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

Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

9to5mac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 411 posts

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#131

Post by trothamel »

jen729w wrote: post #38
crims0n wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in this scenario would Epic then need to develop and maintain their own toolchain and SDK for their app store? The development tools and education are also worth something, Epic shouldn’t get that for free.

Dystopian story plot: Apple completely opens up the iOS platform. Do whatever you like. Also, an XCode license is now $20,000/year. Don’t like it? Build your own.

If I'm remembering correctly, the community jailbroke the iPhone OS and produced a toolchain and app installer before the App Store's original release.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#133

Post by cedws »

foolswisdom wrote: post #83
cedws wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being on the side of the consumer means being on the side of the free market. If you don’t like the charging options of an iPhone, don’t buy an iPhone. If you don’t like the OS of a Pixel, don’t buy a Pixel. If the consumer is choosy and doesn’t like the options available then there is a market opportunity for new entrants.

The nature of a free market is that someone wins the competition, and the winner is then happy to figure out ways to prevent anyone from competing at all (this kind of action doesn't require a complete winner either, but I'm focusing on a thought experiment here). Ergo, if you care about maintaining a free market, then you care about limiting what kind of moves you can make in the free market, in order to preserve a…

Other than capital what prevents a new player entering the smartphone market? In the US Apple is at ~50% market share and Samsung ~30%. These are not colluding entities so there must be enough theoretical freedom to create a smartphone that claims significant market share.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#134

Post by itake »

kelthuzad wrote: post #117
itake wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mobile apps mobile app fraud empties life savings accounts. I agree there should be personal accountability, but that clearly hasn't been working. Installing an app shouldn't eliminate 30 years of life savings.

This is the "think of the children" equivalent that is being regurgitated ad nauseam. Anyone who pretends that Apple cares about anything other than profit is lying to others and themselves. >I agree there should be personal accountability, but that clearly hasn't been working. It has been working on Android just fine. And if Apple is supposedly so concerned with security, then why did it take them so damn long to im…

Super confused. What do you mean its been working on Android just fine? Google just announced they are closing their ecosystem exactly for the reasons I stated.

Most of the fraud at my job comes from the android platform, because the security model on android is much worse than Apples.

Why is Google citing fraud as a reason to lock down android if "its been working on android just fine"?

Apple is not a fast moving company, but they do have a great product and have addressed many of the big issues the community has raised.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#135

Post by StopDisinfo910 »

crims0n wrote: post #11

Honest question, what do people think is a fair percentage? The platform development, app hosting, payment processing, and quality control is surely worth something .

If only there was a mechanism which would allow companies to offer similar services then maybe as they try to get customers they would fix prices so as to make money but gain market shares and the price would emerge. That would be truly efficient. Surely we would then fine companies which do their best to avoid that and not try to find excuses for their practices.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#136

Post by nradov »

crims0n wrote: post #11

Honest question, what do people think is a fair percentage? The platform development, app hosting, payment processing, and quality control is surely worth something .

There is no way to define a "fair" percentage. Fairness is entirely subjective. Require Apple to allow alternative third-party app stores and let the free market sort it out.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#137

Post by nomel »

tomasphan wrote: post #82
raincole wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The honest answer is that Apple shouldn't own iOS and its main app store at the same time. But there is not legal / regulation framework to prevent that. Case in point: Steam is taking 30% too. But you've heard much less fuss over it, right? Why? Is it because of players' cult-like behavior around Steam? (probably partially) But more importantly it's because Valve doesn't own Windows and Steam Deck is a far smaller f…

Steam feels like a partnership with developers where Apple is a gatekeeper. I publish free games on Steam and all it costs is a $100 one time fee per game. I get human review and feedback on my marketing material and store page assets. Apple is incredibly strict with the content they allow to the point that it feels like a they exclusively cater to children. It’s easier to vibe code the apps that I want under my own…

Not sure why this was flagged. Apple is strict and does not allow graphic adult content, famously so [1]. One of the only exceptions you'll find is Twitter/X.

Steam does allow this. But, has recently started restricting some adult content [2].

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2010/04/19/steve-jobs-android-porn/

[2] https://www.gamesindustry.biz/whats-going-on-with-steam-and-...

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#138

Post by Reason077 »

crims0n wrote: post #11

Honest question, what do people think is a fair percentage? The platform development, app hosting, payment processing, and quality control is surely worth something .

> ”Honest question, what do people think is a fair percentage?”

The UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) believes it is 17.5%.

One issue, IMO, with this determination is the existence of Steam, which reportedly also takes 30% yet operates in a competitive market on open platforms. So there is a case to force Apple to open the platform to other app stores, but the argument to regulate Apple’s pricing is much weaker.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#139

Post by awillen »

bmandale wrote: post #100
awillen wrote: post #10

"The CAT said in its ruling that developers were overcharged by the difference between a 17.5% commission for app purchases and the commission Apple charged, which Kent's lawyers said was usually 30%." Where does the 17.5% come from? I can't find it here or in the link Reuters article. Is that just the number that the tribunal decided was fair? If so I'd love to read the analysis of how they got there.

""" 919. The comparators available to us (the Epic Games Store, the Microsoft Store and Steam’s lower headline rate) suggest that the competitive rate of commission would be in the range of 12 to 20%. We do think it is reasonable to make some adjustment to that range to accommodate the points made by Apple about its premium brand, the quality of its offering and its established market position. However, we do not thi…

Thanks for digging that out.

Re: Apple loses UK App Store monopoly case, penalty might near $2B

#140

Post by flomo »

anonymous908213 wrote: post #130
flomo wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was some point around 15 years ago when it was nearly impossible to download and install Windows software without getting some extra adware and etc. This was true even for 'legit' vendors like Sun and Adobe. (Plus Google would offer up wrapped installers for Firefox, OpenOffice, etc.) Honestly if you thought "things were fine", you were ignoring the Linux/Mac people laughing about it.

"Nearly impossible" is quite a stretch. While it was certainly shameful that it ever became as mainstream as it did, it was a matter of unticking checkboxes in the adware installers, and there was plenty of software out there that did not engage in that behaviour to begin with. At any rate, I didn't say anything about operating systems. You can also install software of your choice on Linux or Mac. I'm not really sure…

Point being the only real difference between Windows and Mac was marketshare. (Linux doesn't have an ABI, software predominantly comes from the 'store'.)
Post reply on HN