Live data from Hacker News

Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

forums.dropbox.com

251–260 of 361 posts

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#251

Apple's really become a shitty company in the past few years. I was rooting for them when OS X was introduced, but now they're no better than Microsoft in the late 90s, and somehow more arrogant than MS ever was. How does something like this not run afoul of antitrust laws?

If Apple were like Microsoft in the 90s then they would have implemented their own Flash player for the iPad and made its frequent crashes look like Adobe's fault, they'd make it impossible to uninstall or remove Safari from the desktop or dock, and switch Chrome and Firefox for Safari as your default browser every time you upgraded Safari (which would be every time you patched). Every time a mew version of OSX shipp…

You just convinced me more than ever

> they'd make it impossible to uninstall or remove Safari from the desktop or dock,

You can't remove the iTunes store from the iOS desktop, even if you only use Spotify. You can't remove Newsstand either. I'm kinda surprised that iBooks hasn't been baked-in yet, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time.

> and switch Chrome and Firefox for Safari as your default browser every time you upgraded Safari (which would be every time you patched).

Apple rejects alternative web browsers on iOS outright, and there's no way to replace any of the default Apple associations

> Every time a mew version of OSX shipped, competing third party apps would become unstable.

Every time a new version of iOS ships, apps get removed from the store for "bugs" and it takes a week to get them re-approved.

> Software compiled with non Apple tools would generate bogus error messages on pre-release copies of OSX.

Software compiled with non Apple tools WERE 100% BANNED FROM THE APP STORE for a while.

> Apple would develop its own version of Java that ran faster but encouraged developers to use features not available in Java.

See Apple embrace and extending HTML5/CSS with pre-standard stuff like canvas, 3D css transforms, etc, so that sites with cool designs only work on Apple browsers.

> They'd also bundle apps together so that anyone buying Apple's popular video editor, say, would have a free image editing and page layout programs.

iWork/iLife for OS X?

> They'd steal code from third party developers and turn them into free add ons for their OSes. Oh and they'd simply kill off competitors by releasing free clones of their products.

Apple banning Camera+ from the iOS store, and then turning around and adding the feature that got the App banned into their system Camera app, without even an apology.

Also, Classics -> iBooks.

The pre-Jobs-return Apple used to buy apps instead of just cloning them, like MenuClock, the hierarchical Apple menu, Stickies, etc. Then Jobs came back and they just said fuck it and ripped off Watson with Sherlock, then ripped off Konfabulator with Dashboard, etc, simply screwing over 3rd party developers because they could.

> They'd license their OS to hardware vendors on the condition that those vendors pay a license fee for every box shipped even if it didn't have the OS installed.

They take a 30% cut of content sales on iOS, and then completely forbid sellers from having lower prices on other platforms that don't have the 30% apple tax, in effect applying the 30% apple tax even on other platforms.

This conveniently causes major hassles to competitors to Apple's built in services such as iBooks or iTunes, which don't have to pay a third party a 30% overhead, in effect killing Kindle and music store alternatives.

> When successfully sued for misconduct, they'd pay some of the fines in the form of strategic donations of software to their competitors' best customers.

It'll be interesting to see the outcomes of the current Patent lawsuits

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#252
I've tried to defend some of Apple's more dickish policies in the past, as logically they make a lot of sense in terms of business requirements, and hey it's Apple's wild ride.

This is fucking stupid though. The 30% cut logic works fine when dealing with items, but trying to apply it out to services is a nightmare as most users either don't care about the paid aspect of the service or have already paid for it.

Plus all this effectively does is say 'if you've got a paid service with an API, you're not welcome'. Less API access on the iOS platform is not a good thing for developers, which makes it not a good thing for users, which makes it in the long run shitty for Apple. Lets hope they pull some sense together and fix the rule properly this time.

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#253
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. Not right now, they don't. My point is that if Apple keeps pushing the walls higher on its garden at some point people will start complaining. iOS could very well become the Windows of mobile. I can imagine a future where a lot of people will complain "I don't want to use iOS, but it has all the apps!". I personally have owned an iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 4, and iPad and I will probably buy the upcoming iPhone.…

You seem to be confused. This Dropbox is the same rule that has been in places for years. In fact the walled garden is less evident than in the past.

No I don't think hes confused, I feel the same way.

What made the Kindle issue "OK" is that Kindle was undermining the Apple marketplace. This is simply not the case here. Apple are just being 'assholes'. A link to a link, to a link that sells disk space - not even CONTENT. How does it undermine Apples business model, or hurt end users? Answer is, It doesn't.

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#254
post #144

What Apple is doing seems to be completely legal and completely disgusting (and not at all new). Given that there's no ground for legal action, here are a few things we, developers, can do: 1. Don't work for Apple . This one is really the easiest to implement, there's more then enough fine alternatives in the Valley. 2. Don't develop for Apple . Unfortunately, not really an option for most mobile developers. So, the…

yes, i will consider moral values over convenience in my future purchases and also i am going to favor platforms that are more open in future. freedom trumps everything, more profits doesn't necessary make you happier.

