Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes • Hacker News Board

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#271

Post by panragon » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:34 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #76

candiddevmike wrote: post #62

Device freedom is a must. Any device should be completely controllable by the end user. There's two parts to this to me: app stores and the data collected by the devices. Users should have the freedom to install any software on their devices, period. Users should also have the freedom to stop all data collection by these devices. This applies to all electronics--video game consoles, TVs, printers, who knows what else…

If users didn’t want these things, users wouldn’t buy them. For the vast majority of people, and iPhone is way, way better than a computer that can run any app, precisely because it can’t run any app they click on. I’m a hacker, so I would love to be able to install any software I want on my iPhone, and introspect it in other ways. Most users, however, would have a way worse experience using their phone if they were…

I have this discussion nearly daily when talking with Android users. The iPhone is not a modular unit that can be tampered with at all, but despite even being a software developer, I do not actually care about my phone being modular. I want it to work and I want it to work well across the entire platform. Not only does iOS severely limit your options for changing your phone's UX, something a lot of people lament about quite often, but they also have rigorous design-guides that push every developer in the eco-system to have it look the same way. Something as simple as the date/timepickers that Apple removed in iOS 14 can't be changed by the user, but Apple does their hardest to make sure everyone makes it look the way they've set it up, and for my purposes I legitimately prefer that over deciding it myself but having the apps on the platform ultimately use either or willy-nilly.

There definitely are issues with Apple, but the user not having full access to changing their device isn't really one, and that's coming from someone who most definitely has the know how to do pretty much anything and still remain safe, I'd dread to see users be stuck having full root access to their phones without even knowing what the fuck that means.

There absolutely needs to be options for those that want to be able to hack away at their phone to their hearts content, but it doesn't need to be every phone, and Apple aren't criminals just because they don't offer that possibility and users happen to want their phones anyway.

Please don't give me root access to my iPhone, I do not care about it, I have no need for it, and I do not want it.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#272

Post by jlelse » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:34 PM UTC

gpm wrote: post #208

All the arguments about what company is most evil entirely miss the point. You don't make a decision on a specific issue based on what company you like more, you base it on who is right on the specific issue. From an ethical perspective that's what having a codified rule of laws is all about. Everyone get's the same rules no matter how much you like them. You don't arbitrarily punish people for doing things you don't…

> All the arguments about what company is most evil entirely miss the point.

This!

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#273

Post by nemothekid » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:34 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #167

temp667 wrote: post #97

Haha - this illustrates WHY the app store is so popular. You've got Match.com (owns tinder). Repeat FTC offender (most scammmers never get the FTC slap on the wrist). "Match Group also allegedly makes it too difficult to cancel a subscription through “confusing and cumbersome cancellation practices.” The FTC claims users must click through two pages of survey questions and cites a 2015 internal presentation that note…

Your perspective makes me sad. I'm honestly depressed because people rush to defend bad behavior of their favorite monopoly. Like, physically holding back tears. Serious. What is wrong with us? Our computers and technology have been locked down by anti-competitive juggernauts. Our legislators have written laws that cede more of our liberties and privacy. This modern internet sucks so much and I want to go back to whe…

>I'm honestly depressed because people rush to defend bad behavior of their favorite monopoly.

While techies lived in their utopia, the rest of us without the ability to compile from source were tricked into downloading spyware, profiled, and scammed from dubious "developers". These problems were known, but nothing was done about them in the name of "developer freedom".

A company comes along and offers the vast majority of people a safe computing environment at a premium. Surprise, surprise most people choose that and instead of having to trust N-developers to not do everything in their power to get a quick buck, I only have to trust 1, Apple, to do the filtering.

The problem that I'm starting to see is most people here, being developers, naturally side themselves against Apple. The alternate perspective I have is that most developers are actually user hostile and Apple is the only one that has repeatedly shown to value my dollars over abusing my data or privacy. So, no, I'm not "rooting" for Epic after the games industry and repeatedly shown they will abuse children with gambling mechanics. Why should fight for Match Group's rights at the detriment to my own?

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#274

Post by ketzu » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:35 PM UTC

xlii wrote: post #215

ketzu wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic is in my eyes evil company and they done a lot of bad things in area I care about. Can you elaborate on that? It's hard to follow for me. Also: You don't give money to epic, you also think the goal of spotify in that case makes sense. But you are willing to hurt a goal that you think makes sense because someone you don't like also thinks that goal is worth fighting for? This seems unnecessary and a bad strateg…

Epic introduced the concept of exclusivity on the PC gaming scene. Earlier Steam (which arguably is monopoly) provided option to buy games but those games could be distributed from outside - and many games did so. Right now Epic locks some of the games in their EGS store. Few kickstarted games were "bought" by Epic into (and which I personally backed, but I have no access to unless I accept their conditions). There i…

> As for the goal - the goal makes sense for Spotify, not me. I wouldn't condemn them for trying yet I don't have a stake there. They don't do this so that I can pay less, they do this so that they can earn more. I don't see why I should put my mind on helping huge, wealthy company to obtain their goals. Same goes with Apple.

