EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint • Hacker News Board

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

#741

Post by heavyset_go » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 10:53 PM UTC

jpttsn wrote: post #716

heavyset_go wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What’s variable are services that an app may take advantage of, such as push notifications, geolocation queries, iCloud access, and App Store approvals. Cool, so let competition roll out implementations of these services, and developers can decide on their own if its worth using Apple's services or their competitors. Consumers will be able to reap the benefits of increased competition, as the free market delivers t…

Why would Apple agree to this? Is it not morally important that they consent?

> Why would Apple agree to this?

Because they're looking down the barrel of antitrust suits.

> Is it not morally important that they consent?

Is it morally important that they consent to following the law? No, it isn't. Antitrust laws are very clear, and if a company violates them, then they'll face penalties and prosecution.

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

#742

Post by amaccuish » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 10:54 PM UTC

paulpan wrote: post #686

nolok wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vast oversimplification: it's because of chargebacks and fraud. It works kind of like an insurance, someone needs to take the loss at some point and fixed amount doesn't work for that (or would massively hike the fees for cheap sales). That's why when EU capped the fee "so low" we also massively pushed for 3D secure deployment, so those lower fees would still easily cover it.

Interesting. But aren't the banks responsible for handling chargebacks and fraud, not the credit card processing companies? My (albeit limited) understanding is that Visa and Mastercard ensure that the debit/credit transactions are securely and quickly occur, but if there are post-transaction issues like fraud or chargeback, then the credit card-issuing bank handles/resolves those issues. Conversely there's probably…

> My (albeit limited) understanding is that Visa and Mastercard ensure that the debit/credit transactions are securely and quickly occur,

Now in the EU, if online transactions are over a certain amount or flag up as suspicious, we must use 2FA. So I have to stick my card in my card reader and generate an OTP. Works quite well tbh. My other bank sends me a push notification where I approve the payment.

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

#743

Post by ThatPlayer » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 10:57 PM UTC

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.

And with alternative app stores you continue to have the choice of only using Apple's App Store, where Apple would hopefully continue to check each app.

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

#744

Post by dathinab » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 10:58 PM UTC

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 thing is it's a 30% cut on all in-app purchases and not allowing an alternative payment provider.

For in-app purchases the service is ONLY a payment service and nothing more.

Industry standard cuts for payment providers are lessen then 5%, often much less like e.g. 1.5%.

So IMHO this is basically extortion.

For app purchases it's still an absurd cut as nearly all "costs" apple has per app are fixed. The cost which are not are super small.

Furthermore most other "running" costs are more associated with the user then the app. (E.g. Os dev cost).

And if you now want to argue with "but they provide a messaging service" and similar don't forget that they effectively prevented any 3rd party message services (btw. google did so too). So we can't even say if it's a grate service, we have no realistic comparison as any was already killed at he roots before it could came to be.

Just imagine Microsoft effectively ("de-facto") preventing you from using any mail service but Outlock and also forces any "notifications messages" through Outlock and also prevents applications from using polling effectively so that you have to use interlock any messenger, chat app, and similar with Outlock or it won't work properly.

This would be ridiculous, but that is basically what Google and Apple did on smartphones.

So yeah, basically Apple de-facto forces you to use a set of services you might not want to use while taking extortion level cuts for what is basically a payment service (which is also forced onto you) and reasoning that "they need to do so because all the nice services they provide for free".

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

#745

Post by simion314 » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 10:59 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #702

simion314 wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And do you think that if Apple offers 2 iPhones , say the "American Dream" and "The communist pirate dream for EU" , and you buy the "safe one" for you and your family, then what are the downsides? If the "American dream " version is popular then FB will still be on it so you won't lose your FB access, you will still be protected from porn or apps that are not Political Correct and some EU "Communists" would have fun…

Or if it bothers you so much just don’t buy one. You don’t speak for the entire E.U.

>Or if it bothers you so much just don’t buy one. You don’t speak for the entire E.U.

Ha ha, laws don't work like that. I am speaking my opinion and it seems I am not the only one that can see past the Apple giant PR. But if you are from EU you are free not to unlock your device or buy the US cooler version. What you are not free is to demand EU to not apply the existing laws for Apple because Apple is cool but apply them for MS and Google because those companies are not cool.

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

#746

Post by heavyset_go » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 11:01 PM UTC

manuelabeledo wrote: post #439

This is very good news. Sadly, there is already quite some backlash, mostly coming from Apple aficionados. And I say "sadly" because it is always sad to see how people would try to defend companies and brands, against their own interests.

