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

Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 125 posts

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#91

Post by bouke »

vlovich123 wrote: post #75
efitz wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know about markups but in most industries businesses would envy a 10% profit margin.

Finally found something [1]. > When setting your wholesale price, first multiply your cost of goods by two. This will ensure your wholesale profit margin is at least 50%. Profit margin is the gross profit a retailer earns when an item is sold. Apparel retail brands typically aim for a 30% to 50% wholesale profit margin, while direct-to-consumer retailers aim for a profit margin of 55% to 65%. (A margin is sometimes a…

Do note that the 30% cut is actually a 42% (30/70) markup.

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#92

Post by ls15 »

eps wrote: post #21

The best bit is that the proposal requires devices to support the original app store AND side-loading. Which is exactly what Apple doesn't want, because of (a) Fortnite / alt payment options (b) Facebook / privacy restrictions bypass, i.e. the loss of revenue and the loss of credibility as a (sort of) privacy-oriented platform. So I am sure they will fight to at least make it an OR.

> So I am sure they will fight to at least make it an OR.

I am not sure about this. Who would buy an iphone with the intention to sideload apps if it does not let them install all the apps that the iphone is famous for at the same time? Microsoft allowed users to still use IE (and Office and everything else) after they have been forced to offer other browsers.

I envision a scenario, where you buy a new iphone and selecting/configuring appstores is part of the setup process and can be changed later. As many as you want, just like you would add repos in a package manager.

We would not allow our shopping bags to limit our possible sources of groceries to one specific supermarket chain.

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#93

Post by yywwbbn »

olliej wrote: post #81
vlovich123 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finally found something [1]. > When setting your wholesale price, first multiply your cost of goods by two. This will ensure your wholesale profit margin is at least 50%. Profit margin is the gross profit a retailer earns when an item is sold. Apparel retail brands typically aim for a 30% to 50% wholesale profit margin, while direct-to-consumer retailers aim for a profit margin of 55% to 65%. (A margin is sometimes a…

The argument that 30% is excessive and a product of their monopoly is bullshit. 1) the majority of apps don’t pay apple a cent because they make their money off selling user information 2) of those that remain most likely aren’t reaching the income point where it stops being 15% 3) 30% matches the payments of every other store, except those stores that don’t pay for any of the platform development. It’s super easy to…

Why do you think Apple still makes Macs? According to your argument it should be a net loss for them.

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#94

Post by yywwbbn »

ls15 wrote: post #92
eps wrote: post #21

The best bit is that the proposal requires devices to support the original app store AND side-loading. Which is exactly what Apple doesn't want, because of (a) Fortnite / alt payment options (b) Facebook / privacy restrictions bypass, i.e. the loss of revenue and the loss of credibility as a (sort of) privacy-oriented platform. So I am sure they will fight to at least make it an OR.

> So I am sure they will fight to at least make it an OR. I am not sure about this. Who would buy an iphone with the intention to sideload apps if it does not let them install all the apps that the iphone is famous for at the same time? Microsoft allowed users to still use IE (and Office and everything else) after they have been forced to offer other browsers. I envision a scenario, where you buy a new iphone and sel…

Considering that never happened on Android I think it’s even less likely in Apple’s case. Unless the EU explicitly requires Apple to show window allowing the user to pick the app stores he wants to use like they sid with web browsers

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#95

Post by yywwbbn »

olliej wrote: post #72
simfree wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple and Microsoft charge for upgrades on computers, but not for security updates. Cross-subsidization is obscuring the true cost of a good and not permitting consumer choice, many people don't want UI revamps and feature rewrites bundled with basic security updates, with the cost hidden in the fees charged to App Store developers and never disclosed to the customer.

What are you talking about? Apple doesn’t charge for OS updates, yet provides years of support for all its devices. The alternative is charging for updates, or going the android route and selling out users while while also not providing any updates. Google can give away android because Android is stalkerware that feeds their ad revenue.

Yes they do it completely for free on macOS. How can they afford this without a 30% cut on all software sold by anyone?

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#96

Post by yywwbbn »

eqvinox wrote: post #35
paxys wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android has an explicit opt-in for allowing sideloading, and a whopping 0.06% of users currently utilize it. I really don't know why this issue is causing such a big fuss in the iOS ecosystem.

