Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair • Hacker News Board

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#131

Post by dwighttk » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:49 PM UTC

supermatt wrote: post #71

Just as Microsoft were stopped from shipping a browser with their OS, vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. You cant move to another platform without losing access to all your "purchases" - there is no free market. They have monopolies within ecosystems they created. They should be FORCED to have an open platform, with users able to access multiple 3rd party storefronts on multiple pla…

That sounds like a great strategy to switch everything everywhere to crappy web apps.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#132

Post by jdietrich » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:49 PM UTC

tumetab1 wrote: post #112

owenwil wrote: post #4

The claims in here are pretty wild, particularly around how Apple has favored its own products: - Apple blocked Spotify from working with Apple Watch - It blocked Spotify from building apps for HomePod - It blocked Spotify from building apps for Siri - It blocks Spotify updates on a regular basis - It blocked Spotify from using a podcasting API after it acquired 2x major podcasting companies I genuinely hope Europe t…

> The issue of the 30% cut alone is enough for further investigation, Not really, it's 30% for everyone, not just Spotify.

Unless "everyone" also includes Apple Music, then it's anti-competitive.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#133

Post by ubermonkey » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:49 PM UTC

supermatt wrote: post #71

Just as Microsoft were stopped from shipping a browser with their OS, vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. You cant move to another platform without losing access to all your "purchases" - there is no free market. They have monopolies within ecosystems they created. They should be FORCED to have an open platform, with users able to access multiple 3rd party storefronts on multiple pla…

>Just as Microsoft were stopped from shipping a browser with their OS, vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS.

That comparison doesn't really work, because MSFT had an effective desktop monopoly. By contrast, Apple is a minority player in the mobile market.

>They should be FORCED to have an open platform,

Just because YOU want this doesn't mean the Apple users want it. I'm utterly content with a single, curated-by-Apple app store for iOS. I like the stability it affords the platform.

I'd never accept it on a general-purpose computing device, but for my phone it's perfect.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#134

Post by hesk » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:52 PM UTC

nerdwaller wrote: post #52

I’ve been waiting to see Spotify follow Netflix and create their own label, instead of just curated playlists. They’ll otherwise always be at the whim of renegotiations. (Not entirely relevant to the post, but seems like it’s an avenue for them to go to break a little from other players).

I hope this never, ever happens. I love that I can basically listen to any music I like on Spotify. (I know there are exclusivity deals in music streaming but so far it hasn't affected me.) Compare that to the fragmented video streaming marketplace where services try to distinguish themselves with exclusive and/or original content. If you want to watch N shows, you have to subscribe to N different services. And none of the services have a comprehensive movie library (at least where I live).

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#135

Post by jordansmithnz » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:52 PM UTC

Something to note: competition wise, Spotify doesn’t have a 30% App Store profit handicap compared to Apple Music, it has a 60% one.

Spotify doesn’t just forfeit 30% of their App Store revenue, they pay this directly to Apple - so the relative handicap is doubled.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#136

Post by joeblau » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:52 PM UTC

georgespencer wrote: post #44

Can someone help me stop playing the world's smallest violin here? Spotify knowingly built a low margin business living in the pocket of the labels (who force Spotify towards razor thin margins) and Apple/Google (who have, since before Spotify launched, operated app stores for their platforms which are to some extent curated and which are not free market economies). Spotify feels aggrieved that Apple does not allow i…

There was a post by Ben Thompson[1] that outlines some of the challenges with Apples approach in the App Store. It's a good read if you have the time. I'm not trying to change your mind, but more give a different perspective on the conundrum that Apple is in.

[1] - https://stratechery.com/2018/antitrust-the-app-store-and-app...

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#137

Post by gerardnll » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:53 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #66

simongr3dal wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a layman perspective: Why can Siri make Apple Music play artists, albums, playlists, and songs but I can't ask Siri to do the same with Spotify? Clearly the technology is there, but Apple is not letting Spotify use it.

Spotify should be able to do this using the API provided in iOS 12.

It's not about the tech, it's about policy.

Tech is there, https://developer.apple.com/documentation/sirikit/media_inte...

I'm sure Spotify has no problems with the knowledge of its engineers, I just found the APIs in 5 min. In fact, number 4 of this page explains your comment: https://www.timetoplayfair.com/facts/

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#138

Post by chj » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:53 PM UTC

Hamuko wrote: post #103

georgespencer wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Look at the way Facebook and others circumvented the app store using certification recently.

You still need certificates from Apple in order to do so. So your ability to sideload requires a $99 subscription to the iOS development program and the continued support of Apple.

I believe that's Enterprise certificate, internally use only, can't distribute directly to customers.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#139

Post by GeekyBear » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:53 PM UTC

They have some valid complaints, but "if we use Apple's payment infrastructure, we have to pay them a cut for doing so" isn't one of them.

The thing I find to be anticompetitive is that Spotify cannot provide a web link to their own payment processing web page within their app.

Apple has long allowed content providers to opt out of using Apple's own payment system (and paying Apple a cut), but without being able to point users to your payment website, this rings hollow.

As far as Apple Watch goes, the API to allow for downloading content to local storage and playing it back in the background landed in last year's Watch OS update.

Pandora manages this task just fine.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#140

Post by colde » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 1:53 PM UTC

georgespencer wrote: post #73

pedroaraujo wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 30% cut is something that Spotify needs to pay to Apple for every user that subscribes to Spotify through Apple devices. This cost doesn't doesn't exist for PC users, for example. They probably could live with it but I can understand why it feels like an artificial cost that Apple came up with. It would be an understandable cost if they were selling the Spotify App through the App Store and using the actual store i…

> A 30% cut is something that Spotify needs to pay to Apple for every user that subscribe to Spotify through Apple devices Not so as I understand it. Only if you put the option to subscribe into your app in the app store. That cost doesn't exist for Mac or PC, but Apple doesn't heavily curate and have costs associated with the wild west of downloading apps from the web. > it doesn't weight anything to Apple There are…

> Not so as I understand it. Only if you put the option to subscribe into your app in the app store. That cost doesn't exist for Mac or PC, but Apple doesn't heavily curate and have costs associated with the wild west of downloading apps from the web.

The cost is there whether or not you pay through the App Store mechanisms. You have to pay it, even if you provide your own payment mechanism.

> There are significant costs associated with the app store, no? Part of the reason users gravitate towards the iPhone is because you can download high quality apps without malware, viruses, etc.

Sure. Then charge all apps for the cost of being in the App Store. It doesn't excuse a situation where Apple directly competes with Spotify and then charge Spotify 30% they don't charge for Apple Music. Thats a textbook violation of antitrust law.

> Conceptually I'm with you. This is an area I'm struggling with though. The Apple Online store charges accessory manufacturers a fee to be featured there. Should Apple also pay a fee to feature their own products there? I don't think so.

You can buy your accessories other places as well. Apple's Online store doesn't have a monopoly on selling accessories to iPhone users. The App Store on the other hand is the only mechanism to sell to iPhone users. The alternative is to allow competing App Stores on their platform.