Live data from Hacker News

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

appfairness.org

751–760 of 1001 posts

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

#751
post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To keep the continuity of discussion, I assume that this comment was posted here because my top level comment was in part a reply to your (temp667's) comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24579860 I appreciate the attempt to connect this to the anti-trust suit, but I don't see this as a good justification for why your original critique is relevant for a few reasons: - Many of the practices in your origin…

You don't have to agree with apple, but they clearly think the halo effect of having just one reasonably fair app store on their platform increases their platform brand power and profits both. I think they are right. Can I ask a question. When your elderly parents or kids ask for a phone (assuming they are not developers), does it give you no comfort that if its an apple from end to end including app store things wil…

> You don't have to agree with apple, but they clearly think the halo effect of having just one reasonably fair app store on their platform increases their platform brand power and profits both. I think they are right.

I agree, but "it makes us more money and gives us more power" has never been a defense against anti-trust law. Indeed if this was not true I imagine that anti-trust law would never have been necessary in the first place.

> Can I ask a question. When your elderly parents or kids ask for a phone (assuming they are not developers), does it give you no comfort that if its an apple from end to end including app store things will be a bit more reasonable?

First I have to point out that the unbundling solution solves this problem entirely. I just install the "lock this to the apple ecosystem" software before I give them the phone and I get all the current benefits as it pertains to children and elderly tech-dependents with none of the anti-trust issues.

I have to admit that I can only answer this question in theory. I have no kids (and don't plan on future kids) and my parents are more technically competent than average. The extent that I manage their technology is "this is good value for the price" and installing ublock origin everywhere.

The honest theoretical answer though is I don't think it would. There are a number of reasons for this.

- I really don't trust the app store to stop abusive behaviors in the first place.

- I could lock probably lock down an Android to the extent that I'm as happy as I would be with an apple (not very).

- I would (and do) worry a hell of a lot more about the internet than I would (do) about apps.

- I worry about the internet a hell of a lot more on IPhones than I do on androids, because I can't install a proper adblocker, because of Apples anti-competitive policies regarding browsers (the ad blocking api's in safari are gimped compared to firefox).

- At the point where I don't trust someone with a phone, I also wouldn't trust them with a credit card in general... at which point none of the payment stuff is problematic (But I acknowledge that the social reality w.r.t. the elderly and credit cards makes this a hard problem).

> And you do realize if things are unbundled, then EVERY phone company will dump their crap onto every users phone except for the folks who know enough to go uninstall / use the lockout thing you are talking about. And you don't think that will damage the overall apple brand?

This can be solved with apple only providing phones to sellers who agree not to do that easily enough. While I know epic has some issues with this strategy (as it pertains to Google and pre-installing fortnite) I do not.

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

#752
post #719
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>To me the iPhone is a console, end of story. I'm so tired of hearing this ridiculous analogy. From a purely technical stand point it may be true, but for a large chunk of the population, the smartphone is their one and only connection to the digital world. It controls their connection to their bank accounts, governments, news/discourse, family, friends, dating life, education (formal and informal), medical informati…

> But the smartphone has grown beyond a simple "nice-to-have" utility. Lets frame the discussion accordingly indeed. Not all gaming machines are consoles and not all smartphones are iPhones. Why should we prevent Sony from providing a console just because the PC is much more than a nice-to-have utility and their console competes with PC's? Apple is not a monopoly, and they are not even the majority of smart phones. W…

Lets say theoretically PC gaming didn't exist. If the only way to play games was with a console from Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo do you really think they would be selling consoles at a loss[1]? PC gaming is what keeps consoles priced competitively. If smartphones are like consoles, then currently you can only buy consoles. Sure Android is a little bit more open than iOS but not by much. There's not a problem with the existence of walled gardens / console-like devices, but there needs to be options available that aren't so restricted. Currently 99% of the smartphone market is controlled by Apple and Google, neither of which are willing to give up their control so I think this is a case where some kind of intervention is required to introduce competition.

[1] https://www.cnet.com/news/playstation-4-to-sell-at-a-loss-bu...

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

#753
post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How does letting me have a PC experience hurt your console experience? What gives you the right to force Epic into a console experience for everyone?

You can have a PC experience by buying literally any non-Apple phone. There are hundreds to choose from. The large majority of phones sold around the world are, in fact, not made by Apple.

What gives people who prefer the PC experience the right to ban consoles from existing?

