are successful publishing exclusively for one console. Pandora was fine before mobile apps. Many dating websites exist. 40% of a particular segment of the computing sector in a market as huge as the US does not monopoly make.

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

#196

Post by gowld » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

danShumway wrote: post #143

graeme wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, what is the cheerios example supposed to show? I don’t expect the discount coupon comes out of the store’s cut. Tinder or Epic are free to discount boosts or in game purchases, and spotify can give free months. The cheerios example probably involves a fair bit of negotiation between manufacturer and retailer. Whereas apps can discount whenever they choose, without permission.

Right. I'm honestly having a hard time thinking of situations where a seller like Cheerios would be able to say, "no, everyone is going to offer our products at $2.50 for the next week." I'd be tempted to call that anticompetitive in the opposite direction, of course a seller should be allowed to set their own prices and decide for themselves whether they want to participate in a promotion. It's not like there aren't…

> having a hard time thinking of situations where a seller like Cheerios would be able to say, "no, everyone is going to offer our products at $2.50 for the next week."

Because MRP (minimum resale price) is often illegal (bit it's complicated https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...)

MAP (minimum advertised price) is more permitted, which is why Amazon often makes you put items in your cart to see the discounted price.

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

#197

Post by izacus » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

AlexandrB wrote: post #124

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?

From https://appfairness.org/issues/30-app-tax/ > For most purchases made within its App Store, Apple takes 30% of the purchase price. No other transaction fee — in any industry — comes close. This is a straight-up lie and Epic, being in the gaming industry, knows it. Steam takes the same 30% (unless you're huge) and is Epic's direct competitor on PC. Not to mention every other gaming platform[1]. [1] https://www.ign…

> This is a straight-up lie and Epic, being in the gaming industry, knows it. Steam takes the same 30% (unless you're huge) and is Epic's direct competitor on PC. Not to mention every other gaming platform[1].

And Epic managed to fight this by offering a store that takes a lesser maragin. Something Epic or anyone else is ever allowed to do on Apple due to how they deliberately built the product.

If anything, the Steam situation is the perfect example of how broken the mobile world is when it comes to enabling competition.

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

#198

Post by Dahoon » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:16 PM UTC

desmap wrote: post #44

The most underrated thing we might get with multiple app stores: Devs do not need anymore XCode or a Mac to develop for iOS since Apple couldn't enforce any specific runtime or proprietary tool-chains anymore. I have an extra Macbook lying around here just for that reason. Who knows if Google will then offer Android Studio for iOS or Facebook a real React Native. Good times ahead and I cross my fingers. You don't hav…

That would be the day I might own my first Apple device or even release my apps on it.

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

#199

Post by danShumway » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:16 PM UTC

dpratt wrote: post #103

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…

This is a flawed analogy. The correct one would be Cheerios printing "If you buy me at Costco, I cost $1 less" on the outside of the box. No rational retailer that isn't Costco would carry that product.

Eh. A better analogy would be Cheerios sticking an insert inside their box of cereal that said, "save $1 at Costco". That kind of behavior is pretty common with physical retailers; most boxed products I buy will contain inserts that advertise replacement parts and other products from other sources.

Apple isn't just banning apps from mentioning competing stores in app descriptions, it's banning them from mentioning competing stores inside the app.

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

#200

Post by edmundsauto » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:16 PM UTC

flenserboy wrote: post #130

sneak wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If users didn’t want these things, users wouldn’t buy them. For the vast majority of people, and iPhone is way, way better than a computer that can run any app, precisely because it can’t run any app they click on. I’m a hacker, so I would love to be able to install any software I want on my iPhone, and introspect it in other ways. Most users, however, would have a way worse experience using their phone if they were…

Apple's advertising is built on security and privacy — allowing other App Stores on their system would only open up users to invasive tracking & attacks. I want my desktop system to be open as can be; I'm perfectly happy with my phone being (somewhat) locked down. That said, Apple could allow users to choose to install other App Stores on their devices, but at the cost of their devices being considered hopelessly com…

Except Apple is obsessed with taking responsibility for the entire user experience. Also, as people experience the subpar user experience w other app stores, they will still bring it to Apple for support. And probably blame apple - “it’s their logo on the cover”.

Consumer behavior is not intelligent.