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

Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 274 posts

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#251

Post by st0neage »

icebraining wrote: post #183
alextingle wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right, but whatever the details, Google behaviour is unfair both to its customers and to its suppliers. They (together with Apple) are using their dominant position to control this marketplace, to the detriment of everyone but themselves. Full credit to them for creating these markets in the first place. They deserve to be rewarded. However, there is a line (however fuzzy) that they should not cross. If they…

"Regulation" is a general term, and meaningless in this case. What rules exactly would you like to see imposed? Should Google have to allow every payment processor? What if some are scammers? Is Google responsible to blocking them? What oversight should exist to ensure they don't "unfairly" block some? I'm not fundamentally opposed to regulations, but I really dislike it when people throw around the term as if it was…

Nitpicking about details is not an argument.

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#252

Post by zrgiu_ »

radley wrote: post #238
zrgiu_ wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had one of the first 100 apps ever published on Google Play (then called Android Market). After a few months being live, I eventually implemented my own in app purchases using PayPal. Back then Google had no support for any kind of paid apps (only free apps were allowed), and Apple hadn't introduced IAPs. Still, Google removed my app 3 times before I gave up republishing it. Also, in the classic Google style, when…

Obvious question: which country?

Romania.

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#253

Post by alextingle »

nilkn wrote: post #191
einhverfr wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, it you check out http://www.google.com/ideas/ , they are looking a bit like a defence contractor these days.

You weren't kidding. That reminds me of Palantir a bit.

OCP?

http://robocop.wikia.com/wiki/Omni_Consumer_Products

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#254

Post by mitochondrion »

alextingle wrote: post #147

It's sad to see Google go from "Do no Evil" to "Pray we don't alter the deal any further" in just a few short years.

To be fair, Google's stance was "Get right up to the creepy line and not cross it.", not "Do no evil."

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#255

Post by qzervaas »

natch wrote: post #224
qzervaas wrote: post #139

A common theme that has been appearing is how hard it is to actually speak to somebody about stuff (Apple, Google, Twitter, etc...) when shit hits the fan. I earn most of my income via Apple & Google, but if I want support from Apple, it takes 2-3 days for a response (I've made them 5 figures in revenue in the past year alone). There isn't even a method that I could find for me to contact Google if I have a legitimat…

I'm surprised you would say it's hard to speak to someone at Apple. When I call their developer support number they usually pick up right away, and if needed they will escalate any issue to the level needed. And then there are the two free DTS incidents you get with membership, those are gold if you ever need them. +1 408-974-4897 (800) 633-2152

Sorry, I should have been more clear: when submitting an issue in iTunes Connect.

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#256

Post by kkaiser »

redthrowaway wrote: post #231
netcan wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting seeing Google as a grown up company, with many of the flaws they acquired early on still intact and at Google scale. You can be spending $100ks per month on adwords and still not have a competent person to call when you need help. EVen if you do, they don't know much and can't do much. Realistically, it's not much better than an outsourced call centre and much worse than the far less profitable Big A…

>You can be spending $100ks per monthon adwords and still not have a competent person to call when you need help. We just got bit by this recently. One day our organic referrals just took a nosedive (4000 -> 1000 clicks/day overnight). We got in touch with our Adwords contact, who said they'd look into it, then ... left. No longer with the team. Now we have no contact and no way to figure out what went wrong and how…

There is a very easy way to get support: https://support.google.com/adwords/

Theres a link to contact directly on this page.

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#257

Post by icebraining »

st0neage wrote: post #249
icebraining wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not irrelevant. It's not illegal to have a monopoly. It's only illegal to try to kill the competition in another market by abusing that monopoly, which is what Microsoft did, and Google is not doing.

>>No, it's not irrelevant. Yes it is. >> It's only illegal [...] It is illegal to abuse the monopoly position. Which IS what google is doing. Googles app store is NOT just another store. Monoplies need special regulation and special oversight.

Did you know that only Walmart is allowed to build stores on Walmart-owned land? And that they pick and choose what products are sold on that land? That's clearly an abuse of their monopoly on stores built on their land!

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#258

Post by icebraining »

st0neage wrote: post #251
icebraining wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Regulation" is a general term, and meaningless in this case. What rules exactly would you like to see imposed? Should Google have to allow every payment processor? What if some are scammers? Is Google responsible to blocking them? What oversight should exist to ensure they don't "unfairly" block some? I'm not fundamentally opposed to regulations, but I really dislike it when people throw around the term as if it was…

Nitpicking about details is not an argument.

The idea that the actual rules are just an implementation detail is why you end up with legislation written by lobbyists and designed to further entrench the incumbents against competition. Say that one of the rules is that you create a list of mandatory payment providers that the"monopolists" must accept; such list shall be regularly updated, and so a board must be created, possibly composed of the industry players. How likely would it then be that a new startup could enter the market?

This is what's happening everywhere, and it's the result of the irrational reaction that we must have some regulation, without really thinking about what and how.

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#259

Post by erichocean »

outside1234 wrote: post #181

Adding payment countries probably requires someone from Google to talk to someone. Google is not good at talking to people. I don't mean that as a troll but an observation - you see this over and over with Google: if the problem requires someone other than a shut-in with tremendous technical talent, they do a poor job of it (customer service, enterprise, support, ...)

Google is not good at talking to people.

It goes further than that: Google does not want to be good at talking to people.

Whether that is a good decision or not isn't clearcut. Google's position (I think) is that technical competence trumps all, and that end of the day, no matter how much some people whine, most people will go with the better solution whenever it is (a) free, or (b) makes them more money (AdWords).

An alternate theory is that Google considers "talking to people" to be legacy baggage from when "normals" reigned supreme, and that the world being (re-)built now is being built, mostly, by and for people who are much more Aspie-like than the general population.

To these people, the need to not have to talk to people to get something fixed, or to buy something, or to get from A to B is a feature, not a bug. That's the world they want to live in, and unlike normals (who already have what they want), these people are working their asses off to make it so.

It'll be interesting to see how things play out in the long run.

Re: Google permanently bans popular application from Play for not using IAP

#260

Post by lifeisstillgood »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #120
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh come on, Developer wants to build Android app, developer builds Android app, developer puts faith in Google that Google will make it possible for app to get paid. This is exactly the process Google implicitly wants to have happen, its what we all want to have happen. Google just fumbled

>> "developer puts faith in Google that Google will make it possible for app to get paid" And when you're running a business that's an incredibly stupid thing to do.

yup. and thousands do it. Zynga I think valued at a billion dollars based on faith
Post reply on HN