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#255
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you can sign up for Dropbox directly and they get 100% of the fee or you can sign up through Apple and they get 70%. That might be more than their entire profit. (Emphasis mine) Sounds like it might be time to find a new business plan, then.

Many businesses (especially in the technology space) operate on far lower margins than 30%.

Really? Are you talking gross or net profit?

I would be surprised to find many software products where the gross profit margin would be less than 50%.

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#256

Wow, this really freaked me out when I saw this. I've just spent several months working on an app, which I hope to release soon, of which Dropbox support is a major feature. If they didn't allow my app on the app store because of this I'd have to seriously cripple the functionality of my app to get it accepted. Sure, there's iCloud, but it's only about 50% there - all the support is there on iOS but there's no generi…

So you saw how Apple burned all the bridges between you and your customers, and left just a thin rope for you to hang on to.

You just saw this and still you think basing your business on anything controlled by Apple is a good idea? Seriously?

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apple were like Microsoft in the 90s then they would have implemented their own Flash player for the iPad and made its frequent crashes look like Adobe's fault, they'd make it impossible to uninstall or remove Safari from the desktop or dock, and switch Chrome and Firefox for Safari as your default browser every time you upgraded Safari (which would be every time you patched). Every time a mew version of OSX shipp…

You just convinced me more than ever > they'd make it impossible to uninstall or remove Safari from the desktop or dock, You can't remove the iTunes store from the iOS desktop, even if you only use Spotify. You can't remove Newsstand either. I'm kinda surprised that iBooks hasn't been baked-in yet, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time. > and switch Chrome and Firefox for Safari as your default browser every time y…

> Apple rejects alternative web browsers on iOS outright,

Except for Opera Mini - http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/opera-mini-web-browser/id3637...

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#258

Someone explain to me how what Apple is doing is not the same sort of monopoly the government squashed with Microsoft. Basically MS used their os monopoly to push IE. Apple uses its monopoly to get a cut of all action on its phone.

It isn't even funny just how different it is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Halloween_documents_...

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#259

I'm surprised it took Apple this long since launching (the relatively overpriced) iCloud before they started acting like they always do: anti-competitive and monopolistic. In the name of UX ofcourse. It couldn't possibly be because unethical market grabs tend to generate money. Remember: Apple doesn't really care about money. They care about you and all that money they make is just accidental.

This is not a new thing. Apple have been clamping down on any revenue generating activity linked to from an app for at least a year now. They are forcing developers to pick between giving Apple a 30% slice of revenue, or don't charge for it, or don't link to it. Most developers seem to be opting for the third option. The only one that doesn't impact usability is the one that involves giving Apple 30%.

Whilst I can see the reason why people baulk at giving Apple a cut, what doesn't ever seem to be widely discussed are the reasons why that cut might be justified or even well worth it.

The user experience of in-app purchasing on iOS is very good. Compared to the myriad online purchasing systems I've experienced in over a decade of buying things online, it's easily the most reliable and satisfying I've encountered. Case in point: I've had two separate third-party apps crash or stall during in-app purchase (one because of a loss of network connectivity, another where the app just crashed). Upon relaunching, iOS was able to work out where I'd gotten to with the in-app purchase and reassure me that I wouldn't end up paying twice.

This kind of reassurance is invaluable to consumers who aren't tech-savvy, and will almost certainly lead to higher conversion rates. In fact, it means that the user experience of a customer buying in-app purchase with a completely different product makes them more likely to use in-app purchase with your product! Where else can you benefit from this kind of self-reinforcing behaviour? Apple realises that providing this seamless experience is important, and so does what it can to discourage alternatives where a worse experience (an experience which might lead a customer to erroneously blame Apple or the device) might be the result.

Another important point to remember is that Apple targets the iTunes store to run at break-even (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/02/23/tim_cook_addre...), so accusations that this is motivated primarily by profit are wide of the mark. Yes, that 30% cut helps run at break-even, but let's not forget what other benefits you're getting as part of the deal. And if you're certain those benefits aren't worth it, go try the Android Marketplace, and let us know how that works out for you.

Re: Apple rejecting applications which use Dropbox

#260
post #217
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you can sign up for Dropbox directly and they get 100% of the fee or you can sign up through Apple and they get 70%. That might be more than their entire profit. (Emphasis mine) Sounds like it might be time to find a new business plan, then.

What business are you running that has larger profit margins than 30%?

How about one that you adjust your prices by whatever so that 70% is the old 100%?

If your competitors can offer lower prices and still give away 70%, then you're not competitive enough.

Post reply on HN