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

Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 627 posts

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#111

Post by jaywalk »

ysavir wrote: post #99
ZoomerCretin wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think it’s okay for ISPs to double dip on charging their customers for access and then charging their customers’ most popular services (who are frequently competitors of the ISPs) for the privilege of accessing their customers? Why should any ISP think they can charge the source of my bits when I am already paying them for the bandwidth? https://www.theversed.com/2754/riot-games-seek-court-justice... Net Neutrali…

I think the post you're responding to is saying that Google's incentives for supporting net neutrality were self-serving, not noble. They weren't saying that ISP behavior was fine.

Correct.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#112

Post by MDWolinski »

ToruiDev wrote: post #89
MDWolinski wrote: post #78

I'm wondering how this will eventually play out if most companies start requiring Apple/Google to allow third-party apps to use their own payment system. The commission fee that Apple charges, 30% is partially to cover operating/marketing etc. Obviously, Apple makes a good profit off the App Store these days, even though Jobs said he'd be happy if it was break even at best. Here's an analogy I've been thinking on abo…

But at least for apple you already pay a 100$/year fee for them to distribute your apps.

I'm sure Apple will say that fee is to help pay for the development of the developer tools.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#113

Post by ethbr0 »

seanalltogether wrote: post #93
simondotau wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apologies if I wasn't clear. I'm talking about the relationship between Apple and developers who are building applications using Apple's proprietary software libraries. I completely agree that consumers should have very wide rights to the device they purchased.

Should I pay Apple for the right to build a Mac app, or Windows for using their desktop apis? Maybe I should have to pay mozilla and google every time someone visiting my website and I use a piece of javascript that executes in their browsers?

Or maybe Google should have to pay Oracle for duplicating the layout of standard Java classes.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#114

Post by MDWolinski »

IsoldesKnight wrote: post #104
MDWolinski wrote: post #78

I'm wondering how this will eventually play out if most companies start requiring Apple/Google to allow third-party apps to use their own payment system. The commission fee that Apple charges, 30% is partially to cover operating/marketing etc. Obviously, Apple makes a good profit off the App Store these days, even though Jobs said he'd be happy if it was break even at best. Here's an analogy I've been thinking on abo…

> The iPhone (or whatever phone you want) is the equivalent of a Walmart store. The major difference here is that while I don't own the Walmart store, I do own my phone. What is allowed to be sold in the store is determined by Walmart, just as what's installed on my phone should be determined by me, the owner.

Ownership is a valid point. I'm not arguing either course, I'd like to see the ability to be able to install Apps myself just as I do on a Mac or PC mostly because I'm tired of the forced puritism of companies these days.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#115

Post by wilde »

speg wrote: post #30

I really hope they implement this somehow that allows the same processes to exist. e.g., manage all subscriptions from one location, cancel subscriptions without losing time remaining (hello Creative Cloud!), and the entire parental control process.

Managing all subscriptions from one location is great, but Apple already exempts themselves from cancelling subscriptions without losing time remaining. I expect most of these to go away as processors compete for app business.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#118

Post by WastingMyTime89 »

rndgermandude wrote: post #35
bubblethink wrote: post #12

Is there a better source and the text of the law ? Payment systems are a proxy for the fee since there isn't an explicit publishing fee. It would be quite straightforward for both Apple and Google to charge a publishing fee, which may end up close to the current rent. The larger issue is that there aren't alternative app stores. Apple doesn't allow them at all, and Google severely restricts them at the technical and…

Apple and Google won't know what developers using outside payment systems for purchases such as subscriptions or "in-app" stuff are making. So they'd have a problem deciding what a publishing fee should be. Monikers such as popularity can be bad estimators. They might end up charging developers a lot less or a lot more - the latter of which might ruin some developers or hike prices for customers even more. I am not a…

> Apple and Google won't know what developers using outside payment systems for purchases such as subscriptions or "in-app" stuff are making.

Then again, why should Apple and Google charge fees for something they have no hand in?

If they want to charge fees for distribution, they should just do that.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#119

Post by simondotau »

seanalltogether wrote: post #93
simondotau wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apologies if I wasn't clear. I'm talking about the relationship between Apple and developers who are building applications using Apple's proprietary software libraries. I completely agree that consumers should have very wide rights to the device they purchased.

Should I pay Apple for the right to build a Mac app, or Windows for using their desktop apis? Maybe I should have to pay mozilla and google every time someone visiting my website and I use a piece of javascript that executes in their browsers?

If Apple or Microsoft or Mozilla or Google wanted to, they could have. They chose a different model because it suited their business strategy.

Whereas Sony and Nintendo did choose that model for their games consoles.

Post reply on HN