Live data from Hacker News

Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

theverge.com

431–440 of 958 posts

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#431

As a consumer I trust how Apple payments work and like the fact that everyone was using it on iOS. Now I will need to cut back on apps and do more due diligence to avoid scams and other issues. Hard to see how this is a win for consumers in addition to developers.

Apple will stop finding ways to squeeze indie developers and spend more time making iphone great again

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I agree with you. I think 30% is highway robbery and that opinion hasn't changed since day one. But also just take a look at the number of subscriptions we all have these days - Entertainment stuff (Spotify/Music, Netflix/streaming, HBO, Xbox Live), Donations (Charity, Github Sponsors), Software (Password managers, backup solutions, Jetbrains, Adobe), Membership (Prime/equivalent, internet, mobile), ... yada yada…

This wouldn't be an issue if credit card providers offered a standardized system for making subscription charges. When you sign up, you'd pre-authorize them to charge your card a certain amount per time period. You could revoke the authorization through your credit card company's website, along with your other subscriptions. If the service wanted to change the price, they'd need a you to re-authorize it.

If they were doing that, they should also overhaul the whole system so you're never giving your credit card number directly to the sites. Similar to how if I use OAuth to log into a site, that site never has a chance to see my password.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#433

Think Apple has already seen the writing on the wall - both S. Korea & the US are now probably going to push back against the IAP restrictions, and they can / should do a couple of things, which might actually increase revenue. 1. Cut down the IAP commission to 15% for everyone. 2. Cut down the commission to 5% for those who pay for a Business Account, say at $5,000 a year. The thing is no customer wants to use any c…

Apple's system does not allow a developer to refund a purchase. Seems like the height of half-assed.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#434

As a consumer I trust how Apple payments work and like the fact that everyone was using it on iOS. Now I will need to cut back on apps and do more due diligence to avoid scams and other issues. Hard to see how this is a win for consumers in addition to developers.

Nothing in this injunction prevents Apple from requiring that if apps offer purchase options they must also offer IAP as an option. I'm certain that even if the injunction were to go into force, Apple would continue to require that. Apple could probably even mandate that the other purchase options not be cheaper than IAP pricing by more than apple's 30%, preventing developers from putting absurd prices on the IAP opt…

That sounds like it would be going too far and almost show contempt. But perhaps they can reject apps that use scammy payments

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#435
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ruling could cost them billions of dollars in revenue. It's absolutely worth appealing. Even if they lose in the long run, they'll make a few billion more in the mean time.

how many billions? It seems their max app gaming revenue lost would be 64 * 70% * 30% = 13.4B for 2021 , but it's probably a lot smaller due to special deals, and also this would assume they would lose ALL the revenue. In reality they'd lose about,maybe ~$3B ? The alternative would alienate some of their best developers -- who knows, maybe they'd leave?

>> In short, iOS apps must be allowed to direct users to payment options beyond those offered by Apple.

> It seems their max app gaming revenue lost would be 64 * 70% * 30% = 13.4B for 2021

It is my understanding that the injunction is not limited to games. It applies to all apps.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#436
post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would really pay a 30% premium on all your digital purchases just to be warned about a subscription expiring next year? You might be an edge case.

A fair amount of companies makes their subscription cancellation actively hostile in an effort to not get people to do it. To give an example, though you can subscribe online, the NYT requires you to call during only certain hours to a customer service line where you get badgered and questioned like you’re trying to cancel a cable subscription. If the US mandated that you need to provide equivalent means of subscript…

This 100%. As an Android user if I have the option to pay for a subscription with Google Pay (even for extra) I will do it to avoid the dreaded "You can only call to cancel" interaction where someone will spend the next 10 minutes trying to talk me out of it.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#437
post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing is no customer wants to use any company's half-assed bug-riddled purchase or subscription system. Every iOS and macOS user will prefer to use the Apple system. The first sentence is true but incomplete, making the second wrong. For example, the Amazon app is highly likely to have people using their existing Amazon payment method. Companies like Stripe are going to offer their own SDKs just like they do fo…

Companies will want it, but I'm not sure users will. Apple does a really good job of warning me, I feel, and centralizing subscription cancellation etc., and that's huge. Like, if I have to go to your app--or worse, your website--to cancel a subscription? I'm gonna just not use your stuff, because I'm going to forget about it until you whack me for another year or whatever.

One drawback of the current situation is that for example you can’t purchase ebooks through the iOS Kindle app (because Amazon can’t/won’t let Apple take their 30% cut there), and the app can’t even link to the corresponding product page on Amazon. If the new ruling enables such purchases and linking, then as a consumer I’m very much in favor of it.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#438
post #418
post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll get no argument from me that Apple's system is pretty good from a consumer standpoint — that's the primary reason why I predicted that it'd remain popular. It's really nice knowing that you can nuke a subscription without getting some dark patterns trying to talk you out of it. On the other hand, it's really easy to imagine that you'd see something like “$9.99 IAP; $7.99 direct from Epic/Amazon/Google/Netflix/…

I suppose that would only happen if Apple were very uncompetitive in price. In the example above, the options would be equivalent to the company if Apple only dropped their cut to 25% and the competition was free. Assume Apple dropped to 15% and the competition was 10% - then it would be 9.99 IAP, 9.63 on Amaozon/Stripe/Netflix, which probably wouldn't be worth the consumer confusion.

~USD$70 B AppStore revenue (yearly, 2020), so simplistic estimates:

5% price cut: -$3.5 B

15% price cut: -$10.5 B

... I think all bets are on the table as to how Apple will respond, given the magnitude of what we're talking about.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#439

I'm really happy to see this moving forward, but I loathe the potential future landscape. Every fortune 500 is going to immediately pivot to their own IAP options which will make my life harder compared to Apple Pay. I'm hoping with this movement, tools like Stripe/Paddle will develop some better IAP flows to make it as easy as possible. Adding my card information to 50 different in-app wallets does not sound appeali…

If there is competition allowed, maybe Apple lowers price and then you don't have much change in convenience.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#440

I'm really happy to see this moving forward, but I loathe the potential future landscape. Every fortune 500 is going to immediately pivot to their own IAP options which will make my life harder compared to Apple Pay. I'm hoping with this movement, tools like Stripe/Paddle will develop some better IAP flows to make it as easy as possible. Adding my card information to 50 different in-app wallets does not sound appeali…

When Apple announced it was introducing intentional security vulnerabilities to their Apple Pay platforms last month that was the signal that they were done trying to be a bank. I wonder if that decision was made knowing the likely outcome and downstream results of this case.

Wait, what intentional security vulnerabilities?
Post reply on HN