Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 429 posts

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#351

Post by 015a »

sashank_1509 wrote: post #252
015a wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the end, Epic and Spotify get a fat 30% boost in revenue and nobody notices anything different. Well, let's be clear here: Neither Epic nor Spotify are selling anything with Apple today. Epic's games are not available on iOS, and Spotify requires you to make all purchases through their website. Spotify's motivation for wanting change on the iOS platform is primarily due to how limiting Apple's profit share and A…

No one I know uses Apple audiobooks, I thought it was only Audible in this market. Spotify is a loss making company finding reasons to blame its problems. What annoys Spotify is that Apple Music exists, this is the age old problem between vendors and distributors, where vendors hate it if Walmart comes out with its own peanut butter jar to sell. The fundamental problem with the vendor here is their product is not dif…

> No one I know uses Apple audiobooks, I thought it was only Audible in this market.

Yes, I'm sure Apple keeps it around out of the goodness of their heart and not because its used and is profitable.

> Spotify is a loss making company

Spotify is profitable [1].

> as their see their dominance erode they are trying to find boogeyman’s to blame

19% YoY MAU growth, 14% premium subscriber YoY growth, 20% YoY revenue growth, 31% YoY profit growth... Spotify is a strong business, in quite a lead over Apple Music [2].

But, none of that matters to you. You've got your narrative you need to construct to support your worldview. Before your misinformation was corrected, it was "Spotify is a trash business, Apple is a great business, go Apple". Now that you've learned that Spotify is a strong business, your narrative will shift: "Spotify pays artists poorly, no wonder their profit is up, Apple Music pays artists more, go Apple". You struggle to imagine a world where Apple might not be the good guy. Metaphor, like mortar on the foundation of your tech worldview.

The Walmart metaphor is interest-- no, I can't even fake cordiality, as proud as you may be to have came up with it, you're roughly fifty-ith in line on claiming originality on that one. My god, Epic sued Apple in 2020, four years ago, your intuition if its worth anything should be screaming at a hundred decibels that there have been infinite conversations on this very site, every argument permuted a thousand times, torn apart, countered and counter-countered, and you trot out something so banal as the "well, Walmart has the Great Value brand" line? Wake me up when Walmart has 60.8% of US citizens exclusively shopping at their stores, and the remaining 39% exclusively shops at Kroger, there's zero other places to buy food (by design, its for Food Security), and as I rub the sleep from my eyes I say "Wow, I guess that guy on HackerNews was right. I bet the food economy Walmart and Kroger gatekeep is a super fair and balanced market which suppliers super-enjoy participating in! Man, I bet there's so much sick innovation happening!"

[1] https://s29.q4cdn.com/175625835/files/doc_financials/2024/q1...

[2] https://9to5mac.com/2023/07/03/apple-music-spotify-us-subscr...

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#352

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

mirsadm wrote: post #349
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #144

I think this article is overstating the effect that Apple's walls have on lock-in effect. I'm an Android user, and a little less than a year ago I actually bought an iPhone, specifically due to Apple's iMessage lock-in (nearly all of my friends have iPhones, and the especially broken group messaging between iMessage and Android was the primary driver of my desire to get an iPhone). Except the problem was that, after…

All of Google's services are also on iOS, often the apps work better than on Android. There is no barrier to switching.

I realize the apps are all on iOS, but to say "there is no barrier to switching" is a bit annoying as it pretends my experience, where I actually got an iPhone but decided not to keep it due to the barriers to switching, didn't exist.

I'm not saying is impossible or something, but it's just way more effort than it was worth to me. E.g. so many iOS apps by default are set to use iCloud. All of my photos for years were in Google Photos. There is a Google Photos app for iOS, but it is in no way as seamless an experience as on a Pixel (e.g. camera integration). And I think a lot of people would say that if you get an iPhone but specifically avoid Apple's services like iCloud for photos so you can stay on Google's services, that defeats a huge part of the value of being on the iOS ecosystem in the first place.

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#353

Post by edanm »

talldayo wrote: post #12
aurareturn wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth is, all businesses do what Craig suggested. AirBnB isn't opening up their platform to Expedia. Meta isn't allowing your Instagram data to be accessed by another platform. Your own company isn't voluntarily making it easier for its customers to leave.

Well, yes. It's a great reason to not let businesses decide on these things, because their petty interpretation will always override a communal solution. Once you reach Apple's scale, you shouldn't expect to start replacing stuff like SMS with a proprietary alternative and get away with it.

