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

Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 903 posts

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#11

Post by dmitrygr »

donmcronald wrote: post #5

I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…

> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it?

Facebook will demand you use FacebookStore, which will NOT force apps transparency. THAT is the issue!

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#12

Post by ThatPlayer »

greedo wrote: post #8
adam_arthur wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consequences of the lack of competition are borne by a huge number of other wealthy companies/people. Affecting pretty much anybody that builds a product that spans across mobile devices. Spotify and Netflix pay Apple a huge percentage of their subscription revenue, for example... simply because the consumer signed up via iPhone. This is not a chorus of small time devs, these are huge companies

Netflix pays reduced percentages to Apple. Been this way for a long time from what I recall. Other big companies negotiate the percentage as well.

Netflix removed In-App Subscriptions on iOS years ago: https://www.macrumors.com/2018/12/28/netflix-no-more-itunes-... .

Now that Apple is under anti-trust scrutiny, Netflix recently added a link to their website just a few months ago: https://techcrunch.com/2022/07/25/netflixs-ios-app-now-has-a...

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#14

Post by jfengel »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #9
sdfhbdf wrote: post #3

No substance, same arguments repeated from both sides all the time. Seems like a stalemate. I see to ways out for a company that feels it’s getting ripped of by Apple: 1. Don’t publish in App Store, do a web app or encourage your customers to get a different platform device. Not sure which one since Google Play Store AFAIK has the same rules. 2. Charge users +30% more when buying through IAP if same is offered any pl…

That doesn't work when you're preventing competition. Look at when movie studios used to set a ton of rules for their movies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_Anti-trust_Case_of_1...

Nothing about that article actually describes any harm done. It's often called the Golden Age of Hollywood, and many of the greatest movies of all time were made under the studio system. It's not even clear that the collusion increased ticket prices.

Recently, in fact, the decrees have been reversed. Studios are allowed to own movie theaters again.

I'm just curious why you picked that one. There are many better cases illustrating the dangers of monopolies.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#15

Post by adam_arthur »

greedo wrote: post #8
adam_arthur wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consequences of the lack of competition are borne by a huge number of other wealthy companies/people. Affecting pretty much anybody that builds a product that spans across mobile devices. Spotify and Netflix pay Apple a huge percentage of their subscription revenue, for example... simply because the consumer signed up via iPhone. This is not a chorus of small time devs, these are huge companies

Netflix pays reduced percentages to Apple. Been this way for a long time from what I recall. Other big companies negotiate the percentage as well.

Doesn’t matter if they get a better rate than market.

The precise number doesn’t change the stated dynamics or situation at all.

That there are app developers that get preferential treatment just demonstrates the arbitrary power Apple has over choosing winners and losers

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#16

Post by ThatPlayer »

jfengel wrote: post #14
ThatPlayer wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't work when you're preventing competition. Look at when movie studios used to set a ton of rules for their movies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_Anti-trust_Case_of_1...

Nothing about that article actually describes any harm done. It's often called the Golden Age of Hollywood, and many of the greatest movies of all time were made under the studio system. It's not even clear that the collusion increased ticket prices. Recently, in fact, the decrees have been reversed. Studios are allowed to own movie theaters again. I'm just curious why you picked that one. There are many better cases…

I pick that one because there's always arguments that Apple is not a monopoly (just switch to Android) therefore other examples of dangers of monopolies don't apply. The studio system was multiple oligopolies and not a monopoly. I think it parallels the current smartphone app market more.

The decrees were reversed because they served their purpose and studios no longer have oligopolies, not because there were new findings or research that suggested the decrees were not worth doing.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#17

Post by m-p-3 »

dmitrygr wrote: post #11
donmcronald wrote: post #5

I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…

> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Facebook will demand you use FacebookStore, which will NOT force apps transparency. THAT is the issue!

And you'd still have the choice to install it or not. Android still allows their users to sideload apps, and it hasn't been the apocalypse.

The core idea is choice.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#18

Post by dmitrygr »

m-p-3 wrote: post #17
dmitrygr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? Facebook will demand you use FacebookStore, which will NOT force apps transparency. THAT is the issue!

And you'd still have the choice to install it or not. Android still allows their users to sideload apps, and it hasn't been the apocalypse. The core idea is choice.

No post body was provided.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#19

Post by yucky »

greedo wrote: post #7
donmcronald wrote: post #5

I want the option to control my devices. I don’t understand the arguments that claim Apple needs to rule the device with an iron fist. What problems does it cause to make the locked down experience the default with the option for me to disable that and take control of the device after I buy it? I want to own my stuff. I want to repair it and I want complete control over it. I think that in 10 years we’ll all have car…

The car industry already has subscription services; Volvo, Porsche, Jaguar/Land Rover, Genesis, Nissan, all have subscription plans. Don't like those? Go down to most car dealers and you can get a short term subscription called a lease... Funny how the world hasn't ended because of this. Just go buy an Android phone if you don't like Apple's walled garden.

The issue is when you buy an apple phone you're not leasing it.

Re: Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

#20

Post by rchaud »

Sharecroppers complaining that the land baron has stacked the deck in his own favour.

Spotify and Twitter began life on the web, not in the app store. No feature they offer requires a native app. Hence there was no reason to corral half the US userbase into someone else's pen and leave them there for over a decade.

Epic has already gone to court on this matter (re: Fortnite on App Store) and lost. And Fortnite wasn't even web-first!

Post reply on HN