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

Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 851 posts

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#111

Post by ipaddr »

slver wrote: post #83
wccrawford wrote: post #4

Other news on this has quotes from Tim Cook saying that they'd have to find a way to track purchases on IOS and bill developers so that Apple still gets their cut when using other payment processors. For me, this is way over the line. If they want to charge developers to be on their store, fine. I don't have a problem with that. And charging for using them as a payment processor makes sense. Charging for using Apple…

What you're saying is that you're OK with basically every single developer declaring their app as free, and then asking for your credit card, which will be processed in god knows what ways with most of them. So developers get in the shortterm to avoid the 30% cut. But what happens next? The payment process becomes much more cumbersome and much less safe for users. So they start avoiding any payments on iPhone. Apple…

The user. If I like netflix and want to pay outside of iOS I should be able to manage that without apple taking a cut.

Managing payment outside of a closed system makes so much more sense.

Apple losing all funding to operate the app store is the least of all issues. They can shutdown the store and thirdparty stores would take over. If they can't afford the app they probably won't sell many phones. Perhaps taking some of the phone profits to fund the app store would make business sense.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#112

Post by sircastor »

celsoazevedo wrote: post #55
jrsj wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because my grandma is clueless and I give her an iPhone so she doesn’t install malware like she managed to on her Android phone

It's weird that a clueless person was able to download and install a malware apk when by default Android forces you to go to your settings and allow apps to install other apps (the behaviour has changed over the years, but you always need to do something). Not to mention that Google Play Protect scans your apps and warns you if it finds something sketchy. In any case and as much as I like my own clueless grandma, I d…

Never underestimate a malware makers ability to instruct a user to do something. Out for that matter a users ability to get themselves into trouble.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#113

Post by paul_f »

ilovwindows wrote: post #108

30% of a revenue is extortion. Why should an app developer pay that fee? It's like owning almost half of a business. Apple is the most developer hostile company.It charges $100 every year to devs for developing apps to it's platform. And additionally charge another 30% of their business. The worst thing is apps cannot use third party payments, why? Some people argue it's for security. I disagree. It's greed. Tim Cook…

If a developer's net profit margin, after dev and marketing costs, is less than 60%, then Apple makes more money on the app than the developer. 30% is outrageous.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#114

Post by shadowgovt »

wayneftw wrote: post #59
jrsj wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because my grandma is clueless and I give her an iPhone so she doesn’t install malware like she managed to on her Android phone

And Apple protecting her from that is the only solution? I don't think so... With just a tiny bit of imagination I'm sure we can come up with something which will work. Here's an idea: Let Apple sell Apple-locked and unlocked iPhones. It can work just like carrier locking. Buy one unlocked, maybe pay a little extra, and you can have 3rd party app stores. That took me a minute to come up with. I am absolutely positive…

There's a thing called "choice paralysis" that Apple minimizes as a value-add.

My technically-savvy associates, I suggest an Android to (especially if they want to dabble in mobile development themselves). For my family that just wants a phone that works, I suggest iPhone. The ecosystem tends to have a single right way to do any given task, which is a boon when they just want it to work without having to think about details.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#115

Post by slver »

candiddevmike wrote: post #93
slver wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple lags behind Chrome in some features which curiously directly benefit Google. It's not slow, it's not broken. It's a great mobile browser. So stick to reality and not bunch of made up "what ifs".

PWAs and web based push notifications only benefit Google?

Yes.

Google's strategy is simple:

1. The web should be able to control everything (i.e. PWA features not normally found in a browser).

2. Google should control the web (they can index it, track, monetize it, but it has to be on the web).

3. Profit.

Do you think Apple users are super excited at the prospect of most apps turning into battery-draining non-native shitty experiences, instead of using the iOS frameworks? No, they're not.

And push notifications on iOS work as a service, to avoid battery drain, they all go through Apple on a single connection. This is free for all native apps. It can't be implemented for web apps both for technical reasons and because web apps can't be curated, so it'll just be abused like there's no tomorrow.

Have you noticed on the desktop that EVERY SITE asks you for push notifications? This is super annoying and bless your soul if you ever clicked "YES" on any of those. They'll spam you until you die, or eventually ask your nephew to reset your permissions.