If you don't "let business decide on these things", the result isn't better more communal solutions getting made, the result is no solutions getting made because they're not worth making for the business.

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#354

Post by etempleton »

baby wrote: post #89
Dalewyn wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Android was initially designed so that operators could customise it. ... The exclusion of carriers from being able to make modifications to the phone was, and remains, an active feature for end users. Japanese Android phones bought from carriers are fucking horrible because they have modifications both from the manufacturer (eg: Sony, Samsung) and the carrier . I wonder if this is partially why Japan is among the fe…

If you think about it, this is one of the reasons I like macOS. Back then, buying a PC with windows meant having a lot of crap installed by default. Not sure if it's still the case because I haven't bought a PC in ages, but I remember that formatting my computer and reinstalling windows was step 1 when I was buying a brand new laptop/PC.

PCs generally still have a lot of bloatware installed by default and most Android devices have modified versions of Android. I won’t buy a pre-built windows PC anymore.

Honestly, I think this situation is worse for consumers than anything Apple is doing. Technically you have more choice with Windows and Android but it can be difficult for the average consumer to make an informed decision because the device manufacture cram so much stuff onto these devices without your knowledge.

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#355

Post by edanm »

nerdix wrote: post #299
aurareturn wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's just say that the government decided in the year 2005 that no private company can ship something that will replace SMS as the defacto messaging system because it wants interoperability. We would have never had iMessage, Whatsapp, Messenger, etc. Other countries would have far surpassed us in messaging communication tech. Regulations are a double edged sword.

It doesn't have to be "you can't replace SMS" because that would be stifling to innovation. It could simply be "messaging protocols should be open and/or interoperable". The web is what it is today because its open. The telephone network is what it is today because its interoperable. Imagine if the web was bifurcated based on the operating system you wanted to use (that was Microsoft's vision in the late 90s and earl…

> It doesn't have to be "you can't replace SMS" because that would be stifling to innovation. It could simply be "messaging protocols should be open and/or interoperable".

It doesn't seem the same, but that's effectively also stifling to innovation.

For one thing, if the whole reason something like iMessage got created was to ensure an Apple monopoly, if they couldn't use it to do that, they just wouldn't build it, not build it open instead.

For another, what does "open and interoperable" even mean? There isn't necessarily a defined protocol for these things already. So who would come up with one? Almost certainly, the big companies would have to be involved, and they could steer the standard to benefit themselves, even just by making it closer to something they've already built (which makes total technical sense too - of course you want to base the protocol on existing tech!).

But that means that compliance is much harder for smaller companies, which would mean you're giving a huge advantage to a big player anyway.

As opposed to the no-regulation world, in which Whatsapp was a startup that could do whatever it wanted, and ended up being the default messaging platform that half the world uses.

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#356

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #18

One thing that I haven’t seen mentioned in discussions of communications tech monopoly (or “monopoly” in many cases) is the risk of future political censorship by a hypothetical future evil Apple. Centralized market power here isn’t just about unfair profits or bad products, it’s also about control of information (and therefore control of minds).

> the risk of future political censorship by a hypothetical future evil Apple

Apple's already exercising a great deal of editorial control over all political content on Apple TV+, so it's not too hard to imagine them extending this philosophy to other domains.

Unlike HBO, Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc. if you want to make a TV show on Apple TV+, you're not allowed to criticize technology or technology companies too heavily in dystopian fiction. They forced Jon Stewart to straight-up leave because he wanted to make an episode critical of China, and also wanted to interview Lina Khan.

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#357

Post by kyletns »

For anyone who wants much more detailed coverage of these cases, and are willing to pay for it, I can't recommend Matt Stoller's Substack enough. Here's an older article, but he regularly covers developments in all the anti trust cases: https://open.substack.com/pub/mattstoller/p/monopoly-round-u...

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#358

Post by zarzavat »

Jtsummers wrote: post #301
lenerdenator wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with "prevents fair competition" with regards to iMessage is that there were plenty of chances for fair competition and others ( particularly Google) kept messing it up. How many chat platforms did they blow through? I can absolutely install other messaging apps (WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, etc.) on my iPhone and contact other people on an Android device using that app. The thing that keeps me from doing…

> How many chat platforms did they blow through? https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a-half-... Which, to me, demonstrates the core problem: Apple succeeded by remaining focused. Google failed because it has some form of institutional ADHD when it comes to messaging services. Google even had a six year head start on Apple with Google Talk, and still managed to fail because they couldn't remain focuse…

It is so funny how differently the Messages app is viewed.

