Live data from Hacker News

Spotify CEO renews attack on Apple after Musk's salvo

reuters.com

181–190 of 903 posts

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

#181

Stop buying Apple if you don't like it. Seriously. At the end of the day all of these companies would do the exact same thing as Apple if they were in Apple's position. The real solution to this is improved functionality of web apps and complete migration to those, then you can be free of the duopoly. Other than using phone specific features, why can't all apps run on your desktop, laptop or elsewhere? I'll never get…

Another solution is to pass legislation making Apple's business model illegal.

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

#182

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…

> I want the option to control my devices.

Why is that you'd demand this of _Apple_? Doesn't Linux and the plethora of devices it supports give you this already?

I ask as a willful customer who prefers the complete control Apple provides. I never have to think about "porn" or "bitcoin scam" or "upsells from parent's bank" or any other crap from being easily accessible on my kids' or elderly parent's devices. Even Steam has some arcane filters that eventually allow porn content to be visible in the store. Honestly, outsourcing the basic policing of content to a company like Apple is a feature; not a bug.

Besides, there's so many competing devices that give you all the freedom + control you want out there already. Right? What am I missing?

Now, I admit, this means I'm under the mercy of what _Apple_ thinks is "right" or "wrong". As an extreme example, I'd also like to disable _all_ non-vegetarian content from my kids' or parent's phones; to appeal to their "religious"/"moral" beliefs. But obviously that's a not a PoV upheld by the App Store. Similarly, I can empathize there are many other viewpoints people hold that may or may not be aligned with App Store guidelines.

But despite all that, why can't Linux devices serve the "control my devices" need.

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

#183
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android allows 3rd party app stores, you can side load apps, and you can install a different OS.

Is Spotify on any of those 3rd party app stores other than Amazon's (which also has a fee)?

They could be if they wanted, is the point. So it's harder to go after them for the fee.

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

#184

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 way I see it the users have two crappy options based on business model: 1) Apple's freedom from inspection: they control your device and their ecosystem because they make money off the ecosystem. The take a cut of the phone/computer/watch you buy then anything you buy in their ecosystem because the ecosystem is their product. Your data is (mostly) safe from advertisers because that's not their business. 2) Google…

> Your data is (mostly) safe from advertisers because that's not their business.

I beg to differ.

Apple is becoming an ad company despite privacy claims

https://proton.me/blog/apple-ad-company

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33736259

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

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like being able to trust my device and my kids device, if you wan't something to hack on get a pinephone or something the reality is that billions of people need to trust their phones with their most personal information, fininaces and lives and apple's policies while sometimes annoying do a lot to build that trust they aren't a big secret and if you don't like it you're free to not buy their products

How does the option of openness interrupt your curated lifecycle?

for me personally I don't care about it on my phone either way, I do on my laptop/desktop

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

#186
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android allows 3rd party app stores, you can side load apps, and you can install a different OS.

Is Spotify on any of those 3rd party app stores other than Amazon's (which also has a fee)?

Why does it matter? Spotify wants the freedom to set their own margins. Compensating artists fairly starts by kicking out useless middlemen, and Apple plays that role in this instance. Every developer deserves the right to distribute software on their own terms, that's not some extremist or abhorrent ideal to advocate for.

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

#187
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Spotify on any of those 3rd party app stores other than Amazon's (which also has a fee)?

They could be if they wanted, is the point. So it's harder to go after them for the fee.

Why aren’t they if they’re so upset about fees?

Are they actually so upset about fees?

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

#188
post #170

Can someone explain why Apple is always the target for these complaints regarding fees? Is it just shorthand for both companies or a target people rally against? As Android has the same 30% fees for in-app billing, it's not like it's cheaper for Spotify on Google's platform. I get there's theoretically F-Droid and sideloading, but I don't see Spotify on fdroid so presumably there's not enough users to make it worth i…

Because Google will negotiate and Apple will not.

For example, Google and Spotify have an arrangement termed User Choice Billing wherein users can choose whether to pay Spotify directly or through Google's payment rails.

That, and iPhone users may have higher average LTV.

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

#189
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No one is stopping you from buying a Linux based phone? What is this supposed to be an argument for? Do you think this is an own? Is this statement made in good faith? Did you really let your 10th grade economics teacher tell you what a "monopoly" was and then never question either the usefulness or the validity of the definition?

What the parent is likely trying to point out is that Apple has no obligation to give you the feature the way you want it (in fact, Apple seems to view not providing flexibility as the feature). If you feel this strongly about the feature, then using a different phone (which there are many) is available.

Standard Oil has no obligation to give you oil the way you want it. If you feel this strongly about oil, then using a different oil provider (which there are many) is available.

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

#190
post #170

Can someone explain why Apple is always the target for these complaints regarding fees? Is it just shorthand for both companies or a target people rally against? As Android has the same 30% fees for in-app billing, it's not like it's cheaper for Spotify on Google's platform. I get there's theoretically F-Droid and sideloading, but I don't see Spotify on fdroid so presumably there's not enough users to make it worth i…

Apple Music is their biggest competitor and they are very close in terms of userbase size. Apple Music is also (along with Tidal) one of the top places people go when they leave Spotify (for the various good reasons one might leave Spotify). Not much business point in trying to go after Google. The 30% cut IS a big deal but that's not the primary reason.

As for why so many companies target Apple's level of control over their ecosystem (even if they don't directly compete on a service) ... well ... there's the whole data privacy and anti-ad-tracking thing they have been doing. Nearly all SaaS businesses are also ad or surveillance businesses either primarily or on the side. Most of the press and legal challenges mounted against Apple are attempting to remove Apple's policy-level control over what is deployed on devices.

There is so much more than just the 30% cut.

Post reply on HN