EVERY single feature not in Safari, has a reason not to be there. And I'm sick of everyone eating up Google's propaganda and becoming their tools in this. I don't mind Google at all, they should fight for their PoV on all this, and they have a right to expand their business.

But not at the expense of Apple or Apple's users. F that.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#116

Post by jmull »

fartcannon wrote: post #92
jmull wrote: post #80

I don’t know the legalities, but I think Apple should be free to set their App Store policies but allow alternative app stores to be installed (with some hoops to jump through so that it isn’t too easy for the tech-blind to do).

That's the same trash Google does with Android and it's effectively as anti-competitive. They shouldn't be permitted to limit competition at all. In any way.

How do you think malware should be controlled?

An App Store has the ability to load executable code that might do anything onto your device. I don’t think an OS can just opt to do nothing about this.

Some basic guard rails, designed to dissuade the technically unsavvy seems like the least that could be done. Additionally, I think there would need to be a malware management system, similar to ones on other more open platforms like macOS or Windows.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#117

Post by maxsilver »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #50
Hamuko wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do actually get a cut if you pay with Apple Pay.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204274 >Are there additional fees to accept Apple Pay? >No. Apple doesn't charge any additional fees.

> Apple doesn't charge any additional fees.

They do charge additional fees, just not to customers. Those fees get tacked onto the bank/merchant in the transaction. Apple charges between 0.15% to 0.30% of total transaction, according to Financial Times.

https://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/12/more-apple-pay-details/

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#118

Post by sokoloff »

aero-glide2 wrote: post #3
Hamuko wrote: post #2

Tim Cook's line of argument seemed a bit weird to me. On one hand he's saying that he doesn't know if Apple's customers would be able to distinguish between Apple's good and holy curated store and Epic's filthy shitheap of porn and blackjack, but he's also saying that Apple's customers definitely want Apple's App Store as-is. > Lawyer says, “if people really value Apple’s curation and Apple’s App Store, even if there…

Why not give customers the choice to run other app stores? Imagine if all the software on your laptop must be downloaded from the windows store..

Customers have that choice today.

On the Android platform.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#119

Post by rdedev »

akg_67 wrote: post #8
Hamuko wrote: post #2

Tim Cook's line of argument seemed a bit weird to me. On one hand he's saying that he doesn't know if Apple's customers would be able to distinguish between Apple's good and holy curated store and Epic's filthy shitheap of porn and blackjack, but he's also saying that Apple's customers definitely want Apple's App Store as-is. > Lawyer says, “if people really value Apple’s curation and Apple’s App Store, even if there…

I hope multiple App Stores don’t become a thing on iOS. The reason I like iPhone is that I am assured that apps I download from App Store are not shit and curated by Apple. Apple has vested interest to keep apps made available to be clean and not going to compromise iPhone. Android play store, in comparison, is full of crap and free for all, basically buyer (or downloader) beware. Phone is used by too broad of user g…

I don't get this argument. How can an alternative app Store affect the quality of the Apple app Store ? The alternate app Store is not gonna come installed by default. No one is gonna mistake the alternative app Store for the apple one. Apple is gonna make sure of that. Apple can even put up loads of warnings and dark UI stuff when installing an alternate app Store to dissuade the "noob" users.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#120

Post by jodrellblank »

aero-glide2 wrote: post #3
Hamuko wrote: post #2

Tim Cook's line of argument seemed a bit weird to me. On one hand he's saying that he doesn't know if Apple's customers would be able to distinguish between Apple's good and holy curated store and Epic's filthy shitheap of porn and blackjack, but he's also saying that Apple's customers definitely want Apple's App Store as-is. > Lawyer says, “if people really value Apple’s curation and Apple’s App Store, even if there…

Why not give customers the choice to run other app stores? Imagine if all the software on your laptop must be downloaded from the windows store..

Also on HN today, endless comments about how Amazon is a shitheap full of fake products and fake reviews and wishing Amazon would tighten up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27253047

> "Why not give customers the choice to run other app stores?"

Why can't people who don't want Apple's curation and want to install other app stores buy Android phones, instead of trying to ruin nice things for everyone else?

Post reply on HN