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

Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

accc.gov.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 503 posts

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#261

Post by OpieCunningham »

pentae wrote: post #239
simonh wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subscription services like Spotify only pay 30% for the first year of each subscription. After that they pay 15% and this has been the case since 2016. Apple has done a lot to revise the App Store charging policy over the last few years, and I think they deserve credit for that. Also their hosting of free apps for only a nominal developer registration fee is a huge boon to users and a lot of iOS developers. So I don’…

When the average subscription to just about any online service is 3.3 months, the 15% after 12 months is simply PR. Nothing more. Apple crunched their numbers and knows exactly what they are doing. What's more amazing is that everyone, including you, has fallen for it.

Considering most cancelled subscriptions are cancelled within a trial period, the average subscription duration is heavily weighted down. Your point would be something worth considering if you had an average that excluded all cancellations within, say, the first month.

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#262

Post by [deleted] »

laingc wrote: post #111

Why does half of HN seem intent on ruining the iPhone for the rest of us? The explicit selling proposition of the iPhone is that it is a closed ecosystem . I and my family buy it for precisely this reason. If you want a choice about what you install, you can have it! It's called Android, and hundreds of phone manufacturers are lining up to sell you a compatible handset. Leave us with the one phone manufacturer who ha…

[deleted]

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#263

Post by berkes »

Gaelan wrote: post #253
Barrin92 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that's what you want, I want to know why you want that. Apple being able to exercise market power is bad for you , it means that Apple can command higher prices that are being passed on to you. It's like saying you only want Walmart in your neighborhood, because that means Walmart can coerce its vendors. The only one who benefits from this is the platform owner. Competition is good (for you, the consumer…

That's the thing: Apple's exercising market power does bring all sorts of benefits to users. Obvious examples include the new privacy rules they're imposing, in-app purchases allowing any subscriptions to be cancelled with zero hassle. If Apple allowed other app stores, Facebook would almost certainly move to one that let them produce a far more invasive app. And the vast majority of the users will just download Face…

In essence that is arguing that an abusive monopoly (facebook) must be fought with another abusive monopoly (apple).

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#264

Post by [deleted] »

edrxty wrote: post #55
Elidrake24 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a user of iOS, this is precisely why I go with Apple, and why I push my family to do the same. Particularly for the more elderly in my family, Apple's setup (by and large) prevents them from doing anything that would screw themselves over. Removing Apple's control removes my desire to be apart of that ecosystem, and I know that is true for many others outside our insular little community here.

By the same logic we should just eliminate free will because it's dangerous sometimes. I hate these arguments as it is allowing incompetence to drive innovation. There are plenty of other options whereby 3rd party apps/app stores could be installed safely, just like on any other computer system. If you need to give someone with diminished mental faculties a locked down device, that can be made explicit.

[deleted]

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#265

Post by simonh »

gonehome wrote: post #247
Spivak wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's still pretty extreme imo when you control the only store and you directly compete with them/undercut them. Regulators don’t (yet I suppose) care about this because of opportunity cost. If I’m making $3/user/mo off your $10 subscription and I decide to enter the market and compete with you at then every user I steal and every user if not for me would have gone with you costs me $3/mo plus cost of providing th…

If Spotify is $10/month and paying $3 to Apple they get $7/month. If Apple enters with Apple Music and charges $10/month - they're undercutting Spotify while charging the same.

How many billions of dollars, over how many decades did Spotify spend developing that platform, OS and app distribution system? How many times did they almost go to the wall over the commercial risks that took?

Anyway as I already pointed out it’s effectively 15%, not 30%. Also the vast majority, over 99% (literally, I looked it up) of Spotify app users earn Apple nothing because they use it add supported and all the add revenue goes to Spotify.

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#266

Post by [deleted] »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #63
edrxty wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the same logic we should just eliminate free will because it's dangerous sometimes. I hate these arguments as it is allowing incompetence to drive innovation. There are plenty of other options whereby 3rd party apps/app stores could be installed safely, just like on any other computer system. If you need to give someone with diminished mental faculties a locked down device, that can be made explicit.

Exactly. I don't understand the argument Apple users are presenting. Its like they can't comprehend that they can have an option to install third-party apps but they don't have to enable or use that if they like being "protected" from hurting themselves.

[deleted]

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#267

Post by simonh »

pentae wrote: post #239
simonh wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subscription services like Spotify only pay 30% for the first year of each subscription. After that they pay 15% and this has been the case since 2016. Apple has done a lot to revise the App Store charging policy over the last few years, and I think they deserve credit for that. Also their hosting of free apps for only a nominal developer registration fee is a huge boon to users and a lot of iOS developers. So I don’…

When the average subscription to just about any online service is 3.3 months, the 15% after 12 months is simply PR. Nothing more. Apple crunched their numbers and knows exactly what they are doing. What's more amazing is that everyone, including you, has fallen for it.

The idea that subscriptions are the main issue is just fluff. Under 1% of Spotify app users subscribe, for the rest all the add revenue goes to Spotify. Apple distributes the app and gets nothing.

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#268

Post by [deleted] »

zmmmmm wrote: post #228
simondotau wrote: post #70

This report is somewhat bipolar. On one hand it's arguing that Google and Apple exert too much control over smartphone app marketplaces. On the other hand its proposed remedy asks that Google and Apple exert even more control over these app marketplaces by stamping down on anti-consumer practices like subscription traps and scams. On the other other hand it proposes that Apple and Google should allow third party paym…

Yes it is a shame - while the ACCC often is well motivated, it lacks any sense of philosophical purity in its solutions. So you often see things that are highly anti-freedom, anti-democratic and ultimately anti-consumer come out as a result of its actions. The recent forced negotiation of Google/Facebook with news publishers is an example of this where they have no problem compromising completely fundamental aspects…

[deleted]

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#269

Post by gonehome »

echelon wrote: post #260
gonehome wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The web exists, android exists, etc. I like local control, I think urbit is cool and hope they succeed. I'm a little disturbed by the need for mighty and how we've ended up in a such a messy state of things with modern computing. It's not about reducing risk or scam apps really - it's about Apple being able to incentivize user-benefiting behavior that ad-driven business models corrupt. Maybe we wouldn't need this in…

> It's not about reducing risk or scam apps really - it's about Apple being able to incentivize user-benefiting behavior that ad-driven business models corrupt. Maybe we wouldn't need this in a world that had more CCPA laws with teeth, I'd be happy to live in that world, but we don't. Apple isn't doing this out of their own good heart! They've built one of the largest monopolies in the world. Is it okay for one megam…

I agree the 30% cut is wrong.

But the control and leverage is good.

Re: Dominance of Apple and Google’s app stores impacting competition and consumers

#270

Post by Clewza313 »

murphyslab wrote: post #211
thombles wrote: post #120

Incidentally, if you have a business registered for GST in Australia you have to submit a quarterly activity statement. The tax office website had bizarre authentication requirements but the browser plugin was at least cross-platform. They now require you to use the myGovID app, which is - you guessed it - available only on the App Store and Play Store. You can't even run a business without being part of the duopoly.…

When I was in grad school, the university's Student Union provided an extended health insurance plan. To get a reimbursement, you had two options for submitting a claim: (1) Paper forms submitted via the student union or (2) the insurance company's app which was only for Apple devices. The app's only functionality was to facilitate taking a photo (of a receipt) and uploading that photo, along with the user's details.…

For many people, it's too complicated (as in, they don't know how) to transfer a photo into their computer and then upload it separately. Integrating a camera in the app is far easier.

Still doesn't excuse being iOS-only, though.

Post reply on HN