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

Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

proton.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 665 posts

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#31

Post by amelius »

rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #24

Apple and Proton are two companies that I personally like, but the claim that the internet descended into surveillance capitalism because of the walled garden approach of the App Store is an argument in bad faith. Even if Apple allowed other app stores or payment methods, that would not have stopped Facebook and Google from capitalizing on user data to sell ads and manipulate public opinion. They would give their pro…

> But the core of my contention is that: if you make the platform that others run on and which creates entirely new economies and allows businesses to thrive, don’t you get to define the constraints that you want since it’s _your_ platform? What’s effectively happening here is that companies are using the courts to force the design of OSes in a certain way: That only open OSes can ever be made, not closed ones.

Huh, the __user__ paid for the product, so they own it. After the user handed over their money, Apple has nothing to say about who I do business with on that product, or what the conditions are.

You can say "platform" as much as you like, but that's just Apple's way of forcing their way into the argument.

Someone has to make the platform. If they want recognition for that or compensation, maybe they should apply for government funding. Don't bother the consumer with it.

And if you don't like a government regulating a market, then you haven't seen a company regulate one.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#32

Post by echoangle »

dwedge wrote: post #19
resolutefunctor wrote: post #15

There is a lot I hate about building apps and releasing them on the App Store, and I'd be happy for there to be alternatives. But that said, I don't understand how its a monopoly. There is no requirement to build an app for iOS devices. There are other devices and means for software delivery out there. What makes their control of their own ecosystem monopolistic? As someone who has paid the apple tax for digital sale…

Their ecosystem is your phone. As long as you cannot install anything on your phone without going through their app store, it's a monopoly

If you define the scope narrow enough, everything is a monopoly.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#33

Post by FredPret »

bitpush wrote: post #21
resolutefunctor wrote: post #15

There is a lot I hate about building apps and releasing them on the App Store, and I'd be happy for there to be alternatives. But that said, I don't understand how its a monopoly. There is no requirement to build an app for iOS devices. There are other devices and means for software delivery out there. What makes their control of their own ecosystem monopolistic? As someone who has paid the apple tax for digital sale…

If tomorrow, Tesla insisted that their cars will only accepted Tesla branded tires, would you be ok with it? Sure it's their car and they can do whatever they want with it, but consumers are losing choices - which is what anti-monopoly rules are for. Say, Michelin or Pirelli tires are strictly better but Tesla doing this harms consumer choice and that's why it is bad. Imagine if this were extended to Tesla branded ch…

If this happened tomorrow, you'd have every right to be outraged.

But if someone then bought a Tesla the day after, they'd have far less right to be outraged.

And if the new tires & paint were integral to fundamental value-add of the car (the analogy breaks down here), then there's just zero grounds for it.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#34

Post by cosmic_cheese »

rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #24

Apple and Proton are two companies that I personally like, but the claim that the internet descended into surveillance capitalism because of the walled garden approach of the App Store is an argument in bad faith. Even if Apple allowed other app stores or payment methods, that would not have stopped Facebook and Google from capitalizing on user data to sell ads and manipulate public opinion. They would give their pro…

Yes, the advertising industry seems like it’s the more relevant institution in this particular case. Apple’s culpability has mostly to do with doing nothing to mitigate the runaway race to the bottom in during the App Store’s earliest days, but that would've happened even if they hadn’t taken the walled garden approach. Surveillance capitalism is the inevitable end state where on the web and in apps, ads are the most readily accessible, consistent, and sometimes lucrative form of monetization.

> Note that the businesses who are lobbying against Apple are operating on the very same capitalist, profit-optimizing interests that drove Apple to choose a walled-garden approach. They are not doing this to make the world a better place, and the vast majority of smartphone users do not even care about this “issue”.

They’re all blatantly self-interested, but Spotify is perhaps the biggest hypocrite among them. They’re continuously bolstering their dominance in the streaming music space at the cost of both users and artists, and when Apple gives them features they’ve asked for they refuse to use them because that’d weaken their case. They only care because if it weren’t for Apple Music they’d for all practical purposes have a monopoly.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#36

Post by [deleted] »

resolutefunctor wrote: post #15

There is a lot I hate about building apps and releasing them on the App Store, and I'd be happy for there to be alternatives. But that said, I don't understand how its a monopoly. There is no requirement to build an app for iOS devices. There are other devices and means for software delivery out there. What makes their control of their own ecosystem monopolistic? As someone who has paid the apple tax for digital sale…

[deleted]

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#37

Post by drivingmenuts »

Living in the US, I trust Apple with securing my communications (I don't have high security needs). I don't exactly trust third party developers. So, three no need for me to use something outside of Apple's apps, unless its something that don't provide. If these apps could prove they were better, id consider them, but all these lawsuits just sound like inferior products trying to force themselves onto a platform they should be on.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#39

Post by Workaccount2 »

I don't think any big tech company has ever done anything as evil and predatory as Apple walling off iMessage, giving the impression that Apple phones were high technology, and interacting with peasant androids is what made group chats fragment and pictures and videos look like trash.

Few things are more enraging than people being left out of chats with friends and family because they didn't bend over for Apple. Even worse being a teenager and having to endure social shaming for it. It wasn't until the EU signaled it was going to bring down then axe that Apple capitulated to RCS.

- Yes, I know you are part of the domestic US long tail that use signal/telegram with all your friends.

- Yes, I know no one outside the US uses iMessage.

ETA: A note because people are pretty incredulous about "most evil". Tech companies do a lot of evil stuff, no doubt.

But there is something special about putting social connection behind an expensive hardware purchase and walled garden lock in. Every other messaging app I know of is open to anyone on most platforms for little or no cost. Apple on the other hand purposely leveraged social connections in your life to force you into their garden and keep you there. Lets not pretend that Apple couldn't open up iMessage or even charge a nominal fee for outsiders. Instead you get an iphone and just seemlessly slide into iMessage. So seemless that most users don't even know that it is a separate service than sms/mms/rcs. Apple muddies that too.

But they would never do that, because using people's closest social connections to force them into the ecosystem and lock them there is just too juicy. "Oh you don't want an iPhone anymore? Well looks like you have to leave your social circles main discussion hub to do so..."

It's just evil on another level.

Re: Proton joins suit against Apple for practices that harm developers and consumers

#40

Post by leptons »

resolutefunctor wrote: post #15

There is a lot I hate about building apps and releasing them on the App Store, and I'd be happy for there to be alternatives. But that said, I don't understand how its a monopoly. There is no requirement to build an app for iOS devices. There are other devices and means for software delivery out there. What makes their control of their own ecosystem monopolistic? As someone who has paid the apple tax for digital sale…

Apple also blocks any web browser on their mobile devices except their web browser. Chrome, Firefox, and any other browser on IOS is using Safari under the hood.

Now why would Apple do this? Because they have hobbled Safari so that it does not have modern web APIs which would allow web developers to create web-apps that use APIs that are only allowed on App-store apps on IOS devices.

This forces developers to either make an app for the App-store, or don't have any IOS users.

This is one of many reasons Apple is being sued by the DOJ - because they won't allow any other browser engines on IOS, at least not in the US, the EU slapped them on the wrist and now it's allowed there.

Safari is the current worst web browser in terms of features and bugs, and Apple wants to keep it this way for no better reason but greed. They want to push people to make App-store apps, which they can extract 30% revenue from.

That is anti-competitive, and monopolistic behavior.

Post reply on HN