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

Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 247 posts

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#201

Post by nabla9 »

troupo wrote: post #198
nabla9 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course Apple would never go for that They do in EU, because they were forced to. AltStore PAL https://altstore.io/ Buildstore https://builds.io/ Aptoide https://en.aptoide.com .. and so on

They also go out of the way to make these stores prohibitively expensive to set up and still applies app review to apps distributed through those stores (even though they claim they don't and won't)

> prohibitively expensive

fact checking

Apple Tier 1 mandatory store services:

  0.5€ Core Technology fee per install
  2%   Initial acquisition fee 
  5%   Store service fee
This includes app reviews, manual updates, and fraud protection. This tier is mandatory for any app that promotes external payment options.

Compare that to 20-30% that Apple's own AppStore take and its a bargain.

Even with Tier 2 with marketing tools, automatic updates, app recommendations, analytics dashboards, and promotional features the cost is only 10% for small business program members, 15% for others.

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#202

Post by zb3 »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #179
matheusmoreira wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But people should also be able to get apps from whatever store they want. This the answer. The app store monopoly doesn't really matter, the real tyranny is needing Apple's cryptographic blessing to run software on our own computers. This should be literally illegal. Restore our computer freedom and their app store rent seeking becomes irrelevant.

It's a tradeoff. You may have the knowledge and risk awareness to install anything, circumvent protections like you still can on MacOS, but the vast majority does not and should not have that power; this led to huge botnets during the Windows XP era when many internet connections were first set up. They overcompensated with Vista, asking permissions for everything so people developed a kneejerk "just hit accept". The…

> It's a tradeoff. You may have the knowledge and risk awareness [...] but the vast majority does not and should not have that power

But that power is not more dangerous than having guns, right? So.. while I can apply for a gun license, I can't apply for an unrestricted computing license, so something is wrong here, don't you think? Unless you believe guns are less dangerous.

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#203

Post by sokoloff »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #103
sokoloff wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re arguing that Apple’s App Store, even with its commission, is a better business proposition. I agree, and from that conclude that Apple’s earned their commission/fees.

Apple with a 90% commission would still be a better business proposition.Did they earn that or are they at that point a monopoly on half a domain of tech?

Is that a better business proposition for a prospective app developer? GP was arguing that the alternatives to the App Store commission were far worse. Under a 90% commission scheme, they're probably both unviable.

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#204

Post by zb3 »

pen2l wrote: post #186
pjc50 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an alternative app store existed, you could just .. not install it? Does the mere existence of an alternative harm you if you never use it?

I'd rather another one not exist, because then it would become a game of incentives... app owners might only make their apps available on THAT App Store, resulting in App Store's value being diminished. I would like that the one App Store be the one and the only one in a KISS principle. Apple so far hasn't failed me, and so I continue to trust it and its judicious management and curation of apps. Folks who care about…

> app owners might only make their apps available on THAT App Store

Because it's better for them and they have that right. If YOU need a safe walled garden, shouldn't YOU be the one who supports the process and incentives for developers?

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#205

Post by Y-bar »

azangru wrote: post #185
jmull wrote: post #45

I think Apple should mostly be allowed to run as crappy an App Store as they want. But people should also be able to get apps from whatever store they want. (Ground rules all app stored would have to follow based on technical, security, and legal concerns would be fine too, IMO.) Of course Apple would never go for that, so we'll end up with whatever mess legal processes can wring out of them.

> But people should also be able to get apps from whatever store they want. I agree with you. But, as devil's advocate, why not suggest that Apple should be allowed to run as crappy a store as they want, while people should be free not to buy Apple?

People are free to buy Apple (or an Android flavour, or no smartphone at all). But there are many many things which goes into a buying decision than what manner of software delivery is available.

This duopoly does not truly offer a lot of choice, so any criticism must happen from within the confines of the current reality.

I’m not going to tell a pedestrian who wants safer roads to stop being a participant in traffic, I accept that they have very little real choice.

Having to uncritically accept anything and everything the manufacturer of your device does is not really viable and is a recipe for a worse future.

