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

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981

Post by giantrobot »

garaetjjte wrote: post #943
giantrobot wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not going to get open firmware. Cell phones are radio transceivers in the hands of millions of unlicensed users. The only reason any of the cellular infrastructure works is all the devices run tested and certified firmware. For most cellular basebands the PHY is more powerful and capable than the regulations would normally allow. They only get certified for consumer use because the firmware bounds the operatio…

You can buy various SDR devices without any license, it's not hard to make jammer if you want to.

It's not hard to make a jammer if you're setting out to build one. The problem is when you inadvertently turn your phone into a jamming device because you tweaked some firmware settings.

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

#982

Post by nodamage »

mthoms wrote: post #977
nodamage wrote: post #878

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the context but I think you've actually largely misunderstood the point of the original poster you were quoting: > To me the iPhone is a console, end of story. That poster was suggesting the iPhone is an intentionally locked-down device similar to the way that consoles are locked-down devices. They also suggested there are alternative devices on the market (Android for smartphones, PCs for gaming) that a…

Try to re-read my comment detached from the original posters overall argument since I actually made no mention of it. My problem (as I though was clear, perhaps not) is with dismissively equating (any) smartphone with consoles. Especially as it relates to business models and user freedoms. It's intellectually lazy and is especially a disservice when used dismissively ("end of story"). We can and should do better.

So you took a single sentence from an entire paragraph out of context and proceeded to post an elaborate counter-argument against an argument the original poster hadn't actually made? Literally the same thing you were complaining about two posts above?

No one actually suggested smartphones have the same level of utility as a console. The original point was that one specific aspect (tightly controlled software distribution) of one specific brand of phone (the iPhone) is similar to the console experience and is something certain users might actually prefer, which is an entirely fair point to make.

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

#983

Post by a1369209993 »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #710
_qulr wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have built trust with Apple and prefer the centralized Apple (over the decentralized dev-houses of the world) IMO this is a false dichotomy. Epic and Spotify are not the size of Apple, but they're still giants compared to little indie developers. I trust indie devs way more than any of the BigCos. It's just natural: the fewer customers you have, and the less market power you have, the more you care, the more you…

I appreciate this sentiment, but I've lived through too many of these transitions to agree. e.g. Blizzard, Google, YouTube, Curse, Sun Microsystems, Zynga, Minecraft, Occulus. Indie developers / startups either become the size of Epic and Spotify, or get bought by companies the size of Epic, Spotify and Apple. Find me the indie developers / startups that cannot be "corrupted" (converted?) and I'll invest as soon as t…

> Find me the indie developers / startups that cannot be "corrupted" (converted?) and I'll invest as soon as they IPO.

A couple years ago I would have said Bay 12 Games, but they recently sold out to Valve, despite almost (more than?) two decades as independent.

Trust no one, trust nothing.

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

#984

Post by nodamage »

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…

The original analogy is pretty disingenuous and conveniently ignores a crucial detail: in the cereal example Kroger (presumably) still gets paid when the discounted box of cereal is sold. Whereas what they're asking for is the equivalent of Cheerios demanding to be placed on Kroger's shelves while cutting Kroger out of the transaction entirely. Why would Kroger ever agree to that?

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

#985

Post by rtikulit »

gpm wrote: 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…

I think the discussion and analysis of each company's prior behaviour is exactly on point--the question before humanity in the general case is "what are these companies really up to?"

Each (including Apple) has a hidden agenda. They can be both beneficial and harmful. They are not our friends! They deserve our scrutiny, suspicion and supervision.

A company is a system that was created to pursue an agenda. That agenda is nothing like the agenda of a typical human individual (except at absurd levels of abstraction) and is not necessarily net-beneficial to actual humans in the short or the long run.

It's an axiom of systems analysis that behaviour trumps speech when you are trying to figure out what a system is really up to. To say it another way, we would like to identify the actual operant utility functions of these companies, so we can predict what they are really working towards, and what their behaviour and impact might be in the future. Their prior behaviour is the best signal we have!

To force the discussion to revolve around "laws" and "right" is to pretend that current ethical positions and laws are optimal and can't be gamed. A superficial inspection will show these premises are false.

The ongoing work of governance is to try to figure out economic, social and legal rules that "work" for some consensus definition of "work". That requires a clear understanding of what is actually happening, and good scenario analysis for the range of possible outcomes (including unintended consequences). Maybe that's unrestricted free markets, maybe sometimes it isn't. Maybe it's the law as it currently stands, maybe it isn't.

