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

451–460 of 825 posts

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

#451

Post by dropofwill »

nolok wrote: post #408
darkwizard42 wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is the work of the app store flat fee for an app? I think if you have a massive userbase and drop an update etc. this requires way more of Apple's resources to keep up with, it should probably be a sliding scale right?

I don't understand your point. If you're serving a file from AWS to ten people or to a massive userbase what happens ? Does AWS pricing change once you have a certain amount of traffic ? No, you pay per GB delivered. Apple should offer that kind of pricing, or a price per user (download) if they want. And Apple should also be free to offer the % as an alternative if they wish, "don't want to bother with details ? Jus…

AWS price per GB actually goes down as you reach different monthly checkpoints.

To me it seems like payment processors are a more direct comparison and they usually do a combination of flat fee + percentage.

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

#452

Post by SllX »

zibzab wrote: post #6
zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

Should add, the ruling is not really about the validity of the 30% fee. What EU seems to argue is this: 1. Apple is in phone business, Spotify music. So far so good... 2. Then apple wants to get into the music business too. Now they have an unfair advantage since Spotify must pay 30% to apple while apple music "pays" 0%. So apple use their dominance in one area (phones) to get an advantage in a totally different area…

Original article didn’t make that case, or present this side of the EU’s argument.

If that were the EU Commission’s line of thought, it would be wrong on the basis of its presuppositions alone by trying to categorize these two companies into what businesses they are in and screwing up the timeline.

Apple has been in the music business longer than the iPhone has existed, even in prototype form, and longer than Spotify or Beats Electronics existed (whose Beats Music service is the direct predecessor of the subscription component of Apple Music).

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

#453

Post by nolok »

hk1337 wrote: post #449
nolok wrote: post #391

Lots of comments around the line of "ok maybe 30% is too much, but we can all agree they offer a valuable service, so what percentage should they take ?" Uhhhh, not a percentage ? Do you imagine AWS billing you a % of your revenue instead of a given price for a given service ? Give a price to be listed in store, to be reviewed, to be downloaded by a user, ... And let company pay what they owe you. Let them pay throug…

Technically, AWS doesn't bill on percentage but they do bill on how long something is being used and how much data is run through whatever you're using, plus a number of other charges.

... So usage, entirely different from revenue.

If you manage to double your price without changing how much resources you need to use, AWS bill doesn't change. Apple's bill doubles.

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

#454

Post by simondotau »

Someone wrote: post #131
zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

I disagree. It’s not that Apple wants 30%, it’s that they get away with it. For most companies, such a demand would be fine, legally (suicidal, but fine. Companies are free to make stupid decisions)

30% has been an industry standard for digital sales for a long time, long before Apple adopted it.

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

#455

Post by s_dev »

fraud wrote: post #446
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it work now for free apps?

Not an expert but i believe all they pay is the $100 apple developer fee every year to be able to publish apps... 30% seems to only be for apple payments like subscriptions and app purchases

For digital goods. If you want to buy a coffee with your app you can as the coffee is not digital -- Apple will not take a 30% cut.

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

#456

Post by fouric »

simion314 wrote: post #267
ericmay wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the topic has been beat to death a million times, the danger is that adding additional app stores will result in decreases in the exact thing the OP likes the App Store for. All of the hard work fighting for privacy, security, etc., goes out the window. Facebook will put their app on a 3rd party store and now we’re back to them and others abusing privacy and tracking users and not sharing what and how they’re trac…

This is FUD. iOS will have the sandbox, if some shitty app ask "Do you want me to open the microphone now?" the user can still say NO, if the app asks "Please give me access to location!" the user can still say No, or Apple could even be clever and offer the user the ability to give fake location data, From your point of view iOS users are so stupid that they shold not be allowed to use a OSX device or a browser(not…

> iOS will have the sandbox

THIS. Permissions must be enforced at the operating system level. Apple, Google, and others have repeatedly demonstrated that large companies do a really bad job at policing their app stores - and the fact that the task is intrinsically harder and technically inferior to building a better operating system doesn't help.

The only correct solution to many privacy and security issues (such as microphone access) is OS-level sandboxing and permissions control, not an un-scalable and error-prone attempt at auditing before publishing to an app store.

(note that I said "many" privacy and security issues, not "all")

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

#457

Post by AlexandrB »

nolok wrote: post #448
AlexandrB wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that this seems more shocking even though it's not much different than Apple collecting 30% on one thousand $10 purchases.

It's because Apple's actual costs are pretty much fixed (storage, bandwidth, ...) so clearly on a low price / many customer scenario it seems fairer. That's why a per usage pricing would be fairer. And yes, the app having one thousand $10 purchases would pay way more than the app having a single $10000 purchase, but that's the point.

But for Spotify or other apps that sell content Apple is not providing storage, bandwidth, or anything else. They do provide payment processing, but it's common for that to be a small percentage of purchase price already (e.g. ~1-2% for credit cards).

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

#458

Post by nolok »

LatteLazy wrote: post #447
nolok wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not an issue, already solved in many market: offering the normal pricing doesn't stop the provider (here Apple) to offer other special terms to those who want them. Example in another market: you can buy an Unreal Engine license, or you can get it for pretty much free but then owe a % of sales. Nobody is saying Apple cannot offer an alternative "30% all included flat price", the complaint is about them offering ONLY…

The issue is that if Apple lose a tonne of money when Spotify decides to go flat fee, someone has to make up that difference. So smaller Devs lose out as they're currently being subsidised...

Free apps maybe, but then again the "all free" is a myth since there are costs to pay by someone, and Apple is free to keep subsidizing them if they so desire (because an entirely free app is good for their customers).

But non free apps with a smaller base you would be surprised I guess. Storage for hosting and GB for bandwidth is incredibly cheap.

To give a frame of reference AWS pricing is currently at $0.023 per GB for storage and $0.09 per GB for bandwith out.

That means 30% of a $0.50 sub is enough for covering the entire storage + distribution costs of one gigabyte for that user (and that's assuming you need to store an entire copy for each user, which you don't). Yes, there are other costs (website, review, ...), but then again how many subs are $0.50 ?

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

#459

Post by tolmasky »

nolok wrote: post #391

Lots of comments around the line of "ok maybe 30% is too much, but we can all agree they offer a valuable service, so what percentage should they take ?" Uhhhh, not a percentage ? Do you imagine AWS billing you a % of your revenue instead of a given price for a given service ? Give a price to be listed in store, to be reviewed, to be downloaded by a user, ... And let company pay what they owe you. Let them pay throug…

They should take whatever percentage they want, even 100%, as long as they allow alternative ways to get apps onto the iPhone and to charge for in-app purchases. The problem isn’t that their price is too high, it’s that it’s the only game in town. Allow alternatives and then the price they choose can compete with the rest of them. We can see exactly how valuable of a service it really is.

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

#460

Post by shuckles »

yummies wrote: post #434
nolok wrote: post #391

Lots of comments around the line of "ok maybe 30% is too much, but we can all agree they offer a valuable service, so what percentage should they take ?" Uhhhh, not a percentage ? Do you imagine AWS billing you a % of your revenue instead of a given price for a given service ? Give a price to be listed in store, to be reviewed, to be downloaded by a user, ... And let company pay what they owe you. Let them pay throug…

The most ridiculous example of this is Tesla's offering of in-app Autopilot upgrades. At $10k, imagine what Apple's cut is, for absolutely no value added.

Buying a physical good or an upgrade to a physical good isn’t an “in-app” purchase. I don’t think Apple is taking a cut here — it’s probably just Apple Pay.
Post reply on HN