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#206

Post by half-kh-hacker »

nabla9 wrote: post #201
troupo wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also go out of the way to make these stores prohibitively expensive to set up and still applies app review to apps distributed through those stores (even though they claim they don't and won't)

> prohibitively expensive fact checking Apple Tier 1 mandatory store services: 0.5€ Core Technology fee per install 2% Initial acquisition fee 5% Store service fee This includes app reviews, manual updates, and fraud protection. This tier is mandatory for any app that promotes external payment options. Compare that to 20-30% that Apple's own AppStore take and its a bargain. Even with Tier 2 with marketing tools, auto…

50c per install (of which there are hundreds of thousands) to a party who should be uninvolved is not reasonable

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#207

Post by ksec »

rootusrootus wrote: post #64

If there was more than a duopoly in smartphones, I'd say Apple should be able to have whatever horrible app policy they want, so long as it is clearly communicated to everyone including customers. Let the market decide. But that's not where we are. I think it makes sense to treat both Apple and Google as de facto monopolies with respect to the smartphone market, and impose some regulation on what they have to allow a…

Agree. I think all the discussions often missed the main problem. Apple App Store holds far too much power, and they alone decides letting or stopping other business. All Banks, Finance, Ecommerce, Retail need to kowtow to Apple or Google for access. And that is not the power and responsibility you want to hold.

People argue you have Website too. But Website does not provide the same level of experience and is at disadvantage compared to Apps.

I have long argued Apple should have given up this power since 2013 / 2014. And Apple should split Games to Game Store, that keeps their 30% cut and would have kept at least 70 - 80% of their current App Store revenue.

For what ever reason last time I said this in 2018 and 2020 I was devoted to oblivion on HN.

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#208

Post by troupo »

nabla9 wrote: post #201
troupo wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also go out of the way to make these stores prohibitively expensive to set up and still applies app review to apps distributed through those stores (even though they claim they don't and won't)

> prohibitively expensive fact checking Apple Tier 1 mandatory store services: 0.5€ Core Technology fee per install 2% Initial acquisition fee 5% Store service fee This includes app reviews, manual updates, and fraud protection. This tier is mandatory for any app that promotes external payment options. Compare that to 20-30% that Apple's own AppStore take and its a bargain. Even with Tier 2 with marketing tools, auto…

> fact checking

You forgot that just to set up an alternative app store you need this:

--- start quote ---

Provide Apple a stand-by letter of credit in the amount of €1,000,000 from a financial institution that’s at least A-rated or equivalent by S&P, Fitch, or Moody’s, and maintain that standby letter of credit as long as your alternative app marketplace is in operation

--- end quote ---

> 0.5€ Core Technology fee per install

per install

So if your app is suddenly popular, you have to pay through the nose.

> This includes app reviews, manual updates, and fraud protection.

Why is Apple involved in app review on alternative app stores?

Why is Apple doing manual updates?

Considering the amount of scam apps on App Store, Apple isn't doing fraud protection in their own store.

> This tier is mandatory for any app that promotes external payment options.

Why? What does Apple have to do with external payment options?

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#209

Post by thewebguyd »

zdragnar wrote: post #115
echelon wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Games are silly and inessential. And there are a dozen markets to choose from. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Steam, GOG, Epic, Ubisoft, Humble, Itch, direct download, retro games, ... Phones are essential. You can't get a job without one. It's impossible to stay connected or navigate without one. You can't even order food in a restaurant these days without your smartphone. Yet two companies control and tax the entirety…

We could have had other competitors, but nobody wanted them. Windows phones had a very enthusiastic but too-tiny following. Blackberry lost the plot with terrible hardware and software for the app era (developing an app for the Storm was enough to convince me to never get one of their phones). Symbian's S60 was too little too late in the US. Ubuntu, Mozilla, and others all tried various flavors of Linux and web based…

> We could have had other competitors, but nobody wanted them

People didn't even get a choice. Google bullied Windows Phone out of the market.

People won't switch to a platform without apps. Microsoft tried to fix that, made an HTML5 youtube app. Google threw a fit and blocked it, twice. MS even followed what Google told them to do, and still blocked the app.

Google saw great hardware, and an OS that was gaining media attention (Windows phone at the time had a lot of positive reviews, and the Nokia Lumnia phones were great, and better cameras than any Android at the time) and used their market power to kill it.

Re: Y Combinator files brief supporting Epic Games, says store fees stifle startups

#210

Post by jen20 »

qwytw wrote: post #175
anilgulecha wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A chicken and egg problem is highly unlikely. Here's a few probable situations: 1) A fdroid equivalent pops up, which them becomes a collection of fantastic open source apps, and soon develops a strong user base. 2) Google launches play store for iPhone, which will on day 1 get millions of users. 3) Meta launches metaStore, which so the only way to get Facebook, threads, Instagram and WhatsApp. This becomes the faste…

> 3) Meta launches metaStore, which so the only way to get Facebook, threads, Instagram and WhatsApp. This becomes the fastest growing store in a matter of a week. Why? They don't do this on Android. At then end of the day the number of active users would fall if they do this. That's unavoidable. So what incentives do they have to not distribute on the App Store? It's not like (unlike in Epic's case) Apple is requiri…

> Why? They don't do this on Android.

So they can fuck their users in ways not currently permitted.

Post reply on HN