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

291–300 of 437 posts

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#291

Post by jlokier »

emsy wrote: post #66
DannyBee wrote: post #65

One downside (as a consumer) of this bill is that it requires app store owners to allow spamming users "A Covered Company shall not impose restrictions on communications of developers with the users of the App through an App or direct outreach to a user concerning legitimate business offers, such as pricing terms and product or service offerings." Yay, more spam (probably all starting with "Dear user, we have a legit…

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

I cannot login to three of my bank accounts (even on the web), authenticate with several services used in my job, or approve some card payments without installed apps on my phone.

It is assumed you have a device. Not installing isn't a reasonable option. You may think "just choose different banks, jobs and cards" but suitable alternatives were not available.

Having a second device would be ok, but very inconvenient and a little expensive due to needing multiple mobile contracts.

If those apps start to include more user hostile features such as spam and data collection, if there are no suitable alternatives we will live with those features. To some extent I am already seeing spam in bank apps, in the form of interstitials advertising shady third party services.

At the moment the app store policies and human review offer some buffer against those features being pervasively standard for such apps, but it's not hard to imagine a dystopian future where all e.g. BankId apps that are required to make payments for food everywhere all seem to have built-in spamvertising and tracking functions that no technical measures like sandboxing can prevent.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#292

Post by Spivak »

Bellamy wrote: post #277
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.

Strongly disagree. 30% cut is a robbery that only a monopoly can get away with.

The Windows store charges 15%/30%, Xbox in-game purchases are a 30% cut for digital games. PlayStation in-game purchases are a 30% cut for digital games. Google Play IAP is a 30% cut. Same with Nintendo digital games. Same with Steam.

Surely they all can’t have monopoly power? Is 15% of revenue suddenly not monopoly power? Would you still feel forced to pay it if it was 50% or 75% or would you just leave iOS?

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#293

Post by fartcannon »

zepto wrote: post #282
fartcannon wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah they are.

No they aren’t. If you want F-Droid, buy an android phone. Apple can’t stop you.

I want F-Droid on iOS. Apple is preventing that, but looks like not for long.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#294

Post by AnthonyMouse »

charcircuit wrote: post #289
keleftheriou wrote: post #27

Great news. Apple has turned the magic of software development from “how cool would this be?” to “how cool would Apple be with this?” That’s an environment of software suppression instead of free innovation, and Apple has felt little pressure to change. For anyone concerned about the security and privacy implications, don’t fall for the misconceptions perpetuated by Apple: non-App Store apps will still be sandboxed (…

If you want free innovation why not develop for PC? If Apple doesn't think free innovation is a good thing for their app store then it's Apple's loss for losing out on innovative software.

Many apps have network effects. You can put together a great messaging app but if Apple bans it or cripples it, it can't catch on.

And that's just as true while you're small. You have six friends and three of them have iPhones, you can't get them all to switch to your own app.

Meanwhile Apple's "loss" is of an app that they purposely didn't want, e.g. because it might have displaced iMessage by being a better SMS app (which they don't allow). They don't ban everything, they ban the things that are in their anti-competitive business advantage to ban.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#295

Post by [deleted] »

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%.

[deleted]

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#297

Post by starik36 »

keleftheriou wrote: post #27

Great news. Apple has turned the magic of software development from “how cool would this be?” to “how cool would Apple be with this?” That’s an environment of software suppression instead of free innovation, and Apple has felt little pressure to change. For anyone concerned about the security and privacy implications, don’t fall for the misconceptions perpetuated by Apple: non-App Store apps will still be sandboxed (…

I agree with your sentiment, but how would apps be scanned by Apple if you are allowed to sideload via 3rd party stores? They don't exactly scan apps downloaded from Cydia today.

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#298

Post by TipiKoivisto »

Apocryphon wrote: post #136
sudosysgen wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

F-Droid, Amazon, Samsung, and multiple Chinese companies are operating third-party stores with a fair amount of success.

F-Droid is great for hackers- a niche subset. Chinese app stores are a special case because of legal and political separation. How successful are Amazon or Samsung's app stores, and do they actually host any popular apps that users can't get on the Play Store?

Excellent question. Would be great to see some real stats about download numbers and available apps (and not only from the two big ones: https://www.statista.com/statistics/276623/number-of-apps-av...).

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#299

Post by lostmsu »

Spivak wrote: post #266
lostmsu wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 pub…

> In addition to the fees DoorDash charges you they also charge the restaurant ~20% revenue behind the scenes.

I don't think the point is wrong though. You can bypass DoorDash both as a customer (using other service or going personally) and the restaurant (by having online ordering on another platform).

Re: App store bill sails out of Senate Judiciary Committee

#300

Post by Apocryphon »

toqy wrote: post #218
Apocryphon wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if Apple can't keep the quality of their software from falling to that level, just because of being slightly more open, then that is their failure.

What? They’ve already prevented it from falling to that level. If that is changed through legislation how is it their failure?

Because they exercise enough control over their platform, the App Store is far from the only avenue of protection.
Post reply on HN