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

#986

Post by chaosharmonic »

Apocryphon wrote: post #547
chaosharmonic wrote: post #461

As an Android user, DAE wish we could see some similar collaboration across some of the vendors running downstream forks? The Apple tax comes up a lot, but there's a whole separate conversation to be had about Google Play APIs as a major choke point rendering other Android implementations "incompatible."

That's a great idea, Google shouldn't be exempt from criticism and activism just because Android is more open than iOS. It's also a good way to put the irritating "why don't you go after Google too?" whataboutism that abounds in any discussion that critiques Apple.

It also would be better for the proliferation of actual specs if we had an industry group offering up alternatives to, say, Cast and Wear APIs.

Never mind the dream that would be a sane alternative to SafetyNet.

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

#987

Post by Apocryphon »

pb7 wrote: post #593
Apocryphon wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iOS App Store 2018 revenue came to $46.6 billon, while Google Play revenue stood at $24.8 billion by this measure https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/ > Apple Users More Willing to Pay for Apps https://www.statista.com/chart/14590/app-downloads-and-consu... > The median iPhone app user earns $85,000 per year, which is 40% more than the median Android phone user with an annual income of $61,000. [...] T…

Thank you for confirming what an incredible deal iOS developers are getting for a mere 30% fee. It sounds like Apple has created a really valuable platform that attracted wealthy customers compared to the competition and they should be rewarded for it.

It also confirms that because of Apple's dominance in terms of profitable smartphone platforms to develop for, developers are essentially obligated into having to support iOS if they want to make money. Even if you choose to spin that in a positive light, it demonstrates a power asymmetry.

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

#988

Post by ece »

mullingitover wrote: post #973
Teever wrote: post #972

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are health and safety standards irrelevant to product features?

Better question: how are they at all relevant? The health and safety regulations are proscriptive: you must not harm consumers. On the other hand, product features are creative expression. It would be like the government telling you that your novel must include at least three references to other writers' works.

Anti-trust is about anti-competitive practices and consumer benefit. Carterfone and Microsoft are possibly the most relevant examples. Google and Apple are a duopoly in the phone market, and Apple's (and Google's in the case of Epic) behaviour towards these companies could be seen as anti-competitive.

If you want to run a platform business, you'll need to be mindful of anti-trust law more than anything else. The Apple platform is perfectly capable of anti-competitive behaviour given it's market share, and doubly so given Apple and Google control 99% of the phone market.

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

#989

Post by stale2002 »

cafed00d wrote: post #974
stale2002 wrote: post #939

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> should not be allowed to mess with systems that can literally end their life by exploding in their pockets! This is non-sense fearmongering. Giving people the ability to install fortnite, on an official fortnite app store, is not going to cause people to die from phone explosion It is just not going to happen. Fortnite is not going to blow you up. The reason why I know this to be the case, is that half the US smart…

>> should not be allowed to mess with systems that can literally end their life by exploding in their pockets! > This is non-sense fearmongering. I was referring to "Root access"; not the ability to install Fortnite. There's a difference. People have the ability to install Fortnite. Do it through the Apple App Store.

> People have the ability to install Fortnite.

They do not have the ability to install it through a competing Epic Games app store.

Allowing people to install fortnite, through an Epic Games app store, that is not approved by Apple, is not going to cause people's phone to blow up.

> not the ability to install Fortnite

In my post, I specifically said "on an official fortnite app store", but it seems like you ignored that for some reason.

That is what I am referring to. If you agree with me, that:

"Giving people the ability to install fortnite, on an official fortnite app store, is not going to cause people to die from phone explosion"

Is the case, then cool. You agree that there is not going to be a blowing up phone problem, if Epic Games, has an app store on people phones, that is run by Epic Games, and not Apple.

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

#990

Post by zepto »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #867
zepto wrote: post #826

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Privacy is better on iOS because it’s not about what goes to Apple - it’s about what goes to 3rd parties. Also you seem to be just wrong. iOS doesn’t inform Apple when apps make GPS location requests.

Android allows the user to prevent data from going to third parties as well. The difference is it also allows the user to prevent data from from going to the OS manufacturer. This is strictly greater privacy. You are wrong about GPS location requests: "By enabling Location Services for your devices, you agree and consent to the transmission, collection, maintenance, processing, and use of your location data and locat…

I’m not wrong. Your quote supports my assertion.

You seem to be ignoring these important words:

“...in an anonymous and encrypted form”

Apple doesn’t end up knowing where you are.

Even though colloquially we can say they ‘send your location’, they don’t actually learn where you are.

This invalidates support for your claim about how iOS privacy is worse than Android.

Post reply on HN