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

Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

puri.sm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 280 posts

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#271

Post by imwillofficial »

heavyset_go wrote: post #138
imwillofficial wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is terrible business advice. Look how wildly successful their model is. It’s the example of how other app stores run their businesses.

Standard Oil and Microsoft in the 90's/00's were both wildly successful, too, yet they still engaged in anti-competitive behavior to the detriment of the market and consumers alike.

Are they equitable? I think not. The paradigm is iPhone as an "App Console" I don't see anyone here decrying Nintendo or Playstation for their walled gardens are steep developer fees.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#272

Post by geofft »

CyberRabbi wrote: post #270
geofft wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but I'm disagreeing with the claim that there is no retailer monopoly and that there is an Apple monopoly. Landlords have exclusive use of land, a limited resource. If I am running a clothing brand and I want to have a store in a particular city, my options are to build a store on empty land very far from the city center, or to negotiate with the person who has the land.n If I want to have a store in a mall, I…

Apple’s product makes up at least 60% of mobile phone usage in the US[1]. No single landlord owns 60% of retail space in the US. If you want to say landlords have control over their market not unlike apples control, you have to concede that apples control is likely two orders of magnitude more than any single retail landlord. To access 60% of US mobile phone users, App developers must go through Apple. Apple faces no…

Why are you drawing the line at the US? Worldwide, Apple's share is something like 20-25%. And at the level of a single city, it is very common for a single landlord to own over 60%, if not 100%, of mall space in a city.

But anyway - there are something like 1,000 to 2,000 indoor shopping malls in the US, depending on how you count, and there are companies that own hundreds of malls, and they're consolidating. Would it become a problem if one landlord ended up owning 60% of mall retail? Why?

And how are you concluding that Apple faces no competitor pressure? Apple's 30% cut is exactly equal to Google's 30% cut. Is this a massive coincidence, or is this the market doing exactly what you'd expect a market to do and equalizing prices between competitors for similar products? Why hasn't Apple raised their take to even 35%, if it really is their discretion alone?

(Microsoft, as it happens, also takes a 30% cut of Xbox-related sales on their store. They take a 5-15% cut of other apps. https://9to5mac.com/2019/03/06/microsoft-store-revenue-share... This is pretty much exactly with what you'd expect if 30% is what the market will bear for reasonably successful products, and if Microsoft is obligated to compete on price for non-Xbox-related store purchases.)

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#273

Post by CyberRabbi »

geofft wrote: post #272
CyberRabbi wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple’s product makes up at least 60% of mobile phone usage in the US[1]. No single landlord owns 60% of retail space in the US. If you want to say landlords have control over their market not unlike apples control, you have to concede that apples control is likely two orders of magnitude more than any single retail landlord. To access 60% of US mobile phone users, App developers must go through Apple. Apple faces no…

Why are you drawing the line at the US? Worldwide, Apple's share is something like 20-25%. And at the level of a single city, it is very common for a single landlord to own over 60%, if not 100%, of mall space in a city. But anyway - there are something like 1,000 to 2,000 indoor shopping malls in the US, depending on how you count, and there are companies that own hundreds of malls, and they're consolidating. Would…

> Would it become a problem if one landlord ended up owning 60% of mall retail? Why?

The fact that they own 60% is not a problem in itself but it is a problem when you consider the practical effects it’s having on app developers. A growing number of developers who reject their 30% price tag have no alternative to reach that segment of the market.

If we were seeing the same level of dissatisfaction with landlords hoarding real estate and the inability of their potential customers to go elsewhere, I would of course consider their monopoly a problem as well. I don’t think we are seeing the same level of monopoly and its failure modes happening in retail real estate.

I cited US statistics because US-based companies (Epic, Purism, Basecamp) seem to be at the center of this debate. If this discussion turns into proposal for legislation or an anti-trust case, it will likely happen in the US.

> Apple's 30% cut is exactly equal to Google's 30% cut.

Google actually has decreased their fees to 15% for smaller developers [1]. This is also much less of an issue on Android because there exists alternative app installation methods on that platform. Users can install app packages without needing to go through the google play store. So there is an alternative for developers.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/google-app-store-fees-cut-fo...

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#274

Post by lmm »

zepto wrote: post #250
lmm wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A VPN is no use unless both ends of the system are using it. Should Apache block Safari from accessing websites hosted there? That doesn't seem like a good way to promote open-source.

