Live data from Hacker News

Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

twitter.com

121–130 of 593 posts

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those have been part of the web standards for ages (serviceworkers, web notifications).

not on mobile safari

Right, and for those who aren't aware, that means not on any iOS browser since they all (are required to) use safari under the covers

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to do photo/video/media integration on a web page. There no good way to interact with the filesystem to share content, start a livestream, etc. UIKit also make it pretty easy to create layouts that work well on your phone with swiping gestures. I am an app developer that would love to move to a mobile web app but those are the problems that I am running into at least. If web assembly can accomplish all of t…

Your service not having access to my data is a feature. It's one of the primary reasons I prefer websites over apps.

What personal data (that you didn't explicitly provide or allow access to) does an app have access to that a website doesn't?

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> She knew the rules when she started playing this game Knowing the situation is not the same as accepting it. Just because I know a couple of large actors control the market does not mean I have to accept the situation.

If you engage with those actors accepting the terms that is exactly what it means.

...no.

You can't meaningfully accept terms when they are a requirement to enter the market.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#124

Serious question, why does everything require an app? Why can't the same thing be accomplished via the mobile web? I get so tired of being prompted to install apps when you could just *show me the damned web page*. Anything that requires speed can be done via webassembly, and sure, anything like games can ship a native app.

Many features aren't available on the web. e.g. web midi isn't planned on being worked on anytime soon by the webkit team. Also, iOS Safari browser updates constantly break/maim apps. e.g. iOS 14.4.x all had real time audio processing issues that weren't fixed until iOS 14.5.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#125
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't force Netflix to pay them 30% either. The reality is they take 30% where they can overpower the other party. Where they are overpowered, they acquiesce.

I believe the majority of a Netflix subscriber's consumption is still on their TV, not on their iPhone/iPad. But you also cannot pay for Netflix in the iPhone app. You have to do it on their website.

I pay Netflix through my iPhone. I can manage the subscription along with my other iPhone app subscriptions.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#126

Serious question, why does everything require an app? Why can't the same thing be accomplished via the mobile web? I get so tired of being prompted to install apps when you could just *show me the damned web page*. Anything that requires speed can be done via webassembly, and sure, anything like games can ship a native app.

Because apple deliberately hobbles mobile safari so that you need a native app to get real stuff to work. Google talks the talk for web apps but still falls far short. And why not? They are making so much money by not actually supporting web apps. It's in both companies DNA now.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually for proper push messaging and background processing

Those have been part of the web standards for ages (serviceworkers, web notifications).

OK, well iOS doesn't adhere to the standard, which means most of the US mobile device market does not support it.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on any market.

They control computing for 50% of Americans. Not games, not movies. All computing. And all of the commerce around that computing. You have to pay their tax to interact with Apple customers in any way. Who are Apple customers? 50% of Americans. It's a protection racket and it's anticompetitive af. Furthermore, you can't use your own software stack / runtimes, have to dance to arbitrary rules, and can't deploy or updat…

Yeah, computing is not a market.

I get you are trying to win an easy sentimental argument, but making your own market definitions will not make them a monopoly.

Apple sells products, not "computing". In no market where they sell products they have a monopoly.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The web never implemented easy micropayments, and iPhone/Android did.

Actually, Apple Pay works great on the web, but doesn't charge a 30% fee.

Which tells you everything. There's a stocking fee you pay to be on the Apple Store. I never hear the HN crowd complaining about the hoops you have to jump through to get your product on Walmart's shelves. It's almost like the entity owning the retail channel and the customers gets to set the T's and C's. You always have the option for not targeting Apple's customers and building your app for Android only - just like you can tell Walmart where to shove it and only sell your product at Costco. It's how retail works.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#130

The antitrust case against Apple is so overdue it's embarrassing. What I don't get is people who defend it. Imagine Microsoft taking 30% of every purchase you make online because you used their OS to get there. Then would the defenders admit it's an obvious abuse of a monopoly? What makes it different for Apple?

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on any market.

Apple certainly has a duopoly with Google in both the mobile operating systems market, and the mobile app distribution market.

iOS has 60% of the market in the US[1], and Android has 40%, and Google and the App Store is responsible for 100% more revenue than the Play Store[2].

Also, layman definitions of monopoly do not matter when it comes to antitrust laws[3]:

> Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.

[1] https://deviceatlas.com/blog/android-v-ios-market-share

[2] https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/

[3] https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

Post reply on HN