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

Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 671 posts

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#651

Post by stale2002 »

forest_dweller wrote: post #643
stale2002 wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No I don't. How disingenous. The claim was that it would reduce the cost. But you agree that it would increase the developer split. Thats good enough for me. Glad you agree that it would increase the developer revenue split. > At the moment they do. Ok, and it is still a good thing, that in the moment, for a certain period of time, that developers would get a better revenue split. Thats still good. > it won't benef…

I really shouldn't reply but I really can't leave this unaddressed. > But you agree that it would increase the developer split. Thats good enough for me. Glad you agree that it would increase the developer revenue split. I never agreed. Please don't put words into my mouth. It is soo disingenous. I haven't done it to you so don't do it to me. As for the rest of the points. You aren't accepting the reality of the situ…

> Nobody will benefit from this in the long run

Even if you think it is only a short term benefit, that is still a good thing that the benefit would exist in the short term. Great. Glad you agree that there would be at the very least, a short term benefit.

> More app stores won't benefit the consumer or the developers in the long run

Even a short term benefit is still a benefit and is still a very good thing! Glad you agree that there is a short term benefit.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#652

Post by the_other »

swebs wrote: post #201
the_other wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely this is true for all developers, at any size? And also just about any product, or service, in any industry? As counterexamples: Apple sell Logic, yet it has numerous competitors, also all fairly successful: ProTools, Live, Cubase, Reaper, Ardour, FruityLoops. Apple give their customers Notes, Reminders and Mail for free , on all their devices (i.e. you don't even need to get hold of apps for these functions),…

>Surely this is true for all developers, at any size? And also just about any product, or service, in any industry? No, this is very unique to Apple, and only on iOS. Its the reason why iPhone web browsers have to use Safari under the hood.

That particular case sees Apple setting the rules of the market, not acting anti-competitively.

All the browser-makers successfully compete on features, as proved by the continued existence of multiple browsers on the App Store. Hell, Firefox can even afford to cannibalise its own market with two versions of Firefox (FF, and FF Focus).

Furthermore all the big name browser makers sell their offering at "free". In my view, this makes browsers an outlier in any discussion of Apple's anti-competitive behaviour. It doesn't shut down the conversation, just takes browsers out of it.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#653

Post by johannes1234321 »

Andys wrote: post #615
johannes1234321 wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tour via settings isn't that easy for "Joe Average" and updating isn't easy as well.

This is a good thing! It shouldn't be too easy, just easily possible for someone who knows what they're doing (What we used to call "power users", what happened to those?)

The point in this sun thread is "phone creators make it hard to use other app stores, that's anti-competitiom", the GP claimed "it's easy on android, come on" I refused that notion. I didn't make a statement about the value as I'm conflicted. I see the issues of the Windows desktop, where users install whatever they find as administrator without second thought, but I also see the issue of gatekeepers apple and Google ...

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#654

Post by alisonkisk »

heavyset_go wrote: post #526
breakfastduck wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but many of the larger players who are willing to go to war use the 'its not fair on smaller developers' argument against them. This really slaps down the ability to use that.

No it doesn't. Apple and Google have stood on the neck of the mobile app distribution market for over a decade, and small developers have suffered for it. This change doesn't address the problem at all.

Google Android allows 3rd Party app stores and sideloading, with $0 0% fee. Hardly neck-standing.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#656

Post by alisonkisk »

viktorcode wrote: post #208
pg_bot wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30% is honestly a terrible deal as Apple does not provide the value for the money they are charging. The difference is you are forced into that arrangement you don't have the option of doing it all yourself. If you had to develop all of those services yourself, it would look a lot like the internet. None of the things you mention are particularly challenging for the modern web.

I don't get "you are forced" part. If a deal is bad for you, don't take it.

Then you are a victim of Apple's tortious interference between yourself and your customers. Apple installs malware on every iDevice preventing users from installing apps they choose to purchase from 3rd parties.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#657

Post by alisonkisk »

singemonkey wrote: post #594
varispeed wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These things that you listed are not that expensive to run. If you produce a food product you can also set up your own store, but you can't in case of Apple.

You probably upvoted that guy who was sure he could build Dropbox in a weekend.

Dropbox is great. But Apple bans its customers and app developers from using Dropbox as an an app delivery system.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#658

Post by alisonkisk »

viktorcode wrote: post #204
varispeed wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a level that state would take to take care for roads, healthcare, civil service, army and so on. There is no justification for such high % to maintain an app. They could charge per app review and maybe the data transfer fee no more than Amazon S3. Anything else is Apple abusing their monopoly. Developer can't submit their app to an alternative app store because Apple doesn't allow that and it must change.

Unlike a commercial company a state is not for-profit enterprise. Maybe you think that app stores shouldn't be for-profit marketplaces either?

The state is not-for-profit because it is a monopoly. Like Apple.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#659

Post by zaroth »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #529
zaroth wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's almost a infinite number of things they could do that would be illegal that you might also call 'anti-competitive'. IMO, as long as there are viable competitors to Apple, and as long as Apple is not colluding with its competitors, Apple should be able to implement any lawful policy on its own device that it chooses. Apple can't violate its existing contracts with its customers or developers (e.g. threatening…

Decouple payments/subscriptions from distribution (AppStore). Allow us to pay using Stripe, PayPal, Amazon Payments, Google Pay, Apple Pay, or any of a host of other payment processors: the developer can choose his own payment platform, just like in the rest of the world outside of the iPhone. That's a good first step towards competition that would allow Apple to keep the AppStore exclusivity -- for now.

At the very least, they would need to decouple the payment processor in a way that still provides the user all of the following;

  1) No need to re-enter billing information across apps
  2) A centralized UI for the user to manage all their
     subscriptions, enforce consistent billing policies,
     request refunds, etc. 
  3) Enforce parental controls and family approval 
     policies which may be configured on the account
  4) Prevent any surprise billings or unauthorized charges
  5) Ability for Apple to force a refund even if the app dev won't
And probably many more technical measures. Otherwise, you are directly damaging a key value proposition provided by Apple and demanded by their users.

In the end, the payment processor is a red herring. Apple isn't charging 30% for the payment processing -- they probably pay less to run the charge than Stripe does. For example, for $0.99 charges, the app developer pays Apple less for their entire fee than Stripe would charge them just to run charge.

The 30% fee is Apple's share for creating the entire ecosystem. Everything from the programming language, the platform, the API's, the security framework / secure enclave, the app review, the distribution model, the billing system, the cloud services for software delivery/push notifications/updates/shared storage, all the way up to Apple's customer support lines. Actually running the payment gateway is perhaps the very least of it.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#660

Post by heavyset_go »

vivian_lee wrote: post #625
freedomben wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not only that, but most people have no idea how to side load apps, and Android doesn't make it easy. I completely disagree. I'm not sure how they could make it much easier without defaulting to allowing it. Download the APK, open it, click install (or if the setting disallows it, follow the prompt to change the setting).

I agree with you, it just click -> (prompt setting) -> install. Android would ask me to only allow once, which is super convenient since I would like to disable it after finish installation. I don't understand how can it be easier while remaining security. Beside, third party app store is allowed.

> Beside, third party app store is allowed.

Third party app stores on Android are not allowed to compete with the Play Store on feature parity because of limitations put in place by Google.

Again, the only way to implement automatic upgrading, background installation or batch upgrading/installation of apps is via the Play Store.

Post reply on HN