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

241–250 of 411 posts

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

#241

Post by heavyset_go »

nandomrumber wrote: post #198
heavyset_go wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much should we be paying Microsoft when we buy Steam games on Windows? 30%? I'd be okay giving Microsoft whatever they wanted on the Windows app store as long as they loosened their grip on being able to run what you want, from where you want, without their explicit blessing. Same applies to Apple. If their App Store is really that good, it can compete on a fair playing field with other options (and no, 3rd party…

What software can’t run on Windows without Microsoft’s blessing?

Anything that isn't signed with certs from Microsoft-blessed CAs, anything that is signed with certs that were revoked either by Microsoft or their blessed CAs, and anything newly signed with old certs that weren't renewed for a $100+/yr fee. That, or you upload your app to Azure for cloud signing where Microsoft decides to bless it or not, and you might pay less than going with a full code signing cert from a CA.

Ran into this fun issue a while back[1].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40815488

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

#242

Post by vladvasiliu »

eviks wrote: post #237
vladvasiliu wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In which situation does the end user not pay for everything? Even a fine or a tax on a company ends rolled up in the price paid by the end user. Same thing with programs paid for by the government. It’s the taxpayers who foot the bill. I’m kinda split on the whole Apple situation. I’m firmly in the camp of “monopoly bad”, but apparently people are fine with apple’s practices. It’s not like they have to buy an iPhone.

In a situation where profits decrease instead of price increase

But that would only work if the end user refused to pay whatever price the company asks for. In the specific case of Apple, people line up to buy their product.

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

#243

Post by lozenge »

shuckles wrote: post #235
bmandale wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google play has a dominant market position as well and is presumably next for this sort of ruling

Wow sounds very comparable yet notably omitted from the ranges the tribunal considered. Sounds like you agree with me that they just made it up? Or are you saying that it's fair to exclude the app store of an open platform which has plenty of "free market" competition from side loaded and 3p distribution apps because ~vibes~?

Not considered? The words "Google Play" are in the judgment 47 times. Maybe you could read it?

By your logic, each of the two companies could use the other as an example and then both get away with breaking competition law. Two wrongs don't make a right.

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

#244

Post by eviks »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #242
eviks wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a situation where profits decrease instead of price increase

But that would only work if the end user refused to pay whatever price the company asks for. In the specific case of Apple, people line up to buy their product.

Are you saying that every single person on the planet bought /lined up to buy iPhones? Or did a lot of people refused to pay whatever price?

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

#245

Post by lozenge »

cedws wrote: post #46
gpm wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as Apple requires they make use of those services for me to install software on the computer I bought, and they prevent others from producing equivalent competing devices via patents (i.e. government granted monopolies), zero. It's not that it's not worth something, it's that they're abusing their patents and monopoly to extract further compensation after I already bought the device.

You had the choice to buy another phone.

As a developer, you have to offer your app on both phones otherwise your business won't get anywhere. There's no choice there.

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

#246

Post by laughing_man »

BrenBarn wrote: post #164
gpm wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as Apple requires they make use of those services for me to install software on the computer I bought, and they prevent others from producing equivalent competing devices via patents (i.e. government granted monopolies), zero. It's not that it's not worth something, it's that they're abusing their patents and monopoly to extract further compensation after I already bought the device.

> As long as Apple requires they make use of those services for me to install software on the computer I bought, and they prevent others from producing equivalent competing devices via patents (i.e. government granted monopolies), zero. Right, that's the thing. And zero should also be their revenue and their asset value as long as they continue along that path. The fines should continue to escalate, and should also b…

That's a big enough number that the likely result is Apple would pull out of the UK altogether.

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

#247

Post by asadotzler »

chongli wrote: post #61
monkmartinez wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Apple have an explicit guarantee that apps can not scam or data siphon from an iPhone or iPad app?

Yes, assuming that iOS's entitlement security has not been broken.

Point me to an Apple document that says they'll reimburse me if I'm scammed by an App Store app. If Apple cannot offer a guarantee, that means they don't trust their App Store to protect me and if they don't trust their App Store to protect me then they can hardly claim in court that they deny user choice to protect users.

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

#248

Post by concinds »

> “The CAT also ruled that app developers passed on 50% of the overcharge to consumers.”

This is complete nonsense. App companies set price based on willingness to pay. If Apple allows custom payments alongside IAP, you might get a temporary gap (naturally The vast majority of Apple's app/IAP revenue is from "mobile game" companies. You think they won't enjoy a 42% increase in iOS revenue (1/0.7=1.42) by keeping prices at a level consumers have already accepted for years? There's no "lower sales" tradeoff, customers are used to those prices.

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

#249

Post by Fire-Dragon-DoL »

chongli wrote: post #113
anonymous908213 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sideloading, AKA "installing software on your device", is something PCs have been handling just fine for decades. It's fine to warn the user when they're going off the beaten trail, but do not lock them in a cage to prevent them from doing so. If they ignore the warnings and get scammed because they are unable to identify reputable software from disreputable software, they learn a life lesson. Life goes on. There sho…

There are entire classes of people who have simply given up on PCs and only use a phone, so I would call that substantial evidence that PCs have NOT "been handling [it] just fine." For these folks, PCs are a total failure; a dead end. A danger zone to be avoided at all costs.

The same can be said about alcohol, yet all you need to do is reach alcohol age in the country you live in, no "license to drink alcohol". Why PCs should be treated differently?

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

#250

Post by imron »

troupo wrote: post #209
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 .

> The platform development, app hosting, payment processing, and quality control is surely worth something. 1. I didn't know iPhones are free. Or iPads. Or Macs. Or Apple developer program 2. Apple could just... not host apps or provide payment services, and allow people to install apps from alternatives and let devs use other payment systems

> and allow people to install apps from alternatives and let devs use other payment systems

Pre iPhone this is how all software was sold.

Not defending Apple, but independent developers ended up with far smaller piece of the pie.

That’s one of the reasons devs flocked to the AppStore. At the time 70% was exceedingly generous compared to other distributors.

Post reply on HN