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

EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 825 posts

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#231

Post by FredPret »

deergomoo wrote: post #18
beforeolives wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! 1. No, this is limited to the AppStore, those businesses can operate elsewhere. 2. What's the alternative? How is any business entitled to free or low-fee access to a platform that Apple built and maintain?

> How is any business entitled to free or low-fee access to a platform that Apple built and maintain? I’m sure many businesses would be perfectly happy to have no access whatsoever to the platform Apple built and maintain (platform meaning the App Store in this context), but if they want to ship on iOS (which is where all the money is), they have no choice.

So Apple is providing these businesses with a platform that has captured hundreds of millions of high-income users. That’s incredibly valuable

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#232

Post by slver »

realusername wrote: post #201
slver wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's take a step and ponder wouldn't you find it bizarre to have this sequence of events: 1. Apple creates iPod, and iTunes serves as its music store. 2. Apple creates iPhone, which has an iPod app. 3. Apple introduces App Store so other apps can be used on the iPhone. 4. iPod (Apple Music) competitors emerge. 5. EU says "that's it, Apple can't have iPod anymore on the phone unless iPod (Apple Music) becomes a separ…

> No one (successfully) sued Apple for anti-competitive practices on iPod Because they never had the market share and power in the music market that they have now on the mobile market that's why. You kind of answered why they are getting sued now yourself.

You're in effect saying "no, EU didn't sue iPhone because it added an App Store to iPhone, it sued iPhone because it was successful".

Is that better? Become successful, get sued? Android has 87% market share, iOS has 13%. That's not even a monopoly.

Of course we can define arbitrary categories like "Apple has monopoly on the iOS market". Which makes the concept of monopoly absolutely nonsensical, because then everyone has a monopoly. I have a monopoly on the slver username on HN, so I guess EU might sue me any moment now.

Also, let's recall EU suing Microsoft and forcing them to offer Windows without a media player. So what did this result in? It resulted in lots of nephews children and grandchildren having to visit their relatives and help them install Windows Media Player. I'm from EU and I want to like all their decisions, I'm team EU. But they're complete idiots sometimes when dealing with tech.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#233

Post by simion314 »

endisneigh wrote: post #38

I personally don’t get it. iOS is a choice. Android is a choice. Neither is a choice. Back in the day, we had Palm, Blackberry, Windows Mobile among others to choose from. The decisions made by the respective companies affected adoption and now we’re left with Android and iOS for now. People compare phone choice to things like electricity and water which makes no sense. Let’s ignore Apple and Google specifically here…

This would be correct only in a actual free market, now you have 2 players that split the market equally and are smart enough to know how to win in the prisoner dilemma game.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#234

Post by laurent92 »

mrep wrote: post #168
slver wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So then if Apple Music internally pays 30% to App Store, we're all good by this definition.

With that accounting methodology, between the 30% apple store cut and the 70% music publishers cut, Apple music is left with no revenue whatsoever to fund their service, therefore running it at a 100% loss and thus price dumping which is also illegal.

But this is an excellent accounting methodology then: Each sub-business should run as a separate business.

It picks my interest: Companies internally run as communist economies, all resources are merged and shared, employees are not individually associated with a revenue because the group is worth more than its sum, on the outer, liberal economy. At what size / on which criteria should a group inside a company be considered an independent product-and-loss entity, in order to avoid supercorporations to make use of monopolistic behaviors? Should a 100-billion-dollars marketing operation inside Apple be allowed to function at a loss if it pumps interest in all of Apple’s other products? Can Apple Music be disguised as a marketing operation instead of as an independent entity?

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#235

Post by ClumsyPilot »

FredPret wrote: post #217
thayne wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I think the key here, and probably a big reason Spotify went after Apple and not Google, is that on iOS you have to use Apple's app store. You can't distribute your app using your own infrastructure, or an alternative app store even if you want to.

That fact is key to the advantage that the iPhone ecosystem offers. I, and millions of users like me, like the closed garden. I’m effectively outsourcing the duties implied by caveat emptor to Apple. I don’t have the time/inclination to check the safety & honesty of each app developer.

"millions of users like me, like the closed garden."

Alcapone was popular, but he was still a criminal and a murderer

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#236

Post by ewindal »

speedgoose wrote: post #11

I wish one of the outcome would be to allow better web browsers than Safari on iOS.

I really hate this, too. iOS Firefox is the only browser that has auto-complete on URLs that I find usable, but it's an unstable piece of shit.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#237

Post by ClumsyPilot »

seszett wrote: post #110
f6v wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also don’t have to buy a subscription in the app, do you? You can pay on the web directly to Spotify and use the subscription in the app.

Spotify is forbidden to mention it in their app, though.

Thats a violation of freemarket

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#238

Post by breakfastduck »

frereubu wrote: post #227
breakfastduck wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple have been in the music business much longer than Spotify.

I'm not sure that's relevant is it?

Yes, considering apple have been in the music business longer than App Stores have even existed.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#239

Post by snovv_crash »

the-dude wrote: post #58
Mindwipe wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm hopeful Apple might be forced to divest the App Store into a separate company entirely tbh.

I wonder if they do that, if they will be pressured into allowing competing stores too. Seems inevitable.

They wouldn't have any incentive not to

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#240

Post by adriancooney »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #46

Since this is an EU case, that should mean it'll actually do something, and won't take a decade and a half to conclude. The penalty won't be the big deal here, it'll be what Apple is prohibited from doing. And it'll be really exciting if the precedent set blows back on the entire 30%-rent-seeking-platform-industry.

Is it fair to call Apple's platform rent-seeking? I think a 30% cut is certainly far too much but I wouldn't call it rent-seeking. The platform itself provides a lot of value and they are entitled to charge something for it.
Post reply on HN