471–480 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know a few vendors who sell on Amazon. With advertising, they end up paying close to 60% of the selling price to Amazon.
How can Amazon pricing be so competitive if the cut is so large for third-party vendors?
2. Because some products might be sold at breakeven price to attract and retain customers
3. Because some products might be loss leaders to attract and retain customers
It's incredible that there are actually people in this thread arguing in favor of Apple. You don't need to defend the trillion dollar company. They are not your friend, they do not care about you, your work or your life. All they do is steal 30% from society that could be used for more productive purposes than make a few people who already have everything even richer.
[flagged]
-putting disparate things together to form a whole and polishing it
-design
-marketing which includes cult building
All these talents are put at work together in harmony.
I own devices from Apple (which have both advantages and disadvantages) and other companies, but at no point I fell myself better because I own Apple devices, nor do I consider their devices better than anything else out there.
For some people, brands are a part of who they are. Apple, Gucci, Christian Dior, Tesla are not longer manufacturers of goods to be used. They are symbols that are used to craft ones identity, together with whatever ideology of the day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stealing? I see it as fee for an exchange to access to a huge market of wealthy people (one that can afford an iPhone probably can afford your app). Where entry barrier is extremely low. If you make 100 sales, you don't have to pay much, if you make huge profits off the platform you make huge payments to the platform owner.
They shouldn't have the right to be the gatekeeper in that relationship. The wealthy people own the hardware, the devs own the app. Why does apple get the legal right to demand money in that transaction when it would be better for everyone if they weren't involved
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It'll probably need to be another lawsuit since it's in the developer agreement. Via user lolinder ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39020745 ): > Apple is already pretty clear in its developer agreement [0] that the 30% commission is for "its services as Your agent and/or commissionaire" (Schedule 2 3.4), not for its services as a payment processor. They are contractually allowed to take the 30% fee out of paym…
Will be interesting to see Epic file a lawsuit questioning the legality of per-sale licensing models for SDKs. You know given they charge exactly the same way for Unreal Engine.
Apple isn't charging for use of the iOS platform SDKs; the developer agreement is much more vague and weasely about what they're charging for, being the developer's "agent and/or commisionaire".
Per-sale licensing for a copyrighted (or patented) work is pretty normal and done in many industries. Apple's agreement doesn't specify any fees for licensing at all.
It's incredible that there are actually people in this thread arguing in favor of Apple. You don't need to defend the trillion dollar company. They are not your friend, they do not care about you, your work or your life. All they do is steal 30% from society that could be used for more productive purposes than make a few people who already have everything even richer.
>All they do is steal 30% from society that could be used for more productive purposes This is how all businesses work. If there was no way to make profit then businesses would not exist. Apple spent billions of dollars creating an app platform with a clear monetization model that did not get in the way of them accumulating a lot of valuable apps and users. Developers are not forced to make apps for the platform nor…
I don't want their platform forced down my throat. On my PC I can download and install software from wherever I see fit. Had I not being a MacBook Pro user for the time being, I would have a chance to upgrade RAM and SSD without paying twice on the damn device.
If anything, I consider Apple being an anti consumer company. What is good for them, is not good for the end user.
That being said, their devices do have some advantages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL, but at face value, that seems like it would be, well, quite insane? To emphasize, I've seen plenty of insane stuff in the legal system, but if the argument is basically that Epic doesn't have standing because Apple won't let them be in a position where they could have standing , yet they generally offer that position (dev program membership) to the public at large, that seems like some sort of Catch-22-ish nig…
It’s not that difficult to follow. As I recall, and feel free to correct me on the chronology if I get something out of order, it went something like this: - Epic pushed an update to Fortnite at some point to the App Store that would allow them to issue an update from the server side to enable a flag to offer Epic’s own payment processor where you could buy in-game currency from them instead of IAP. They then issued…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>All they do is steal 30% from society that could be used for more productive purposes This is how all businesses work. If there was no way to make profit then businesses would not exist. Apple spent billions of dollars creating an app platform with a clear monetization model that did not get in the way of them accumulating a lot of valuable apps and users. Developers are not forced to make apps for the platform nor…
Something is not moral just because it makes a profit or because it is legal, and revenue is also not profit. And I think if a company operates outside societal norms, which I think Apple with regards to European societal norms, it should expect to get regulated to fit those norms again. Maybe the US is too dysfunctional to do this any more, but the purpose of government should be to align the laws and regulations wi…
Well, maybe Apple should open a bank. You just gave them ideas. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can’t developers bring a class action lawsuit or someone else just open a case? They did so in Cameron vs Apple and Google … and settled I believe !
They can. They have little interest to. Very miniscule reward (the only ones winning in a class action are the lawyers... I am due for a solid $20 from Google though!) for a huge risk. I'm repeating the words of another commenter, but most app devs aren't competing against Apple but other devs. They aren't billion dollar businesses that stand to benefit by trying to get a lower rev share.
But I do agree that most developers probably wouldn't be interested. They don't want to stand up their own payment processor, or don't care to do integrations with a bunch of third parties, and tolerate the fees to use Apple's payments platform. And for many of these developers, their entire business is built on their relationship with Apple. Getting their developer accounts terminated would mean shutting down entirely.
It's incredible that there are actually people in this thread arguing in favor of Apple. You don't need to defend the trillion dollar company. They are not your friend, they do not care about you, your work or your life. All they do is steal 30% from society that could be used for more productive purposes than make a few people who already have everything even richer.
I don’t need them to be my friend or to care about me but as a share holder I want them to succeed. So far their R&D has proven valuable to me as both a consumer and share holder.
I don’t care if a few people who already have everything get richer. Since I believe the company is doing great things and I think it still has a bright future ahead I get to share in that upside too. And so can you if you want to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a better analogy would be something like installing aftermarket parts for for your vehicle.
Could you actually describe this? How would that be a better analogy?
As a vehicle owner I'd like to be able to have a choice whether I want to install OEM parts or after market parts. The after market parts might be cheaper, or have features that the OEM parts lack. I would like to be able to purchase these parts without a 30% markup that goes to the car manufacturer.
As an iPhone user, I'd like to be able to install apps on my iPhone without having to pay the iPhone manufacturer a 30% markup.
I realize that this analogy doesn't directly address the issue of whether Apple has a monopoly on the market of iPhone apps, but it's how I think about it as a consumer.