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

In-App Purchase Rules

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 84 posts

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#31

Post by meritt »

easton wrote: post #29
meritt wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would be good to get a little more awareness into this process. Make upvotes and downvotes public, and do something to reduce the constant flood of throwaway accounts who do nothing more than constant trolling on contentious topics.

Downvotes and upvotes being hidden is the only thing keeping HN from devolving into reddit. Otherwise, people would just agree with whatever had the biggest number instead of (hopefully) applying some critical thinking.

I'm not talking about the quantity, I'm talking about a list of who upvoted and downvoted a specific comment/post.

Also what you've described happens anyway. The fact that a number isn't displayed doesn't really matter when comments are ultimately ordered by score. When someone writes a comment that doesn't adhere to the current groupthink, they get downvoted. When people are downvoted too much they delete their comments, stop commenting, or through pavlovian reinforcement change their opinions until they get positive points.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#32

Post by dang »

meritt wrote: post #26
dang wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously some HN users have defending Apple while others have been denouncing Apple. So much so that I've had to pin moderation comments to the top asking for better discussion than Glory-to-$BigCo vs. Death-to-$BigCo flamewars [1]. But everyone notices and remembers the comments they dislike the most [2], so each side thinks that "HN" is slavishly and perversely on the other side [3]. It would be good to get a litt…

> It would be good to get a little more awareness into this process. Make upvotes and downvotes public, and do something to reduce the constant flood of throwaway accounts who do nothing more than constant trolling on contentious topics.

Those things wouldn't increase the kind of awareness I'm talking about.

We're not going to disclose how users vote. That's some of the most private data HN has.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#33

Post by staticman2 »

scarface74 wrote: post #30
microtherion wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple does not charge the fees just for the payment processing. Ultimately, Apple would like to earn money from the products they make. There are a variety of models to do so: * You can sell the hardware, sell OS upgrades, and let third parties sell apps without taking a cut. This was the original Mac model. * You can sell the hardware, give away OS upgrades, and privilege third party developers who give you a cut, w…

I didn’t say that Apple does just make money from payment processing I said they could. There are dozens of payment processors that make money just by being credit card processors. It would make things a lot simpler and they could get a cut of payments that they can’t get right now from companies that won’t do in app purchases through the App Store. Netflix and Spotify were consistently two of the “top paid” apps whe…

This has to do with Apple using Mafia style tactics to demand 30% of all economic activity. It has nothing to do with payment processors as such.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#34

Post by scarface74 »

staticman2 wrote: post #33
scarface74 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t say that Apple does just make money from payment processing I said they could. There are dozens of payment processors that make money just by being credit card processors. It would make things a lot simpler and they could get a cut of payments that they can’t get right now from companies that won’t do in app purchases through the App Store. Netflix and Spotify were consistently two of the “top paid” apps whe…

This has to do with Apple using Mafia style tactics to demand 30% of all economic activity. It has nothing to do with payment processors as such.

What is your point? Didn’t I just say that Apple should scrap IAP and just become a payment processor by using Apple Pay?

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#35

Post by lancesells »

Spivak wrote: post #10
MBCook wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice I never said the 30% processing fee still existed. That’s APPLES processing fee. The other payment providers would charge whatever THEIR processing fee is. I assume the market would quickly drive Apple‘s fee down to a reasonable number. But if Apple wants to keep charging 30%, why not? There are alternatives in my plan, so it’s not hostile.

No I mean regardless of which processor you use Apple still takes a 30% cut of all digital sales on iOS. So if you use PayPal you pay Apple 30% and PayPals fees too. Because Apple isn't charging 30% to be your payment processor, they're charging 30% for the ability to sell your goods on iOS at all.

It's not just the ability to sell goods on iOS. It's the reviewing of the app, the upgrades, any App Store curation, any developer support, the iOS itself, etc. That said, I think 30% is too high as an industry standard for software.

The one thing I think that might be the most costly for Apple are all the free apps on the App Store. I know you need to pay $99 a year but as they are free Apple sees nothing in return from those apps.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#36

Post by kgc »

Marco's proposal fails to incorporate the fact that the fees collected help pay for the App Store... It's not free to create and maintain.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#37

Post by function_seven »

kgc wrote: post #36

Marco's proposal fails to incorporate the fact that the fees collected help pay for the App Store... It's not free to create and maintain.

The costs to run the App Store are probably something like 0.1% of the fees collected on apps.

Apple collected $15 billion from the app store in 2019. I'd wager that $15 million would cover the operating costs, which I'd guess are largely the salaries of app reviewers. Even if I'm off by 2 orders of magnitude, that still leaves 90% of Apple's cut as profit.

The app store is a huge driver toward selling the hardware. If Apple were banned from charging any fee at all, they'd still run the app store. They're not dependent on the 30% cut.

EDIT: I'm not saying that, therefore the fee is wrong, or too high, or whatever. Just that the cost of operating the App Store is not a justification for their current level.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#38

Post by InTheArena »

I don't have a problem with the app store rules, for apps that are in the app store. What i do have a major problem with is the inability to use a third party app store with different rules. Marco is opposed to this - primarily because it offsets the immediate advantage he would get if Apple was forced to abandon IAP, while also making him have to possibly go with multiple app stores - but legally I don't think the government can force Apple to set a given rate (they appear to be in line with what Sony and Microsoft get for their hardware, and what Google gets on the app store) or legal terms.

The security in iOS is tied to the sandboxing model - not the app store. The app store is there to protect Apple's interests. If a customer wants to load a separate app store, thats on them.

Apple doesn't own the hardware. We do. It should be our choice to open it up to apps and ecosystems (native app stores) that are competitive.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#39

Post by InTheArena »

jamil7 wrote: post #4

I hope Apple takes notice of the path their walking down right now. When people like Marco are calling them out on their bullshit it's a clear indicator that they've pushed the envelope too far. Alienating 3rd party developers is the same mistake that nearly cost Microsoft everything.

Lets be relaistic and note that Marco has a very lucrative podcasting career hosting a apple podcast - which requires content and something to speak of.

Not saying he is wrong - but let's not pretend that he is not usually at the forefront of every pitchfork carrying moment in the Apple ecosystem.

Re: In-App Purchase Rules

#40

Post by dralley »

kgc wrote: post #36

Marco's proposal fails to incorporate the fact that the fees collected help pay for the App Store... It's not free to create and maintain.

> Marco's proposal fails to incorporate the fact that the fees collected help pay for the App Store... It's not free to create and maintain.

"help pay for" is cute phrasing. The app store made Apple 15 billion dollars in revenue last year. It's a veritable fountain of money.

Post reply on HN