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

#754

Device freedom is a must. Any device should be completely controllable by the end user. There's two parts to this to me: app stores and the data collected by the devices. Users should have the freedom to install any software on their devices, period. Users should also have the freedom to stop all data collection by these devices. This applies to all electronics--video game consoles, TVs, printers, who knows what else…

As a developer, a huge reason I don’t mind walled gardens is the massive reduction in piracy. I’m glad people want to download & pirate the apps I poured blood, sweat, and tears into... but I’m not down with theft. Each dollar I earn represents the time I’ve spent away from friends & family. I’ve worked on games that have been copied outright. All assets and artwork, but a new name and “publisher” being sold elsewher…

All games on computer are piratable. On mobile they are not as easy to pirate as you noticed. Do you think the gaming environment is better on mobile? Are dev better paid on mobile? From what I have seen I could answer no to both, and would even say the walled garden is really really not helping indie devs break through on mobile.

I see actually many ways in which devs are impacted : - discovery is basically null, both on Android and Apple. You need to just pay ads if you want people finding your game. Steam is much MUCH better at it. - you can't really have a good mod environment or a hackable game, which is very important for a lot of indie games - you cannot do some kinds of game. Right now that include gore and sexual games (see kawaii killer for instance) but also some other things like a weed growing simulator. Who knows what it will be tomorrow - as Google is going into gaming, and who knows maybe Apple at some point, you are basically on the hands of a competitor many times your size with no alternative

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

#755
post #507

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?

> I don't disagree but does this mean Sony should allow, for example, Steam to be installed on the PS5? That would be great for the hundreds of millions (billions?) of consumers and thousands of developers in the global game industry, but bad for exactly 3 companies: Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft.

It would also largely undo the business model of having consoles in the first place, and likely result in there never being another gaming console.

Which would be bad for a whole lot of businesses besides Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft, and for a whole bunch of consumers who really like the console gaming experience as distinct from PC.

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

#756

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely resent the implication that protecting the bottom n% of gullible users is mutually exclusive with giving power users the access they desire. they seem to do a decent job of it on their OSX machines, so why not iOS?

You're right! I disagree that the perfectly balanced system is OSX but overall I agree iPhones should have better "hack-ability". As I've posted elsewhere: I agree, Apple should make it easier to boot non-iOS iPhones. Even provide some tools to write custom OSes for the iPhone hardware. However, Apple should only provide that service to the registered adult owner of the device, in person at an Apple store after deliv…

Can you think of what a bad application can do to a user when side loading but is impossible to do when Apple reviews it, If I am a bad actor I can submit an app for review and activate an evil mode after the application is approved.

Maybe we can stop pretending that the lock is in place to protect the users, most Android users do not root their devices or install random evil applications and then complain to Google about it, can't we just be sincere and say , "yeah is the way Apple keeps control on things for financial reason" . we could focus on the correct stuff then like how we can protect the small set of very gullible users from bad apps(that can be in the store) or bad webpages or evil messages.

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

#757
post #671

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…

Wow that site was disappointing. It focused mostly on the 30% apple charges, which is both common and reasonable. It mentions the anti competitive behavior but mostly how it inflates prices, which is exactly how apple is trying to frame the debate. Also they have cookies on an entirely static site and disable scrolling until you press accept in the cookie dick bar (something you should probably never do, certainly no…

Common and reasonable according to which standards? One of the arguments of Epic in court is that Apple set the standard and other stores are simply following it.

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

#758
post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an intentional trick to force you to keep paying. The vast vast majority of people have access to a Windows PC or Apple product. How you ended up in this edge case I'll never know. To take this to it's logical conclusion, what if you don't run JavaScript on your browsers. Would they also need to give you a cancelation page which doesn't require JavaScript.

How about this? An email reminder N days in advance of the charge date with a cancel link. Companies get regulated for a reason, and facilitating the cancelation of subscriptions sounds reasonable to me.

Apple does send those emails, but the link to unsubscribe simply doesn't work on Linux or Android. It's the most absurd thing.

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

#759
post #743

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech is the right to not be arrested for speaking. It's not the right to not be punched in the face for saying stupid things (there is a separate law for face punching).

> Free speech is the right to not be arrested for speaking. It's not the right to not be punched in the face for saying stupid things (there is a separate law for face punching). No, the 1st Amendment is the right to not be arrested for speaking (in the United States). Free Speech is a philosophy that would absolutely cover not committing physical violence against someone for what they say. Violence in response to sp…

This is spot on. In addition the first amendment is theoretically protection against punching you in the face not being prohibited because of something you said. The government could make face punching legal in general, but not legal only if the victim first makes an idiot out of themselves.

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

#760
post #208

All the arguments about what company is most evil entirely miss the point. You don't make a decision on a specific issue based on what company you like more, you base it on who is right on the specific issue. From an ethical perspective that's what having a codified rule of laws is all about. Everyone get's the same rules no matter how much you like them. You don't arbitrarily punish people for doing things you don't…

Well said.
Post reply on HN