Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing • Hacker News Board

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#131

Post by Clewza313 » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:00 PM UTC

0xEFF wrote: post #125

wccrawford wrote: post #4

Other news on this has quotes from Tim Cook saying that they'd have to find a way to track purchases on IOS and bill developers so that Apple still gets their cut when using other payment processors. For me, this is way over the line. If they want to charge developers to be on their store, fine. I don't have a problem with that. And charging for using them as a payment processor makes sense. Charging for using Apple…

> If a developer isn't using that infrastructure, they don't owe anything. How would a developer build an iOS app without using any system calls or OS frameworks? Xcode? “Infrastructure” is a blurry concept in such a deeply integrated system.

Apple already charges developers for the privilege of developing on/for its platform.

And notably, Android seems to do fine both a) letting devs use the Android ecosystem for free, and b) allowing sideloading apps outside the Play Store.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#132

Post by schmorptron » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:00 PM UTC

doikor wrote: post #78

newsclues wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple doesn’t take a cut of transactions I make in my iPhones browser.

And for how long would Safari on iOS keep up with new features or not get its performance nuked if for example games started to move into browser apps in major numbers on iOS. Apple itself said in the trial that games pretty much subsidize all other apps in terms of the money Apple makes out of the App Store. iOS Safari already lags behind in features. Apple would just make it even worse if it started to cost them si…

Because it's Apple's incentive to offer a good web browser to sell very expensive devices? The same incentive Microsoft has to make Edge and Google has to make Chrome for Android. They do not have a god-given right to make money on every piece of software that happens to run on devices they sell.

Besides, this wouldn't be an issue in the first place if other web rendering engines weren't forbidden on ios. Google / Mozilla could have their own browsers that aren't just safari reskins.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#133

Post by peoplefromibiza » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:03 PM UTC

0xEFF wrote: post #125

wccrawford wrote: post #4

Other news on this has quotes from Tim Cook saying that they'd have to find a way to track purchases on IOS and bill developers so that Apple still gets their cut when using other payment processors. For me, this is way over the line. If they want to charge developers to be on their store, fine. I don't have a problem with that. And charging for using them as a payment processor makes sense. Charging for using Apple…

> If a developer isn't using that infrastructure, they don't owe anything. How would a developer build an iOS app without using any system calls or OS frameworks? Xcode? “Infrastructure” is a blurry concept in such a deeply integrated system.

IMO it's not that blurry.

The real point is if Apple wants (or should have the right) to collect taxes on their infrastructure and act like a Government - think about VAT - or they are only selling consumer devices instead.

If I buy a tractor from John Deere and make money out of the products I can grow using that tractor I don't have to pay a fee to John Deere, even thought without the JD my fields would probably be much less profitable or plainly unprofitable.

So the question is: has Apple built a digital Nation? And in that case, should they be the only monopolistic option?

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#134

Post by hpaavola » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:05 PM UTC

maccard wrote: post #82

hpaavola wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of trying to compare to other totally different products, do the comparison to Android. Has any 3rd party appstore affected play store in any way? No. Start your argument from that fact.

Yes. Fortnite isn't on the play store.

And it's not in apple appstore neither, so clearly the reason is not the fact that non-playstore apps can be installed.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#135

Post by blendergeek » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:07 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #90

dannyw wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Divide and conquer. It's gaming and software apps now. It'll be bank transactions and commerce later on. A 1% "Apple Platform Safety Fee" on Robinhood wouldn't surprise me....

Sounds like you’re complaining about a hypothetical future where they charge less than Visa and MasterCard? https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/research/average-credit-card...