> And I say "sadly" because it is always sad to see how people would try to defend companies and brands, against their own interests.

I've noticed that of them hold shares, or stand to buy shares, in AAPL.

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

#747

Post by nodamage » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 11:01 PM UTC

fastball wrote: post #722

nodamage wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have done mobile development (both iOS and Android) for a long time and am well aware how sandboxing works. You've misunderstood the issue if you think sandboxing sufficiently solves this problem. Let me flip the question, are you aware what types of data apps collect in order to fingerprint a device? These are the same low level APIs that apps need for legitimate purposes, you can't simply disable them or put a pe…

Yes, I am very aware of what types of data apps collect in order to fingerprint a device. That is exactly why I firmly believe this problem should be solved at the OS level, not at the App Store level. Because I trust a technological solutions much more than I trust App Store reviewers at Apple. This is why I prefer an E2EE chat service to a service that is not but says "we promise we won't read your messages".

Do you really expect the OS to block apps from accessing screen size, locale, fonts, time zone, GPU metrics, accessibility settings, etc. when they actually need these APIs for legitimate purposes? Location and microphone permissions are red herrings when it comes to fingerprinting.

You're also neglecting the fact that malicious apps can mislead the user by prompting for permissions for a seemingly legitimate purpose and then abuse those permissions once granted.

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

#748

Post by heavyset_go » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 11:03 PM UTC

finiteseries wrote: post #117

speedgoose wrote: post #11

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

Web ( Chrome ) developers often go on and on about this, but I have yet to hear a single layman user complain about their iOS version of Chrome missing the ability to have the random news websites they’ve followed from Facebook send them native notifications, take up the entire viewport, or be “installed” to their home screen.

From my HN post[1] one month ago:

> The fact that Apple refuses to implement basic features in mobile Safari that Firefox and Chrome have had for years now, and the fact that they refuse to allow other browser engines on iOS is the reason why we can't have nice things like progressive web apps.

> I recently worked on a health app related to the COVID pandemic. The most common use case would be served really well by a PWA, and as such, there's no reason users would need to install an app on their phones to access the web app's full set of features.

> Despite the web app working perfectly on Android and across Windows, Linux and macOS without native integration, we now must dedicate time and resources to develop an additional iOS app just so iOS users, which over half of Americans are, aren't left out.

> This is an expensive endeavor time-wise and money-wise, during a pandemic where time is of the essence and resources are stretched thin. It shouldn't be this way, but it is.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26520148

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

#749

Post by SiempreViernes » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 11:09 PM UTC

FredPret wrote: post #540

fouric wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That fact is key to the advantage that the iPhone ecosystem offers. That's not an advantage - that's a disadvantage. Having an open ecosystem is a strict superset of the functionality of a closed ecosystem. If I can sideload, then I can sideload and use Apple's app store. If I can't sideload, then I can only use Apple's app store. It's a strict downgrade. > I, and millions of users like me, like the closed garden.…

> "[banning sideloading] is a strict downgrade" Nope, I can buy my mom an iPhone and know that it's not possible to totally brick it by clicking a link from a dodgy text/email > "Popularity does not make you right" I'm not saying that the closed approach is fundamentally better than the open approach, but it sure is for some use-cases. That's why we have a phone OS duopoly. Regarding Apple's garden walls not keeping…

> Nope, I can buy my mom an iPhone and know that it's not possible to totally brick it by clicking a link from a dodgy text/email

Uhm, I guess that's true in the same sense that it's usually more rainy in New York than Chicago: One click RCE aren't exactly impossible for IPhone, just historically more rare than on android. Though recently at least one exploit broker stopped accepting iOS Safari one click RCE because they just got too many shrug.

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

#750

Post by httpsterio » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 11:15 PM UTC

indigochill wrote: post #620

AlexandrB wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had a change of heart on this issue when the prevalence of fraudulent apps on the App Store was documented[1]. It's hard to argue that Apple is providing significant benefit to either consumers or developers for their 30% cut when they seem incapable of reigning in obvious fraud. In addition, I think Apple pushing subscriptions as a solution for long term app funding (instead of upgrade pricing or other op…

> Overall, Apple has not been a good steward of the App Store. But the question on my mind is: what precedent are we setting by legally mandating what a corporation can do on a platform they solely built? And are we pulling up the ladder after the incumbents have climbed it? It's one thing to mandate how much pollution a factory may leak into a shared water supply. But the Apple app store is not a utility or natural…

If Apple wants to keep a tight control on the app offerings and pricing on their store, they should be able to do that. But as there's no official way to install apps outside of that, it's really an unfair position to put the users and developers in to.