> I oppose the generic bashing of Apple and Epic’s antitrust campaign, because these have nothing to do with creating an alternative. Indeed if Epic wins, iOS will become even more entrenched. Supporting Epic’s anti-trust campaign has nothing to do with open source. I think one of the most damaging things that could possibly happen to open source is that government starts to regulate how software is distributed. This…

I think that's crazy. The only reason we have an open-source movement at all is that people were able to start using GNU tools piecemeal on commercial unix. If unix vendors had been able to control what software got distributed for their platforms, open-source would never have got off the ground.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#275

Post by burntoutfire »

gsich wrote: post #98
em-bee wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you expect someone to pay for a windows license just so they can run itunes just to reactivate a device they own? seems a bit much

No need to pay, you can run Windows 10 without activation. I think it was either 90 or 180 days, so should be plenty of time to recover the device.

Is it legal?

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#276

Post by rictic »

crowbahr wrote: post #164
rictic wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Indeed if Epic wins, iOS will become even more entrenched. Hm, care to expand on that? I don't see why that would be.

Because his arguments are against the fundamental structure of iOS rather than against the app store. A second app store inside of the walled garden still ends up being a walled garden, just one with more of an illusion of choice. That means that the users will have even less reason to leave.

Hm, that's accelerationist logic, wanting iOS to collapse to opposing things that would improve iOS for real world users.

The downside is that if the brinkmanship fails and iOS doesn't collapse, then the primary outcome is just that iOS users are worse off for no obvious gain.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#277

Post by forgotmypw17 »

gsich wrote: post #98
em-bee wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you expect someone to pay for a windows license just so they can run itunes just to reactivate a device they own? seems a bit much

No need to pay, you can run Windows 10 without activation. I think it was either 90 or 180 days, so should be plenty of time to recover the device.

For this content, I may have to do this work, but I just want to point out how ridiculous it is that the ,,solution,, to accessing my own content on my own device is to install an entire un-free operating system from a different vendor using grey area licensing, then install another un-free application, then pray that it works, which still does not seem that likely to me, to be honest, having done that dance before only to be given the ,,choice,, to erase the device memory or cancel.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#278

Post by gsich »

forgotmypw17 wrote: post #277
gsich wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to pay, you can run Windows 10 without activation. I think it was either 90 or 180 days, so should be plenty of time to recover the device.

For this content, I may have to do this work, but I just want to point out how ridiculous it is that the ,,solution,, to accessing my own content on my own device is to install an entire un-free operating system from a different vendor using grey area licensing, then install another un-free application, then pray that it works, which still does not seem that likely to me, to be honest, having done that dance before o…

Of course it's ridiculous, but you can wait until Apple does release a Linux version (Hint: won't happen) or use the tools that are available. If you are so keen on using free software, the iPad is not the device for you.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#279

Post by wayneftw »

geofft wrote: post #272
CyberRabbi wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple’s product makes up at least 60% of mobile phone usage in the US[1]. No single landlord owns 60% of retail space in the US. If you want to say landlords have control over their market not unlike apples control, you have to concede that apples control is likely two orders of magnitude more than any single retail landlord. To access 60% of US mobile phone users, App developers must go through Apple. Apple faces no…

Why are you drawing the line at the US? Worldwide, Apple's share is something like 20-25%. And at the level of a single city, it is very common for a single landlord to own over 60%, if not 100%, of mall space in a city. But anyway - there are something like 1,000 to 2,000 indoor shopping malls in the US, depending on how you count, and there are companies that own hundreds of malls, and they're consolidating. Would…

> Why are you drawing the line at the US?

Probably because we live in the US and we will have to depend on our courts to force Apple to open up. Those courts require a certain amount of market power, which a majority market share indicates, to move forward with an antitrust judgement.

> Microsoft, as it happens, also takes a 30% cut of Xbox-related sales on their store.

Game consoles are not nearly as ubiquitous or as important to society as smart phones. We have different laws for things important things like cars than we do for toys like bicycles.

This is why Apple will eventually be forced to allow users to install software from outside the app store.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#280

Post by Wowfunhappy »

Daho0n wrote: post #229
messe wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have been saying the same thing since the Mac App store came out. And yet, here we are in exactly the same position.

Clearly we are not. The amount of changes Apple have made are plenty. VPNs are harder to use, side loading is harder, adblockers are ineffective, etc.

None of those things are true on macOS. Maybe you could argue sideloading is harder, but only insofar as it requires a three word Terminal command. One I know by heart. `sudo spctl --master-disable`.
Post reply on HN