481–490 of 1001 posts
Absurd. What next, they want a 30% cut from me when I set up automatic payments for my credit card through the banks iOS app?
Think bigger, Apple Intelligence will now detect that you are ordering a new TV over the phone and they will want their cut.
Hope by then, we see government intervention and break up big tech
Another point that Patreon isn't really emphasizing here that seems relevant to any conversations about "fairness" is that Apple's fees on Patreon subscriptions in-app are now higher than Patreon's fees. It's important to recognize any time that we're talking about the market that services charge what they can, not what is fair. The market does not have a concept of fairness, only competition. This is why there is no…
I don't like this action form Apple, but I don't agree with your assessment of market economics here. The problem with "fairness" is that there is no objective measure of it. Everybody evaluates fairness according to how it aligns with their own personal interests. This is one of the key problems a free market economy solves. Price discovery is the intersection of what somebody's willing to sell something for, and wh…
I'm a mild advocate of the Apple ecosystem in that I really like the fact it all works together pretty flawlessly for me, with many security headaches taken off my plate. (I'm always reminded of this when every ten years or so I think about trying to save money with a Windows laptop and come running back). But I think the parent comment's suggestion that this isn't about fairness as such, but whether that kind of arrangement is egregiously wrong hits home, and it does make me feel that this is the kind of weird economics that can only come from an unhealthy duopoly of iOS and Android.
What to do about it? I'm not sure the parent or I have any particularly good answers...
I dislike Patreon because they keep making their UI worse over time but that said, I'm furious at apple for this. I like Patreon to allow creators to do per-creation schedule and I hate that Apple has enough power to impact me despite being an Android user (specifically because of these kind of behaviors). So, to people who say that with only 27% of global marketshare there's no case for an antitrust lawsuit, well if…
Another point that Patreon isn't really emphasizing here that seems relevant to any conversations about "fairness" is that Apple's fees on Patreon subscriptions in-app are now higher than Patreon's fees. It's important to recognize any time that we're talking about the market that services charge what they can, not what is fair. The market does not have a concept of fairness, only competition. This is why there is no…
I don't like this action form Apple, but I don't agree with your assessment of market economics here. The problem with "fairness" is that there is no objective measure of it. Everybody evaluates fairness according to how it aligns with their own personal interests. This is one of the key problems a free market economy solves. Price discovery is the intersection of what somebody's willing to sell something for, and wh…
With respect, this sounds a little bit like you're agreeing with me?
Another way of phrasing "fairness is not a valid price discovery mechanism" might be to say that fairness as a concept "doesn't exist" in the market, only competition: ie, what people are willing to pay to acquire a service from the available options they have before them, ideally within an environment where low barrier-of-entry to the market allows prices to fall if a service can be legitimately offered cheaper elsewhere, and where regulation sets the (occasional) market cap on how exploitative businesses are able to be. Fairness as a concept is not applicable to market prices: they don't get set because they are "fair", they get set because businesses calculate the maximum amount that people are willing to pay for products before going to a competitor (assuming there is a competitor to go to).
BUT, if people on HN insist on bringing fairness into discussions about anti-competitive behavior (which very often happens in discussions about the app-store), I think that Apple's fees in this case, and the impacts they will have on small-market creators, are unlikely to line up with most people's personal evaluation of "fair".
A sibling comment phrased this in a really good way, I think this is a situation where regardless of how you feel about fairness, you can look at the market outcome and think, "wait a second, something is not right here."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looks close - those services are typically not the same as what you can get at Walmart. You can get parts, but often the device itself isn't sold (instead they list places you can buy). Or if you can buy direct it is cheaper from Walmart. Walmart is a large enough customer that they won't let you sell it for less (either you don't undercut Walmart, or you will sell zero at Walmart).
> those services are typically not the same as what you can get at Walmart. Several things: A) Apple doesn't sell a creator subscription service that's the same as what you can get from Patreon. B) You can advertise inside of a box for services that Walmart does provide (yes, that includes devices). C) Is your implication that if Walmart did open up a music streaming service that suddenly it would be improper for iOS…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does the app give any benefit over the web? Asking customers to use the browser over the dedicated app doesn’t seem unreasonable.
Apple forbids even mentioning alternative payment methods within the app.
> However, the rulings established that Apple's so-called "anti-steering" rules—language prohibiting developers from mentioning cheaper or alternative purchasing options that might be available outside of an app—were anticompetitive.
> Apple has updated its App Store rules to allow developers to provide external links to other payment options, technically circumventing its normal fee structure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does the app give any benefit over the web? Asking customers to use the browser over the dedicated app doesn’t seem unreasonable.
Does apple allow that? I think there are rules about telling people not to use IOS method. Not sure if that would extend to content displayed in the app too from creators?
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/01/apple-lets-devs-....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has quietly been one of the biggest culprits in the proliferation of subscription software. They still don't support upgrades/upgrade pricing. Subscriptions are also the easiest way to implement a software demo or trial in the App Store. Finally they use their control of the App Store to coerce anyone doing something different than monthly/yearly subscriptions into that model (as we see here). It sucks big time…
I really hate how the current pattern is 1. Download seemingly cool app on iOS (free with potential payments) 2. Go through a 30min quizz 3. Required to subscribe for $150/year to start using the app It’s not free, it’s false advertising