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

611–620 of 903 posts

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

#611

Post by [deleted] »

squarefoot wrote: post #593
eecc wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? Next thing that would happen is that every major "can't miss out" app will walk its users through the process to disable safe management features, all to fulfill the promise of showing cute cat gifs. You know that's how it is.

Then make it a contact that can be opened by removing a screw behind a "non reversible loss of warranty" sticker so that only users who know what they're doing would be motivated to proceed.

[deleted]

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

#612

Post by orhmeh09 »

scarface74 wrote: post #536
sschueller wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have, however if you are a business you can not avoid apple if you want to access the most lucrative markets. An iOS version of your app is a must.

Yes and I’m sure if Apple allowed side loading those side loaded apps would be successful. Just look at all of the popular profitable mainstream apps for Android that are not on the Google Play store. But it came out in the Epic Trial that 80% of App Store revenue came from pay to win games. Most of the other big none game money makers stopped supporting in app purchases years ago - like Netflix and Spotify.

FWIW, HBO Max, Hulu, Paramount, Criterion, and probably others offer subscriptions in app. What else doesn’t? Amazon, maybe?

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

#613

Post by manigandham »

majormajor wrote: post #217
satvikpendem wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you assume Apple doesn't also track every website and email you read (especially if you use the default Apple-made apps)? After all, they make the OS, they can track whatever they want.

Nobody's reported seeing that sort of network traffic sent off of iOS devices. It's trivially easy to spot it, and it's well documented, going to Google and others across the web, though.

> " It's trivially easy to spot"

Is it? How exactly are encrypted payloads to a secure, opaque and generic endpoint easy to distinguish?

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

#614

Post by tpmoney »

lelanthran wrote: post #582
cafed00d wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Ste…

> Why is that you'd demand this of _Apple_? We demand this of almost all non-phone appliances. Why should phones get an exemption? No, seriously, why are car manufacturers forced to allow owners the option of non-manufacturer fuel, non-manufacturer tires, non-manufacturer oil and so on, but when it comes to phones, suddenly "the consumers are making an informed choice" ? We regulate this shit for a reason, and that r…

>We demand this of almost all non-phone appliances. Why should phones get an exemption?

Do we really? By law you can't install your own software or ECU in your car and use it legally on the roads. I don't see many people pushing to be able to install BSD on their refrigerator. I think most people would be a lot happier if their TVs didn't come with a full OS. Game consoles have been locked down forever. While re-flashing my router is fun and nice to do, I would wager the absolute vast majority of people both never do it and certainly don't actually care if they can or not. ESPHome is a thing, but most people are buying IOT devices they don't have the ability to run anything they want on.

In fact, other than a personal computer, I'd wager most of the devices most people use in their day to day life with the ability to run software do not have – nor do people "demand" they have – the ability to run any arbitrary piece of software they want on it.

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

#615

Post by vineyardmike »

heavyset_go wrote: post #537
vineyardmike wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As for services that 'demand' you install something, the option exists on Android and no one demands people install things on their Android devices. Why would iOS be different? https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/mobile/android 1. It is used now. 2. Google is a lot less aggressive than apple (see meta vs ATT).

I don't see where Epic is forcing anyone to do anything.

If you want to play Fortnite - one of the most popular games for a generation of people- you can’t use the play store. You need to side load or use a supported store.

Sure it’s not “forced” like you go to jail or your phone doesn’t work, but you can’t use the way 99% of people will get their games.

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

#616

Post by blangk »

bayindirh wrote: post #596
saiya-jin wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is here consistently in any Apple discussion exactly this reaction? Locked down is good for you, you don't want freedom, we know better. On hacker forum. Seriously, basically any other topic we can discuss like adults here but when it comes to Apple and their restrictions/bad behavior it feels like the most upvoted posts are paid ones (not stating they are, but it certainly would look like that on more generic fo…

> Why is here consistently in any Apple discussion exactly this reaction? Because the only mobile OS provider which allows blinding tracking frameworks with a single click is Apple currently, and every software vendor will want its telemetry and ads for their "monies". The application model evolved from "pay this to get that" to "train this AI implicitly which we gonna use against you, and ah, we also sell your every…

True, but Google's own implementation of Android in the Pixel does allow you to re sign the bootloader so you can install your own OS and securely boot to it. And "Android" isn't all the same. It's a broad and shared ecosystem.

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

#617

Post by laserlight »

michaelmrose wrote: post #568
laserlight wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? Yes, it would, because will require you to opt-out of Apple's ultra-managed experience to use their app.

Then don't install it or only install it if its worth the trade off. The only real reason for 99.9% of apps to want to do that is to prevent Apple from taking a huge portion of the revenue. Decrease the tax and this problem virtually goes away.

> Decrease the tax and this problem virtually goes away.

Why are these companies not happy with the current commissions structure? What guarantee is there that they'll be happy with a new one? Corporations are greedy. They will ask more of whatever their bottom line needs, including users' attention, privacy, etc.

> Then don't install it or only install it if its worth the trade off.

And get excluded from online circles that everyone in the world uses? Or, find a different job, because my employer wants to install their surveillance app outside Apple's sandbox? I prefer not having to do the trade off at all.

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

#618

Post by aussieshibe »

maccard wrote: post #541
aussieshibe wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? I heard an argument like this a lot at the start of discussions about whether we should be able to choose to WFH in the longer term. "I don't want to WFH because..." Ok, sure, but nobody is trying to force you to. It might just be me, and I'll de…

> Would giving people the ability to opt out of Apple's ultra-managed experience and take more control over their device harm your ability to continue to enjoy those benefits? Not OP but yeah, I think it would. Im currently an android user because I thought it wouldn't, but in practice it does. The most explicit example is that despite owning a flagship phone from a flagship manufacturer, the Google suite of apps don…

That's interesting. Is that incompatibility specific to the Flip 3? I have a Fold 4, and Google Wallet works for me.

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

#619

Post by manigandham »

7e wrote: post #360
fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a common misconception that ad tracking is all about targeting ads. That’s part of it, but the truth is that tracking conversions is a more important differentiator for advertising platforms. A conversion is where the user clicks on the ad and then makes a purchase. The top digital ad companies (Apple, Google, Meta, Amazon) all charge for conversions. There is no way to charge for conversions without sending…

That’s not true. They could use differentially private on-device joins using anonymously downloaded ad data. Or they could securely aggregate the results. Or both.

That's not at all how adtech works. You cannot download all activity between ad supply (website/app/etc) and advertisers and every vendor in the middle onto your device for some joins.

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

#620

Post by laserlight »

bnj wrote: post #609
michaelmrose wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then don't install it or only install it if its worth the trade off. The only real reason for 99.9% of apps to want to do that is to prevent Apple from taking a huge portion of the revenue. Decrease the tax and this problem virtually goes away.

Not OP, but the thing which bothers me about this is that it’s not a real choice from an end user perspective. So many employers quasi-require people to use their phones as part of their work. I can just see something like Microsoft teams becoming a wedge that pushes people to disable lockdowns from apple that, in their personal lives, they’d rather keep. I do think that could be solvable. Something like different pe…

> I can just see something like Microsoft teams becoming a wedge that pushes people to disable lockdowns from apple that, in their personal lives, they’d rather keep.

Exactly. Not just employers, but also Facebook, TikTok, and whatever new and worse invasive tech that is enabled by the lack of Apple's restrictions.

> I do think that could be solvable.

I agree. And it should be solved. But, those who are asking for less restrictions won't be happy, because what they are looking for is better tracking tools.

Post reply on HN