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

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 593 posts

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

#481

Post by mchusma »

amelius wrote: post #181
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #107

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?

Probably the argument is that they (1) host the software in the cloud which costs them money, and (2) they review software for e.g. security issues which costs them money. Anyway, the EU is coming for them: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/euro... > The Digital Markets Act (DMA) establishes a set of narrowly defined objective criteria for qualifying a large online platform as a so-called “gatek…

It's basically a myth that apples reviewers are reviewing for security issues. I've worked in the iOS ecosystem since the beginning, undergone hundreds of reviews, and the reviewers are there primarily, almost exclusively, to endure apple gets it's 30% fee. There are automated security tools, to be sure, but apple the costs of hosting and automated tests are basically 0%.

If they charged $5-20 per release, that I would be fine with, and not only cover costs but would generate profit.

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

#482

Post by mschuster91 »

torstenvl wrote: post #232
mschuster91 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The insidious thing that people never get taught or notice is that while, yes, you get 5% cashback as a customer, the store will eventually raise its prices by 5% to make up the higher CC fees.

Which still works out in favor of the debtor, because: (a) they reap the benefit in the meantime; and (b) rising prices benefit retail workers at the expense of those living off savings and investments

> they reap the benefit in the meantime

Yeah, but when the CC reward gets cancelled the store still will charge the old prices.

> rising prices benefit retail workers at the expense of those living off savings and investments

That assumes that retail will distribute extra profits to its employees... which many aren't known for, Walmart and McDonald's are infamous for paying such poor wages that its employees are entitled to food stamps ffs (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-...).

Maybe, just maybe, the situation will change a bit now that corona has entirely uprooted labor markets, but even then it's a smoke debate - 15$/h is the lowest of the low, even adjusting for inflation would lead to a higher minimum wage!

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

#483

Post by lolinder »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #436
xdennis wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having the ability to install non-Apple-approved applications doesn't remove your ability to install Apple-approved applications.

I wonder though if non-Apple stores will lead to fragmentation. Apps on the App Store will flee and there will be a whole host of app stores. Sort of like Hulu/Netflix/Disney/HBO/etc. with television. Suddenly the apps you had come to expect on the App Store are not there now.

That hasn't happened on Android. Using a third party store (a la F-Droid) or side loading in Android is very much a niche feature used only by the relatively tech savvy. Why would iOS be different?

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

#484

Post by Dylan16807 »

martimarkov wrote: post #471
wernercd wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't heard that. Thanks for the new info. They'd be another store I'd avoid like the plague if I was selling stuff. if this isn't collusion and racketeering, then what is?

The market. Microsoft and Sony have been doing it for years. So has Epic’s parent company

I think you misread the question. They didn't ask what this is, they asked what would qualify as collusion and racketeering if this doesn't.

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

#485

Post by defaultname »

smoldesu wrote: post #231
the_other wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or use the web.

Telling people that the web is a suitable replacement for native apps is an empty promise, especially when your only option for a browser on iOS is one that is notoriously outdated and incompatible with the modern web.

"notoriously outdated and incompatible with the modern web."

There are a lot of anti-Apple arguments a passionate critic might leverage, but claiming that Safari is "notoriously outdated and incompatible with the modern web" is just foolish. It is laughable nonsense.

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

#486

Post by jagger27 »

valparaiso wrote: post #402
LocalH wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Industry standard", by itself, is meaningless. What if "industry standard" was 75%?

Tell this to the judge which stated this to Epic lawyers lmao. Don’t forget that Tencent who’s behind Epic takes 50% fee in its Android store in China and Tim Sweeney bans everyone in Twitter who reminds about this fact.

I'd love to hear his response to this in a court setting.

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

#487

Post by Dylan16807 »

echelon wrote: post #467
singlow wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Does GM have a monopoly on Chevrolets? Does that mean they can be regulated as a monopoly? Chevrolets compete with Fords and Mercedes and Honda, etc; so having a monopoly on your own brand is not a monopoly. I have both an Android phone and an iPhone, so when I hear that Apple has a phone monopoly it just seems like dumb whining.

Using your analogy here... Imagine there are only Chevrolet and Honda (Apple and Android). Imagine you could only go to Chevrolet-approved locations. That Italian place you like is on the destination list, but only because they pay 30% of their revenue to Chevy. The movie theater is protesting the 30% fee, so your car physically can't even visit. It's prohibited. The new boutique really wants to get business. After a…

And yeah, web apps, so you can go through the drive-through anywhere you want. That works fine for some places but it's not at all comparable to parking and properly visiting, for many reasons of capabilities and reliability.

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

#488

Post by lilyball »

hakube wrote: post #461
sharkjacobs wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple draws a pretty clear line, it's the difference between buying a book and an ebook. An ebook is delivered and consumed on your iPhone or iPad, a book is not.

What about Patreon?

Patreon probably gets by because a lot of Patreon rewards are physical items, or other services performed by the creator where Patreon (and by extension Apple) cannot guarantee will be received.

Meanwhile an app whose subscription model is “you get access to digital content” falls square within Apple’s IAP rules. I’m rather shocked Fanhouse got approved in the first place.

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

#489

Post by lolinder »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #454
3pt14159 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft takes 30% of xbox purchases. That's the argument. Apple doesn't take 30% of every purchase you make online. You're free to use a browser and purchase there where Apple doesn't take a cut. I'm not saying I agree with this, and I think 30% is about triple what's reasonable, but if we're going to rail against Apple here, we should include Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft too.

> You're free to use a browser You may be free to do that, but it’s worth noting that if an app developer tells you that you can use a browser, their app will be rejected and they may have their developer account banned.

This is a super important point. The "you're free to use a browser" argument would be very fair if I could tell my customers about that option, or charge 33% more for the iOS version, or simply not have a way to pay through the app.

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

#490

Post by p1necone »

martimarkov wrote: post #465
p1necone wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android allows sideloading apps and this hasn't happened there - everyone still publishes on the main Android app store too. (except for Fortnite obviously, but that's been removed from the iOS store too so it's not exactly a counter example) Why do you think it wouldn't work out the same way on Apple devices? Also if you're concerned about hypothetical "missing out" on certain apps, consider all the developers that…

I for one like the single store because it creates consistency. For developers, for privacy info, for subscriptions. If sideloading is allowed when then malware is also close to get on the phone. Not my phone probably but the average joe, my family members, students, etc.

> I for one like the single store because it creates consistency. For developers, for privacy info, for subscriptions.

So... don't use other app stores? Nobody is forcing you to.

> If sideloading is allowed when then malware is also close to get on the phone. Not my phone probably but the average joe, my family members, students, etc.

Average Joe's aren't even going to know that sideloading apps is an option, let alone know how to do it. And if you're worried about grandma/kids doing something silly there's parental controls for this sort of thing. There just needs to be a way for power users to use other apps.

Post reply on HN