US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission • Hacker News Board

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#811

Post by fennecfoxy » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:50 PM UTC

HatchedLake721 wrote: post #653

nolok wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not that 30% is too high or too low, the problem is that it shouldn't be a % but a flat fee structure, like every other services ever. If you have an app tomorrow that sells for $10 to 10k people you owe Apple $30k, now you manage to up your price to $30, same work same size same everything, but suddenly you now owe Apple $90k ? That's called a tax, not a fee. Doing so wouldn't stop apple from having a…

> like every other services ever Apple didn’t invent a marketplace. Please have a look how other online and offline marketplaces work and how they monetize access. You can look at anything from Salesforce, Shopify, to Microsoft, Epic Store, PlayStation and your local Target store. Hint - it’s not a flat fee structure.

B-b-but-

We can take them all down. We should. Doesn't matter if it's Valve or Steam or Google or whoever. It's only better for consumers and clearly we've let it slide to the point where even us usually cynical HN peeps are apparently willing to defend this predatory and anti-consumer behaviour.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#812

Post by eaglelamp » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:51 PM UTC

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #751

andersa wrote: post #373

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.

What's incredible is the idea that an argument or a point of view is somehow invalidated purely because it happens to side with the trillion dollar company. This is in the same vein as "this cause is supported by teh evil Amerika, hence it must be evil" line of thinking, typically espoused by self-declared anti-imperialists (who are often mere anti-US-imperialists). >make a few people who already have everything even…

It's not incredible it is just a different view point. In your second paragraph you take a utilitarian point of view in which case the size of an organization is irrelevant so long as it produces a net gain for society.

An alternative view values human freedom and autonomy. From this perspective the size of an organization is relevant - a large enough organization can impose its will on individuals who don't wish to associate with it.

Neither viewpoint is wrong, but acting as if the one you prefer is somehow more correct or objective is.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#813

Post by webstrand » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:54 PM UTC

systoll wrote: post #766

webstrand wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple preventing 3rd party software not paying the apple tax from running on their phones is not "free market". The only reason they can get away with this is because of laws that protect their market from 3rd parties.

…what laws? Apple restricts third parties almost entirely through technical measures. Jailbreaking to bypass the technical measures is legal.

It may have finally been settled now as legal? I know in the past it was considered a violation of DMCA, circumventing technical countermeasures.

Looks like the lawsuit was settled not decided, and Apple is free to sue it's next victim.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#814

Post by bearjaws » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:54 PM UTC

thrdbndndn wrote: post #185

For me, the glaring issue here is not whether 27% is fair or not. Rather, it's the absence of an alternative method to do so without relying on Apple's "services." Naturally, there can be endless debates about whether this is acceptable or not. However, the reality is that there is a striking disparity between the iOS's model and that of Android, PC, or even Mac.

Its far worse than that. Apple clearly abuses its market place "railroads" to control shipments of apps "oil" from its competitors, mainly Kindle and Spotify. Of course while offering the same apps at a much higher margin for themselves.

It's literally the same problem that led to antitrust in 1890.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#815

Post by fennecfoxy » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:56 PM UTC

shuckles wrote: post #746

kelnos wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SCOTUS has ruled[0] that use (including implementation) of APIs is fair use, and does not constitute copyright infringement if the author of those APIs wishes to place restrictions on them. A developer writing an app for iOS can use the APIs provided by Apple without agreeing to license them. (Granted, you can't get your app into the App Store and onto iPhones/iPads without agreeing to whatever Apple wants you to agr…

This was about the interface not the implementation. What’s the cost of rewriting the entire iOS framework stack?

Probably not that much considering the past, present and future totals of a 30% cut across all developers lmao. We're talking about a LOT of money here. There's a reason Apple is a "trillion dollar company" and it's not because they're putting in anything even close to as much as they take out.

If it were possible to run unsigned code on the average iDevice (and Apple's framework/drivers disabled for unsigned code) then this would have already been done, a long time ago.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#816

Post by smoldesu » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:57 PM UTC

dwaite wrote: post #590

shaan7 wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you buy an iphone there is no one to compete This. The problem is not the 30%, the problem is that iPhones do not have an option to buy apps from, lets say a Amazon Store or Epic Store.

That has been the style of argument made to regulators so far. However then people get shocked that Apple says ok, we've rolled out the ability for third party app stores, we still review all the apps before signing, and the store owes us a 20% commission.

Yes, people are shocked. Apple's provisional approach to legislative compliance isn't working, their indifference towards public opinion is what brought antitrust regulators onto the scene in the first place.

Their App Store monopoly is the most literal definition of anticompetitive bundling in the 21st century; they're tying the primary product (Apple hardware, software, APIs, etc.) to a secondary product (the App Store) that can be offered from multiple competitors.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#817

Post by AlwaysRock » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:57 PM UTC

andersa wrote: post #373

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 wouldnt defend 30% specifically but surely they should get some cut or share. What is the right number? 1%? 50%? I don't know.

> 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.

Kind of an odd take. They take a cut because they provide a service. They are not stealing. I guess lump me in with the defending apple crowd if you want to but to think they would or should charge nothing for their service feels... silly.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#818

Post by BobaFloutist » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:59 PM UTC

dwaite wrote: post #590

shaan7 wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you buy an iphone there is no one to compete This. The problem is not the 30%, the problem is that iPhones do not have an option to buy apps from, lets say a Amazon Store or Epic Store.

That has been the style of argument made to regulators so far. However then people get shocked that Apple says ok, we've rolled out the ability for third party app stores, we still review all the apps before signing, and the store owes us a 20% commission.

Which is, in this context, like Amazon taking 9% if you buy something from Ebay.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#819

Post by smoldesu » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 4:59 PM UTC

merrywhether wrote: post #730

rezonant wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inability to unsubscribe should be fixed in the law, not by granting a payments monopoly for all users of a specific operating system or phone model.

It should be, but I’m not holding my breathe for the US to suddenly start ancting like a functional government (and there are probably other countries where a legal fix is less likely as well). Until then companies are free to offer private alternatives to users who find that to be a valuable service.

> Until then companies are free to offer private alternatives to users who find that to be a valuable service.

The question with the App Store is, are customers allowed to choose?

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#820

Post by fennecfoxy » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:00 PM UTC

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #317

choppaface wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But use of said IP is required because Apple forbids side-loading. Therefore Apple App store is a monopoly. So hopefully the court result will in the end help get the Apple App store shut down / opened up.

Even if you're side-loading, you're still using Apple IP. Every single framework and the OS itself up to the Mach OSS Kernel is Apple IP. It would be entirely unfeasible to run anything on an iPhone without some Apple IP. You'd be looking at an Asahi Linux for iPhone.

Who's paying for this IP, then?

The consumer, who bought the device? Surely the cost of development of said IP is in total recouped from device sales? The device doesn't work without said framework.

The developers who provide a reason to buy the device? Why should they be forced to use a monopolistic platform only because Apple's marketing has successfully clouded consumers' heads?

Humans are terrible at actually boycotting, but I'd love to see what would happen if 90% of app store devs pulled their apps from app stores. Would people buy as many iPhones? Ooooh, now we realise the value proposition that devs are _offering_ Apple, not taking from them.