I personally think this is quite a far reaching issue we can and should form an opinion on. I don't own an apple device but I think it's an important issue of user freedom. It is a much stricter version of the exclusivity you consider a problem.

But I overinterpreted your original statement. Sorry about that.

Also: Thank you for elaborating on the issues. I was aware of those points. I just don't share your judgement about those issues, but there's no real point in discussing them further as it's super off-topic :)

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#275

Post by echelon » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:35 PM UTC

ilikehurdles wrote: post #205

Apocryphon wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basecamp and Tile want walled gardens?

Epic and Spotify.

The downvotes for your parent and your follow-up retort don't make sense.

I'm also backing these companies' argument and I don't want a walled garden. I want an open and competitive marketplace. I want to be able to distribute my software to everyone (like I used to be able to do).

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#276

Post by teddyh » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

Razengan wrote: post #207

uryga wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If users didn’t want these things, users wouldn’t buy them. doesn't follow. people buying a thing despite flaw X just means don't consider X a dealbreaker, not that they actually want X

..What? If X isn't a dealbreaker, then obviously customers are fine with X. If they weren't, it would be a dealbreaker.

There is a vast gulf of nuance between “fine” and “dealbreaker”.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#277

Post by gowld » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

zhobbs wrote: post #185

AlexandrB wrote: post #86

From https://appfairness.org/our-vision/ > No app store owner should prohibit third parties from offering competing app stores on the app store owner’s platform, or discourage developers or consumers from using them. I don't disagree but does this mean Sony should allow, for example, Steam to be installed on the PS5? Or is the definition of "App Store" used here narrow and arbitrary?

Maybe it should be something like, "if your platform doesn't allow side loading of other apps, or other app stores, then the store on that platform can take no more than X% commission on sales"

Does Steam allow side loading into it's launcher/library?

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#278

Post by lotsofpulp » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #251

temp667 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "bad behavior"? Are you joking. You realize people pay apple EXTRA because they value their product? Their product holds its value far LONGER on the secondary market because it is maintained so well? You can get unlocked android phones and install whatever you want. But the reality for our parents / grandparents etc is that the folks who want to have root on their device want to scam them, auto bill them with non…

> Go use another phone if you don't like it. Half of my audience is on your favorite device. I didn't have to pay for them before Apple sunk their claws in. Even if there wasn't a tax, the lack of freedom is what really gets me. Apple built itself atop open source. They leveraged it to gain control over 40% of the CPUs used by consumers. Now we can't run code for these people. I applaud their privacy stance. But free…

My experience with freedom to run software resulted in me spending an inordinate amount of time dealing with malware.

If anyone wants to come up with a freedom to run software alternative that doesn’t result in me dealing with malware, I’m open to it.

Until then, I have to pay Apple, because I don’t have time to deal with the alternatives currently available.

Edit:

>Half of my audience is on your favorite device. I didn't have to pay for them before Apple sunk their claws in.

I might be part of that audience, but when I was purchasing tablets for my business, I chose Apple, because I didn’t want to deal with malware or google support. I knew I could rely on Apple to not have malware and to provide in person support in reasonable time. I’m also willing to pay 30% extra for a subscription via the App Store since I know it’s dead easy to cancel it.

I am aware of Apple’s injustices with their arbitrary rules and enforcement and how they are able to screw over developers. But I need to move on with life, and I need something that just works.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#279

Post by dleslie » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

im3w1l wrote: post #252

dleslie wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

F-Droid itself relies upon Android's openness to allow it to be installed. If you don't like Apple's walled garden then use Android.

And if you want to install whichever apps you want, AND not be spied on by your OS, there are basically no options. Linageos is a possibility, but with the play services situation, running any mainstream app without phoning home to google is if not impossible, extremely difficult and filled with footguns. Pine and Librem are exciting emerging possibilities but they have only been available for a very short time so it…

PinePhone is available to order right now; and it's cheap as hell.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#280

Post by boarnoah » Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

acituan wrote: post #244

ilikehurdles wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want a world where we're free to install whatever we want on our devices or distribute our hard work to others without having to implement it 5 different ways. I do too, but your appeal to emotion is off-topic. This has nothing to do with the lawsuit. None of these companies want that, nor are they working toward that. Epic and Spotify are pushing their own walled gardens, they just want to do it with a bigger pr…

> Epic and Spotify are pushing their own walled gardens, they just want to do it with a bigger profit margin. There is absolutely no problem with that because it cures the one and only walled garden problem. If they implement a subpar walled garden, it will be up to the users to exercise choice on using them, which they currently can't. This is the core of the opponent processes of markets. It is irrelevant to demand…

Just for reference Epic has already shown us their playbook on how they plan to bootstrap a separate marketplace with the Epic Games Store on PC.

Namely, paying for exclusivity onto their store (or more accurately paying for the developer to not release onto Steam - the current incumbent). I'm not sure how you can argue that they are helping users exercise choice when this is behavior they already engage in.