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

App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 437 posts

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#121

Post by panzagl »

ribosometronome wrote: post #67
panzagl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The analogy is saying there are malls in two different towns- there's only one mall in Androidville, and if I want to go to the one in Appletown I have to sell my house and all the stuff I bought at the Androidville mall and move there. Trying to argue its not a monopoly is engaging in the worst type of pointless semantic argument.

>Trying to argue its not a monopoly is engaging in the worst type of pointless semantic argument. So, you think this bill is a waste of time, then? If Apple has a monopoly, no legislation is needed as we already have laws to address it. Epic's lawsuit failed specifically because they couldn't prove Apple was a monopoly. This legislation's existence is specifically predicated on that there could be issues that might b…

No, I support the bill. I guess I should have typed 'monopoly that is not already covered adequately by current anti-trust regulation', but at some point you have to stop.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#122

Post by clusterfish »

nerdjon wrote: post #69

As long as this does not cause an exodus from the App Store and I am forced to start paying for apps directly, I am fine with this. But a strong benefit to the App Store for me is being able to manage and cancel my subscriptions from a central place. No going through 5 screens, no being forced to call, no any of that crap. I can already see apps refusing to carry through the App Store so they can control more, and I…

Pretty much all Apple has to do to keep apps in App Store in the face of competition is drop their fees to less than 10% for all apps and drop bullshit like "you can't even link to your website if it lets users pay from there", and almost everyone except the most brazen will stay on App Store.

We'll see what actually happens but I personally I doubt that Apple values user experience more than it values gouging developers for profit. The Apple that would, is long gone.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#123

Post by nerdjon »

slaymaker1907 wrote: post #113
nerdjon wrote: post #69

As long as this does not cause an exodus from the App Store and I am forced to start paying for apps directly, I am fine with this. But a strong benefit to the App Store for me is being able to manage and cancel my subscriptions from a central place. No going through 5 screens, no being forced to call, no any of that crap. I can already see apps refusing to carry through the App Store so they can control more, and I…

While it doesn't offer easy cancellation, Truebill is really nice for keeping track of subscriptions. That's always been the hardest part for me as someone with ADHD who has multiple bank accounts. The only account it doesn't work with is my Apple Card because it is still in the stone age of connectivity.

Relevant to this post:

I pay for Copilot on my iPhone to keep track of finances.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#124

Post by scarface74 »

keleftheriou wrote: post #56
zepto wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Android is in fact the dominant platform by number of users, and has cool stuff like cloud gaming apps that iOS does not. There are also other aspects of the iPhone that many people prefer over Android phones, e.g. hardware features and quality. The point about sandboxing is relevant because many people conflate sandboxing protections with the protections offered by App Review, and thus are afraid that non-App Store…

Don’t you think that dominance worldwide might be attributed to the fact that you can get an Android phone for $50?

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#125

Post by sircastor »

irrational wrote: post #22

> New rules could require them both to allow app side-loading — installing apps from non-sanctioned marketplaces — and alternative payment processing systems. Apple and Google have argued vehemently against the bill. Why is Google against side-loading? It is already possible to side-load on Android devices, what is their argument?

> Why is Google against side-loading?

It’s a front door for piracy and malware. Bad actors give your unsuspecting victim instructions on how to install this great app!

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#126

Post by scarface74 »

thebaer wrote: post #105
shimfish wrote: post #78

As an indie dev, I'm really not getting this. Android has had alternate app stores for years. I don't recall any of them being a panacea for poor struggling devs held captive by Google Play. I stopped offering my apps on any of them as it was never worth the bother. What problem is this trying to solve for who exactly? I don't see any way this ends up as a win for small devs.

Allowing alternative payment systems. This would be absolutely huge for small devs, as you no longer have to pay the ridiculous 15%-30% rent to Apple.

Thought experiment: I have 7 subscriptions. 4 of those are through the App Store. My credit card expires or get lost. What are the chances I enter new credit card information on your site as opposed to App Store?

And let’s not pretend that Apple is making a lot of money off of Indy developers. Most of the App Store revenue is coming from pay to win games and loot boxes.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#127

Post by dmz73 »

anonymouse008 wrote: post #71
itg wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy the security issue scare-mongering from Apple if they are required to open up their platform. Bruce Schneier points out the flaws in Apple's argument very well in his letter https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2022/01/letter-to-t... .

If I paid for Apple's centralization, by buying their products, and now that's being forcefully removed from me. How is this ok?

Apple's centralization is not forcefully removed, you can choose to keep using only Apple approved software from Apple store and you will not see any difference. This change would just allows you to install software from another source if you wish. If Apple implements the change similar to how Android works, you will have to allow installation from non-Apple store sources, you can do it per app, you can do it once and then disable it, you can allow main app store to scan all your apps for security.

If you are arguing that some people will be tricked into installing malware from other sources then you are right that this change would allow that but it will still require user to go through few steps which should raise red flags for them. Some people just can't resist pushing that button without thinking and regardless of the consequences and in that case app store safety net is just temporary anyway, they are still exposed to the real world where that will harm them in a more serious way.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#128

Post by scarface74 »

sudosysgen wrote: post #58
nexuist wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that fair? Why can't you develop software for the hardware you purchased? How is that different from the argument against Apple's App Store? > Those aren't general-purpose devices So if Apple sold an "iPad Gaming Edition" then none of this would matter?

If they sold an iPad that was only made for playing games and that was sold at a large loss, it would be a different conversation, even though I think that consoles should be opened up.

Epic tried to use the same argument in front of a desk judge with a real law degree. She disagreed.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#129

Post by sircastor »

jliptzin wrote: post #7

Surprised it took this long. If they would have taken a more reasonable 5-10% of developer earnings they’d still collect billions upon billions in rent while not angering millions of developers and lawmakers writing this legislation. Or at least charge a tiered annual publication fee plus payment processing fees. But greed got the best of them. Their fees are akin to a shopping mall owner taking 30% of store revenues…

If it were 20%, people would complain it wasn’t 10%. And If it were 10%, they’d complain it should be 5%.

And there are plenty of other malls to move to, is just that your customers aren’t there.

I really don’t get the complaint about Apple’s monopoly on iOS. To me, it’s like VW’s monopoly on Jettas.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#130

Post by anonymouse008 »

dmz73 wrote: post #127
anonymouse008 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I paid for Apple's centralization, by buying their products, and now that's being forcefully removed from me. How is this ok?

Apple's centralization is not forcefully removed, you can choose to keep using only Apple approved software from Apple store and you will not see any difference. This change would just allows you to install software from another source if you wish. If Apple implements the change similar to how Android works, you will have to allow installation from non-Apple store sources, you can do it per app, you can do it once an…

> If you are arguing that some people will be tricked into installing malware from other sources then you are right that this change would allow that but it will still require user to go through few steps which should raise red flags for them. Some people just can't resist pushing that button without thinking and regardless of the consequences and in that case app store safety net is just temporary anyway, they are still exposed to the real world where that will harm them in a more serious way.

I seriously could care less what we as HN want out of a phone in a way. We are head strong enough to do something different for ourselves -- literally look at PinePhone, etc.

What I'm concerned about is the trickery that is sinister beyond belief, getting access that they never earned and do not deserve.

Here's an example: https://youtu.be/VrKW58MS12g?t=406

This 'hack' is quite insane... Brillant and horrid... and I foresee it happening left and right.

Post reply on HN