My impression is that the Google Play store is much less hostile to developers than the Apple store. Which makes for larger momentum/impact to actually move to 3rd party services. (I have only dabbled in Android apps, my impression of the Apple situation is very much that, an impression.)

On the other hand Play Store is much more hostile to it’s users compared to Apple.

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#97

Post by olliej »

yywwbbn wrote: post #93
olliej wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument that 30% is excessive and a product of their monopoly is bullshit. 1) the majority of apps don’t pay apple a cent because they make their money off selling user information 2) of those that remain most likely aren’t reaching the income point where it stops being 15% 3) 30% matches the payments of every other store, except those stores that don’t pay for any of the platform development. It’s super easy to…

Why do you think Apple still makes Macs? According to your argument it should be a net loss for them.

People often complain about the markup on Macs, so it seems reasonable to interpret that as a higher margin being used to compensate for the lack of ongoing revenue. Higher margins are the obvious (only?) alternative to ongoing commission revenue - that obviously puts Apple at a disadvantage compared to

* Google, who makes money by harvesting information from every android user; or

* Samsung, etc who don't pay the cost of developing a platform

* Steam, GoG, etc who literally only operate a store front, yet still take 30% cuts. They don't even have significant proportion of free games - and the games that they do have are frequently > $50 so their per-sale absolute revenue is insane.

* The various console platforms, because somehow consoles are magically different from everyone else

* Microsoft (ignoring consoles) who charges for their OS, and despite that seems hell bent on putting ads into the OS

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#98

Post by mihaaly »

danielscrubs wrote: post #85

I’m not as optimistic as you guys. What I think we will get is a fragmented mess, with the app store that allows the most stealing of data winning. WeChat is a good example where on Android they require access to your whole contact list to even start but on iOS this is not the case because Apple don’t allow it. Competition is going to make this things worse not better. Once you have competition that uses dark pattern…

I believe it is more like having an option. Having more freedeom. And as with other aspects of life freedom comes with increased responsibility. Those want things to be curated for and told to them, and - hopefully - remain on the 'safe' side, with the added convenience that others - hopefuly - doing a good job in elminating risks, doing this hard task for them for their convenience, could still stick to Apple's services.

But I assume even those will benefit if Apple has to compete with alternative sources of services. Myself I feel the Apple app store is somewhat inadequate and clumsy to use both for consumers and suppliers. Me and some others around me have this view that it could be done better. Especially the process of publishing your work. It remains a bumpy ride as there is no incentive for them to spend on improving it, people have no other choice than doing it the way Apple dictates, no alternatives. Even as consumer navigating the store it feels pretty much directed into a particular direction others want us to go.

Hopefully those not thinking about using alternative choices will benefit too from the opening up of the infrastructure.

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#99

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

vlovich123 wrote: post #63
efitz wrote: post #54

The desire to collect rent drives so many nasty behaviors in companies. At its core, this is a discussion about rent seeking. Apple and Google lust after their 30% cut, which is outrageous and would not be long tolerated in any other business arrangement. They keep the gravy train going because of gatekeeping. “I want to root/mod my device” and “right to repair” are interesting but orthogonal arguments. Those argumen…

What’s the typical margin in physical retail stores, particularly with respect to software (eg video games)? It’s hard to find. All the things I found are about profit margins not what the price breakdown is at the point of checkout. I think 30% has been ridiculously high although I don’t know what a fairer margin is. For what it’s worth Apple has managed to maintain a 30% profit margin (not just sales) on the hardwa…

I don't know what percent is fair, that's for the market to decide. There needs to be competition though.

Re: Apple forced to allow sideloading and 3rd-party app stores under new EU law

#100

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

LegitShady wrote: post #84
olliej wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is none of the third party app stores pay for any of the platform development, so why should they get to benefit from them?

the platform development comes with sale of the platform - which is to say the customer has already paid to have it developed by buying the phone. Many developers don't want to have apple be their gatekeeper for apps. They should be able to have alternatives. Apple's rent seeking behaviour is to take platform development in the cost of the device and again to distribute apps without any alternative.

I agree and this debate is infuriating. They got paid when I bought their hardware. I should owe them nothing more to use the device after that point.
Post reply on HN