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

ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

techspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 392 posts

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#291

Post by inopinatus »

vlozko wrote: post #281
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's something inherently unethical about Apple making it against the rules to let people know they're paying more to buy it on Apple though.

That’s like Apple selling their watches in a Target store and on their box advertise lower priced wrist bands on apple.com on the box. No way would Target tolerate that.

I think it's more like Target dictating what marketing materials may not appear inside the box, because this happens after you already have the app.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#292

Post by kmbfjr »

forty wrote: post #276
dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #270

Guessing this is a hugely unpopular opinion here: A mafia engages in racketeering/extortion. They take a game that’s fair, and make it unfair. Instead of creating value, they steal it. Without the mafia, people would retain more value for themselves. Apple, on the other hand, created and maintains an enormous platform. Without Apple, the App Store would not exist. The rules are posted to a webpage and are applied mor…

> They’re not even close to being a monopoly. They’re a huge company, but there is plenty of competition out there What's the competition for iOS app distribution? There might be competition on the customer side, but as far as I know there are none for the software/app vendors, which is why they can dictate their rules and choose the price (and it's not like customers have each a bunch of smartphones with different O…

What's the competition for clothing distribution inside a Macy's? I mean, c'mon, it is their marketplace.

Apple's customers have willingly chosen this, it wasn't forced upon them.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#293

Post by punitxsmart »

vlozko wrote: post #281
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's something inherently unethical about Apple making it against the rules to let people know they're paying more to buy it on Apple though.

That’s like Apple selling their watches in a Target store and on their box advertise lower priced wrist bands on apple.com on the box. No way would Target tolerate that.

Lower price on apple.com ? Hahaha...good one!

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#294

Post by kmbfjr »

simonh wrote: post #18

I have no problem with Apple's basic approach with the App Store, they provide a service and are entitled to charge for it. I do think they have gone too far with some of their practices though. This sort of shake down of free apps is over-reach and I'm glad they have revised the App Store guidelines. I hope this sort of arm-twisting doesn't happen in future. It is a tricky issue. As I said it's their product their r…

Not only that, but they are charging entrepreneurial rates for something that is now, a very mature business.

Apple's woes on this matter are largely Apple's creation. However, if developers want to accept payment outside of Apple's App store, then they should be prepared to pay elsewhere. The argument that the hardware purchase pays for the app store is bunk in my opinion, the hardware purchase pays for the hardware and the OS.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#296

Post by inopinatus »

manfredo wrote: post #202
dpiers wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about video game consoles? Early in a generation, they are sold at razor-thin (or negative) margins, with the expectation that the manufacturer will recoup losses from licensing fees over the life of the console and that costs will come down in later revisions. If manufacturers lose their substantial licensing fees, they would be forced to charge more upfront for the consoles which is objectively worse for consu…

Consoles are much, much narrower in use than smartphones. Most consoles have a few thousand titles, if that. By comparison the App Store had millions of applications. And as you point out, manufacturers are building these consoles at a loss. Apple builds it's phones at a profit. Getting a game approved for sale on a console is much more involved than releasing an App on the App Store, and involves significant manual…

And yet even then, console games such as MMOs are not required to actively mislead the consumer about their account management options.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#297

Post by kmbfjr »

shmerl wrote: post #277

All this can be solved once and for all by requiring Apple to allow alternatives stores. They got away with this anti-competitive junk for too long.

What? No. Alternative stores will want to be installed by default, and then we're off to the bloatware races.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#298

Post by athms »

systemvoltage wrote: post #197
stefano wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The premium is actually higher than that. For $100, the developer gets $70. Which means the premium is $30 on a $70 base price, i.e. a ~42% higher price. That's a very steep price for easier payment cancellation.

It is the percentage of the market price that the customer paid, not what developer got. You're twisting this. Think about it this way - if Apple was not in the middle, the developer would have received $100. So it is 30% less than what they would have received without Apple cut.

>if Apple was not in the middle, the developer would have received $100.

You are never going to get 100% because of payment processing, license management, and content hosting costs. If not Apple, then somebody else. You can have a payment processor and manage the licensing and hosting yourself. Or, you could use an all-in-one vendor, but you will still be paying 10-20%.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#299

Post by segmondy »

Barrin92 wrote: post #167

Apple is nothing else but the digital equivalent of a landlord extracting economic rents from everyone in the ecosystem. It's time to put an end to it, and while we're at it the same goes for all the other platform owners. We (in this case the EU) should give it the same treatment we gave credit card companies. Cap their rates at 1% or whatever so they can cover the operational costs of their stores, stop them from b…

I agree with you, the say I have framed is.

I say Cisco should charge for every packet that goes through their router that is involved in a Financial transaction. If you don't pay, they add you to a blacklist. It's feasible, router has a blacklist, Cisco checks if you make money, if you do, they shake you down, if you don't pay, they add you to the blacklist and router downloads and refuses to route your IP addresses. Sounds ridiculous, but it's doable. After all they are facilitating the transaction.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#300

Post by snomad »

pwinnski wrote: post #162
zamadatix wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what Apple insisted, if you have IAP you can't have a button below that says "or buy direct 30% cheaper". It's either IAP or no mention of payments.

ProtonMail had no IAP in their app at all, but offered paid subscriptions on their website. Apple insisted that they offer IAP in the app, and ProtonMail is upset. Here: > "Out of the blue, one day they said you have to add in-app purchase to stay in the App Store. They stumbled upon something in the app that mentioned there were paid plans, they went to the website and saw there was a subscription you could purchase…

It sounds like they weren't taking any payments via phone. Purchase only happened on the web, and Apple reviewers found text that led to web.

It would be one thing if they were selling phone and skipping Apple that way. But if their are no phone payments, and only non-obvious links, it should not be required (or maybe I am misinterpreting this)

Post reply on HN