In NA, Messages is the true source of Apple’s power and the key to their evil anticompetitive empire, the only ones who can stop their masterplan are the men in suits from the DOJ.

Outside of NA, it’s the app you use to get TOTP codes and phishing attempts.

You’re right that the real story isn’t that Google missed out competing with iMessage, it’s that they missed out competing with WhatsApp despite having control over the OS and being able to bundle their own messaging app!

Google is not even competitive with third tier apps such as Viber which is really funny. I read HN compulsively yet I don’t know what the name of Google’s current chat app is or even if they have one.

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#359

Post by simonask »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #144

I think this article is overstating the effect that Apple's walls have on lock-in effect. I'm an Android user, and a little less than a year ago I actually bought an iPhone, specifically due to Apple's iMessage lock-in (nearly all of my friends have iPhones, and the especially broken group messaging between iMessage and Android was the primary driver of my desire to get an iPhone). Except the problem was that, after…

As a European, it's baffling to me that your friend group wouldn't simply switch to a messaging app with good group chat support. WhatsApp, Signal, Messenger (FB) - these are all great alternatives that are extremely popular, and all have more features than iMessage.

For example, in Scandinavia the current marker leader on all platforms is Facebook Messenger, despite this also being one of the only markets where iOS is the dominant platform compared to Android. Further south on the continent, WhatsApp is the undisputed leader.

People have all of these apps, and it's my impression that using iMessage exclusively is extremely rare. Cross-platform support is a feature that impacts which app people use, and they are perfectly free to use a different messaging app.

Re: The walls of Apple's garden are tumbling down

#360

Post by sashank_1509 »

015a wrote: post #351
sashank_1509 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one I know uses Apple audiobooks, I thought it was only Audible in this market. Spotify is a loss making company finding reasons to blame its problems. What annoys Spotify is that Apple Music exists, this is the age old problem between vendors and distributors, where vendors hate it if Walmart comes out with its own peanut butter jar to sell. The fundamental problem with the vendor here is their product is not dif…

> No one I know uses Apple audiobooks, I thought it was only Audible in this market. Yes, I'm sure Apple keeps it around out of the goodness of their heart and not because its used and is profitable. > Spotify is a loss making company Spotify is profitable [1]. > as their see their dominance erode they are trying to find boogeyman’s to blame 19% YoY MAU growth, 14% premium subscriber YoY growth, 20% YoY revenue growt…

Do you just blatantly lie thinking no one will click on your links or are you just absolutely ignorant and have no understanding how to read company financials? Here’s the net income on statista : https://www.statista.com/statistics/244990/spotifys-revenue-...

They’ve lost 532 million in their most recent year, the lowest they’ve lost is 32 million. They’ve not had a single profitable year in their entire public history and it seems to only be getting worse for them. I just cursorily follow the stock market and the second you told me Spotify is profitable all the red flags in my head blew up, glad that you confirmed my bias, they are even worse than I thought.

Then you talk about Spotify user metrics, either you are willfully ignorant with no understanding of how to read metrics or you’re just hoping I won’t respond? The obvious metric that you need to judge Spotify by is market share, which Spotify has been on a slow decline on since at least 2019 where they went from 34% to 31% according to tech crunch. The internet is growing, their MAU, revenue etc will all grow, most internet companies can boast that. I literally don’t need to shift my narrative, I know Spotify pays artists poorly, Apple Music does too, any system that pays by stream count is a winner takes all that benefits the biggest artists in my view, Tidal does a much better job.

Probably the fact that I actually know what I’m talking about, and am not falling for your ignorant citations and stats, might be a crack in your world view, you might have been under the comfortable delusion that everyone who doesn’t agree with you has not done the research and is not smart when it turns out that you are actually incredibly ignorant in your research. In fact if you take this as a learning lesson for your life and maybe probe further you will find that for most complex issues, at the highest levels everyone deeply understands the facts, but still can turn out with radically different interpretations of them, consensus on anything other than pure math is hard to achieve. I reckon you’ll be stuck in Plato’s cave forever though, I heard it’s quite comfortable down there.

Post reply on HN