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

How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 215 posts

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#151

Post by gamblor956 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #72
simion314 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just some question so is clear in my mind what your idea is Why more then 80% ? why not 50% + 1 IS 80% of smartphones ? or smartphones+tablets , or all phones , or 80% of capital/financial of all mobile app stores ? What if I say that Apple has 100% monopoly on the iOS? you would say but what about Android ? I would say if I am Netflix,Spotify,Bank X, etc I have no REAL choice as a developer not to make iOS apps simi…

> What if I say that Apple has 100% monopoly on the iOS? That'd be a silly argument. By that logic, Ford has a 100% monopoly on F-150s. > why not 50% + 1 Because the "mono" in monopoly means "one", not "two". You can accurately say that Apple and Google enjoy an oligopoly in the mobile operating system market. You cannot reasonably say either one holds a monopoly.

That'd be a silly argument. By that logic, Ford has a 100% monopoly on F-150s.

It's a very appropriate argument, and Ford does have a monopoly on F-150's. As I've noted elsewhere, monopolies are not by themselves illegal.

The trucks are like the iPhone, so in this context we would be talking about truck parts (i.e., apps). Ford doesn't restrict or attempt to control the market for F-150 parts. If you damage your car, the mechanic can buy parts from Ford or any one of dozens of auto parts makers. In contrast, Apple does restrict and artificially control the market for apps, even to the extreme of drowning out competing apps with irrelevant search results, and Apple is the only market for getting iOS apps.

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#152

Post by ajscanlan »

Fnoord wrote: post #143
tombrossman wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The advantage to using Google Play is that apps containing ads are clearly labelled as such. Apple won't tell you this in advance. (This was my biggest surprise, recently switching from Android after the CopperheadOS meltdown)

Honestly I care less about ads and more about trackers. Google Play says nada about trackers. Exodus project (and therefore F-Droid) does. If you come from CopperheadOS I can recommend /e/ or LineageOS + microG (/e/ also contains microG). microG does not implement GAds. You will still need to block trackers though.

Does the iOS App Store mention if an app uses trackers?

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#153

Post by prashnts »

Quick observation from the data presented in article (very well done, by the way): Beginning iOS 11, if I remember correctly, Apple finally added the ability to delete stock apps. Deleted apps could be downloaded from App Store later. Perhaps the « boost » in search rankings for the stock apps was related to that ? If the dates match, I assume they would have wanted these to be found easily and screwed up in scoring. This is assuming good faith, of course.

Edit: I did not remember correctly! This feature was added in iOS 10, released in September 2016.

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#154

Post by la_barba »

iamzozo wrote: post #117
coldtea wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I never forget the IE war, when everybody complain about the preinstalled browser. And that time they called "monopolistic practices" That's because at that time Microsoft had a monopoly. > At apple, they even don't know what these words mean... /s That's because Apple never had a monopoly. Their market share was always on the low 10% (desktop), or the mid-40s (mobile).

So preinstalled software is ok, till your market share is below 50 percent?

Apparently if you market share increases you are no longer allowed to make "just works" products.

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#155

Post by Wowfunhappy »

alienreborn wrote: post #92
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #14

I'm not saying this isn't a problem, but it seems pretty minor compared to the fact that: 1) Apple's apps come preinstalled on every iPhone. 2) Apple's apps have permission to do things that 3rd party apps cannot. If I search for "Web Browser" on the App Store... well, technically I'll get results from third parties, but every single one is just a UI skin around Apple's own browser. That strikes me as a much larger p…

You don't see a problem with that first scenario where search results for 'podcasts' is filled with completely unrelated apps from Apple?

I do see a problem.

However, if I were Spotify, I wouldn't be too concerned about this particular problem. Apple Music and Apple Podcasts come preinstalled on every iPhone, so Spotify effectively lost the discoverability battle before the user even got to the App Store.

By contrast, I'd be quite concerned that Apple is outright preventing me from making my app as good as their first party offerings. Spotify will not ever be able to open Podcast links shared from Safari, or fully integrate into Siri.