No, in this world they will charge on top of Visa and Mastercard.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#136

Post by cblconfederate » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:08 PM UTC

deergomoo wrote: post #28

wccrawford wrote: post #4

Other news on this has quotes from Tim Cook saying that they'd have to find a way to track purchases on IOS and bill developers so that Apple still gets their cut when using other payment processors. For me, this is way over the line. If they want to charge developers to be on their store, fine. I don't have a problem with that. And charging for using them as a payment processor makes sense. Charging for using Apple…

> If a developer isn't using that infrastructure, they don't owe anything I’ve been following this case and the only thing I can conclude is that their executives genuinely believe that Apple is responsible for all commerce that happens on an iPhone. It’s bordering on delusion. Without third party developers the iPhone would be nothing by now.

I m pretty sure their users think so too. It's Apple's store, they are IPhone's apps. Which is fine , effective marketing halo effect and all, but somebody has to think of the developers

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#137

Post by lucasyvas » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:08 PM UTC

There appear to be a lot of comments effectively saying that Apple's "altruism" is what keeps the app store advocating for user privacy and security.

Let's say that's both true and a good quality of the app store that could be lost on another curator's store.

This is still not a problem, because Apple can instead improve the iOS permission API system to achieve a similar result. The store that delivers you the app is irrelevant - the permission model is what users should be expected to learn, not where they get it from.

This is a computer literacy problem and is the user's responsibility, not the platform. Not to sound too harsh, but how long will users like Grandma - who don't know better - live? Should we cater the entire system to these (comparatively) incapable users when they are a disappearing demographic?

Not to mention, Grandma won't even know how to enable a third party store, so Apple has absolutely no leg to stand on. Apple will continue to make a killing being the default store since they are posturing that their users are too dumb to do anything else.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#138

Post by cblconfederate » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:09 PM UTC

newsclues wrote: post #42

deergomoo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a developer isn't using that infrastructure, they don't owe anything I’ve been following this case and the only thing I can conclude is that their executives genuinely believe that Apple is responsible for all commerce that happens on an iPhone. It’s bordering on delusion. Without third party developers the iPhone would be nothing by now.

Apple doesn’t take a cut of transactions I make in my iPhones browser.

For now

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#139

Post by ajconway » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:10 PM UTC

smnrchrds wrote: post #128

wccrawford wrote: post #4

Other news on this has quotes from Tim Cook saying that they'd have to find a way to track purchases on IOS and bill developers so that Apple still gets their cut when using other payment processors. For me, this is way over the line. If they want to charge developers to be on their store, fine. I don't have a problem with that. And charging for using them as a payment processor makes sense. Charging for using Apple…

I have seen this time after time, that when the question of Apple store comes up, a top-rated comment always makes a comparison with game consoles to argue it is all fair. I don't personally believe the comparison makes sense, but many on HN do. So I am going to ask, how is this different from PS/Xbox/etc? If the game consoles still 'own' the device after you have bought it, e.g. when PS disabled Linux installation f…

Not many companies are in the business of being fair or moral, usually it's about making money. Lawmakers have the power to force companies into being more fair (for whatever definition of "fair").

On the comparison between Apple and Sony, — objectively there is no difference except that they work in different markets and the devices they sell have slightly different purposes. If as a result of all of this Apple is forced to make their devices more general-purpose-like, it would be easier to insist that Sony should do the same.

Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing

#140

Post by 0xEFF » Sun, May 23, 2021, 3:11 PM UTC

rdedev wrote: post #119

akg_67 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope multiple App Stores don’t become a thing on iOS. The reason I like iPhone is that I am assured that apps I download from App Store are not shit and curated by Apple. Apple has vested interest to keep apps made available to be clean and not going to compromise iPhone. Android play store, in comparison, is full of crap and free for all, basically buyer (or downloader) beware. Phone is used by too broad of user g…

I don't get this argument. How can an alternative app Store affect the quality of the Apple app Store ? The alternate app Store is not gonna come installed by default. No one is gonna mistake the alternative app Store for the apple one. Apple is gonna make sure of that. Apple can even put up loads of warnings and dark UI stuff when installing an alternate app Store to dissuade the "noob" users.

Suppose you install a messaging app to talk to your friend. How do you know they installed their copy from the good App Store and not the bad one?