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

App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 437 posts

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#261

Post by mullingitover »

sgjohnson wrote: post #234
mullingitover wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be pretty trivial to throw together some automation that reinstalls your sideloaded apps nightly.

The device has to be unlocked, and non-Xcode builds require connecting the device to the computer using a cable. So it’s not as trivial as it seems.

I actually forgot that Xcode could install wirelessly! To me, unlocking the device and connecting it to the computer (which could be a mac mini next to my bed) is completely trivial. It really doesn't get much easier.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#262

Post by dodobirdlord »

javajosh wrote: post #82
nerdjon wrote: post #69

As long as this does not cause an exodus from the App Store and I am forced to start paying for apps directly, I am fine with this. But a strong benefit to the App Store for me is being able to manage and cancel my subscriptions from a central place. No going through 5 screens, no being forced to call, no any of that crap. I can already see apps refusing to carry through the App Store so they can control more, and I…

You are in luck! Another way to manage subscriptions client side is to use PayPal. In the same way you have control over all your subscriptions in one place, and can cancel without the interference of the counterparty - a great benefit indeed. And paypal can work with anything, any entity that has a PayPal account. PP is, of course, not without its own horror stories, however a lot of that is around p2p selling-gone-…

This doesn’t actually help, because ending payment for a subscription doesn’t absolve you of legal responsibility, and you might at some point end up getting sent to collections over something stupid. Importantly, Apple can force companies as part of their terms of service to recognize an App Store subscription cancellation as an actual cancellation of obligation to pay.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#263

Post by fomine3 »

ralston3 wrote: post #116
javajosh wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are in luck! Another way to manage subscriptions client side is to use PayPal. In the same way you have control over all your subscriptions in one place, and can cancel without the interference of the counterparty - a great benefit indeed. And paypal can work with anything, any entity that has a PayPal account. PP is, of course, not without its own horror stories, however a lot of that is around p2p selling-gone-…

How I read this: You're in luck! Another way to [solve problem] is to [introduce another problem]. XD

xkcd standards!

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#264

Post by dane-pgp »

chacham15 wrote: post #225
guerrilla wrote: post #191

Would this allow alternative browser emgines on iOS?

Yes it would. "Access to operating system interfaces, development information, and hardware and software features shall be provided to developers on a timely basis and on terms that are equivalent or functionally-equivalent to the terms for access by similar Apps or functions provided by the Covered Company or to its business partners."[0] means that anything a native app can do should be possible to do from a third…

Presumably "similar Apps or functions" would mean that third-party Apps could once again[0] deactivate the cellular radio, to prevent tracking by the mobile network at certain times (or locations/speeds).

[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/25674655/how-to-turn-on-...

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#265

Post by emsy »

Spivak wrote: post #228
emsy wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have yet to see a downside of this bill that isn’t solved by deleting or not installing offending apps.

Because software isn't fungible and "doesn't spam" isn't a differentiating feature so it costs apps nothing to do it.

This is actually an argument for allowing multiple stores, because I already receive spam (just today as a matter of fact!). So this might be an incentive for Apple to actually enforce their guidelines to keep users on their store.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#266

Post by Spivak »

lostmsu wrote: post #233
Spivak wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course not, I also wouldn't pay 20-40% more for free two day shipping or 30% more for free food delivery over $12, but nonetheless Amazon and DoorDash are able to take that much of a cut from sellers and restaurants. You miss the fundamental thing which is that the charge is specifically for publishers for a reason. It's because it absolutely is worth 30% to every business who wants to reach a lucrative market.

> DoorDash are able to take that much of a cut from sellers and restaurants You are building a perfect argument against Apple here. As DoorDash rates grew I stopped using them less and less and started driving to the restaurants myself. And DoorDash rates are still far cry from 30%.

You have it wrong. In addition to the fees DoorDash charges you they also charge the restaurant ~20% revenue behind the scenes. Amazon charges ~8-45% (depends on the product) behind the scenes to the seller in addition to your prime membership.

The argument “would you pay some percent more” is somewhat meaningless because if Apple thought you would pay 40% more they would already be charging that and charging the publisher 30%. Two sided markets mannnn.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#267

Post by dodobirdlord »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9
nojito wrote: post #8

I personally can’t wait for students to be forced to install apps from third party stores that collect all their information because their schools have a contract with the developers and have made it mandatory. Same will be true of employees and their employers.

> can’t wait for students to be forced to install apps from third party stores that collect all their information I'm similarly wary. But Apple and Google have been bad stewards of their market power. If the only thing protecting our rights is Cupertino's goodwill, perhaps that's an orthogonal issue for lawmakers to take up (and citizens to lobby for).

> But Apple and Google have been bad stewards of their market power.

Can you explain how? Because I don’t think they have at all. App developers are not their customers, they are business partners, and prioritizing customers over business partners is laudable.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#268

Post by clusterfish »

LexGray wrote: post #249
Arcsech wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If being forced to compete fairly requires them to drop their prices by 60%, I think that’s a pretty good argument that they’re not competing fairly at the moment.

When you are competing against stores that require you to use their ad-tech framework to make up the difference it is a different equation. The idea of billions of devices out there with constantly running background ad-tech frameworks horrifying to me. It would make the AirTags stalking seem like a joke if every phone secretly tracked every Bluetooth. Right now Apple is in the stream to say no to that. The argument…

Bunch of FUD. OS features and permissions aren't going anywhere. Even if coercing users into providing permissions became a real problem, Apple could have the OS provide fake data to apps not whitelisted by the user.

If you don't want to be tracked, don't use Google, Facebook, and other ad techs. Doesn't matter whether you installed their apps or not. Even today Apple can't meaningfully shield you from their tracking if you choose to use their free ad-supported services. (And if you don't, there's not much value in tracking you since they can't sell your attention to the highest bidder)

I'm not defending ad tech, but it will take complex legislation to reign it in. You can't just hide from it in Apple's walled garden, it does not work.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#269

Post by dodobirdlord »

panzagl wrote: post #47
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #14

As an Apple user, I kind of view the App Store as a kind of collective bargaining with app developers. If you want to have access to Apple Users you need to adhere to certain standards. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Apple are some of the scummiest companies and their software is full of dark patterns. Apple’s App Store does a lot to protect me. I guess I view this bill much as a union member might view a “Rig…

Collective bargaining involves two parties, one representing the 'collective'. App stores are more at-will: 'my way or the highway'.

The collective of Apple’s users makes its will known by continuing to purchase iPhones.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#270

Post by Meegul »

shimfish wrote: post #115
thebaer wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allowing alternative payment systems. This would be absolutely huge for small devs, as you no longer have to pay the ridiculous 15%-30% rent to Apple.

Oh goody. I get to manage my own payment system. And have to worry about being tax compliant in every country and state. And deal with logins, and refunds and fraud and uptime and customer support. Where do I sign up?

It's not about having to manage your own payment system, it's about being allowed to. You may not want to, but others might.
Post reply on HN