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#156

Post by coldtea »

gamblor956 wrote: post #131
root_axis wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This logic makes no sense. Using your reasoning Nintendo is a monopoly because only Nintendo devices will run Nintendo games.

Nintendo is a monopoly with respect to Nintendo games (but not Nintendo devices, since you can buy those all over). Monopolies aren't inherently illegal. See e.g., patents and copyrights, which are legally granted or protected monopolies. What is illegal is anti-competitive practices. This doesn't require a dominant or even majority market position--authorities in the US and EU have gone after companies with relative…

>Nintendo is a monopoly with respect to Nintendo games

That's not what monopoly means legally.

>Monopolies aren't inherently illegal

That's true, but a vendor controlling their own store is not a monopoly.

Monopoly is when the vendor has 100% of the overall market...

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#157

Post by coldtea »

m_ke wrote: post #105
coldtea wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is not relevant. Monopoly is defined on a market, not on income segments (and even if it mattered, still on the high income individuals iOS is hardly above say 70%). Someone could sell cars for $5K and have 99% of the car market in a small city of 1000 people, while another one sells a single car for 100M and has 20 times the other's revenue. It's still the cheap car guy that has the monopoly.

Revenue based market share is more relevant than unit market share for most businesses. Apple pulls in 2/3 of the revenue in the mobile app ecosystem and gets to act as a gatekeeper between most consumer startups and their potential customers.

>Revenue based market share is more relevant than unit market share for most businesses.

It's not relevant for monopoly law and whether it's a monopoly, which is what's discussed here...

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#158

Post by kalleboo »

bluedino wrote: post #142
fitzroy wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, Spotify is the 4th app when searching for "music", but it's the first app that doesn't contain the word "music" as the first or second word in the name. It goes: 1. Apple Music 2. Music 3. Music> 4. Spotify New music and podcasts

If I search Google for 'music', Spotify dooesn't come up on the first page either. YouTube - Music Channel music.youtube.com play.google.com/music play.google.com/store/music Music - Wikipedia MusicChoice.com Youtube Music on the App Store Mtv.com

I don't even get Spotify on the second page of results - but I do get articles from The Verge and TechCrunch about Spotify. Spotify itself shows up on the third page.

For me Google even has a "Related search: Music platforms" box that contains YouTube, Google Play, SoundCloud, iTunes and TIDAL (no Spotify)

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#159

Post by Delphiki »

frogpelt wrote: post #24
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #14

I'm not saying this isn't a problem, but it seems pretty minor compared to the fact that: 1) Apple's apps come preinstalled on every iPhone. 2) Apple's apps have permission to do things that 3rd party apps cannot. If I search for "Web Browser" on the App Store... well, technically I'll get results from third parties, but every single one is just a UI skin around Apple's own browser. That strikes me as a much larger p…

I see it differently. Since Apple makes the hardware and the software I don't have a problem with them preinstalling their own products. However, when a user is clearly searching for alternatives on the app store, it matters how far down you have to scroll to find a 3rd party app. Spotify being the 23rd result for a "music" search is absurd.

YMMV, I searched "music" and Spotify is the 4th result.

Re: How Apple's Apps Topped Rivals in the App Store It Controls

#160

Post by coldtea »

damnyou wrote: post #136
coldtea wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is not relevant. Monopoly is defined on a market, not on income segments (and even if it mattered, still on the high income individuals iOS is hardly above say 70%). Someone could sell cars for $5K and have 99% of the car market in a small city of 1000 people, while another one sells a single car for 100M and has 20 times the other's revenue. It's still the cheap car guy that has the monopoly.

Of course it's relevant. A definition of monopoly that only relies on raw unit numbers is obviously incomplete. Antitrust is about power , and Apple has a lot of it.

>Of course it's relevant. A definition of monopoly that only relies on raw unit numbers is obviously incomplete.

We don't get to pick our "complete" definition we prefer because "we deserve free money/mobile platform access". There's an actual, legal, one...

>Antitrust is about power, and Apple has a lot of it.

Only in the same sense that McDonalds has power not to sell Burger King burgers, and a shop owner has owner to sell whatever the duck they want.

Not power related to monopoly over the mobile market or the app market in general.

Post reply on HN