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

Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 369 posts

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#301

Post by stjohnswarts »

olliej wrote: post #30
m463 wrote: post #2

so: - monopoly: the only seller - monopsony: the only buyer So app store customers can only buy from apple. And the app developers can only sell to apple.

PlayStation, Xbox, Nintendo, sega, ... are the same: You can only sell for those devices with manufacturer licensing (that includes profit sharing and mandatory annoyances like “achievements”), and consumers can only buy games licensed by those manufacturers. The only difference is that PC developers haven’t experienced that before. It seems like this would have been established in the 80s/90s, so I’m surprised we’re…

You're ignoring the fact that communication is critical in the modern world and Apple has too big of a piece of the pie there and is clearly too powerful in dictating what is happening as well as abusing that power. Also video games aren't critical to functioning in the information age, while communication clearly is.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#302

Post by henryfjordan »

scarface74 wrote: post #179
p49k wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is not like Tesla; iPhones are often touted as a “luxury brand” but the truth is that they offer products of quality that are roughly in proportion to their pricing, and their high margins are due to better/more efficient operations than their competitors. A phone is such an essential tool in one’s life and priced low enough that it makes sense to invest in a product that is of good quality. Most people can aff…

Movies - if you buy a music on iTunes from most of the major studios, you can sync your purchases with Amazon Video, Google Play Movies and Vudu using Movies Anywhere. Blame the studios that refuse to cooperate for the ones you can’t. Music - any music you buy from iTunes has been DRM free for over a decade. Books - if that’s a concern, buy ebooks from Amazon - like everyone else dies. As far as buying apps, most mon…

With all monopoly/monopsony discussions, it all comes down to the degree to which the monopolist leverages their position. It's not illegal to have a monopoly, only to abuse it.

Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony each compete rather vigorously to attract studios to produce games for their platforms. Nintendo classically has ups-and-downs in this arena, given their unconventional hardware choices. The Switch is attracting a lot more devs than the Wii U ever did, for instance. This breaks the theory of monopsony, as there is clearly competition between platforms to acquire games.

Contrast that with the App Stores on phones where everything feels incredibly static. Apple and Google are clearly coasting on the fact that there's only 2 phone OSes and you have to use one of them. Besides first-party apple stuff, there are hardly any exclusives. And you never hear about app devs changing platforms.

So I would conclude that no, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony don't need to be regulated because they aren't engaging in anti-consumer behavior. They should be subject to the same standards, of course, but they aren't currently in violation of them like Apple.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#303

Post by scarface74 »

simion314 wrote: post #283
scarface74 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Apple should allow random third parties to intercept SMS messages because “people in your group” don’t use SMS?

Apple should let me decide or maybe review Thunderbird and Firefox and allow them. I am wondering how can you bring this argument and at the same time you install random apps on your computer that are not made or restricted by Apple.

That’s kind of my point. I’m very careful about what I install on my computer. I don’t install random crap on my computer from untrusted sources because of the lack of a sandbox.

I install any random crap on my phone and tablet because I know they can’t do too much damage between the better permission model and sandboxing.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#304

Post by [deleted] »

simion314 wrote: post #283
scarface74 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Apple should allow random third parties to intercept SMS messages because “people in your group” don’t use SMS?

Apple should let me decide or maybe review Thunderbird and Firefox and allow them. I am wondering how can you bring this argument and at the same time you install random apps on your computer that are not made or restricted by Apple.

[deleted]

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#305

Post by lotsofpulp »

strbean wrote: post #280
lotsofpulp wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s exactly what keeps me buying Apple for my family and I. I credit their locked down App Store with saving me from spending hundreds of hours of my time dealing with malware over the last 10 years.

I've used android phones for a decade now and never once been affected by malware. If the issue is kids installing shady apps, you should probably use a parental lock for that.

The issue is people clicking on every link that comes their way via email or whatsapp.

And since I can’t stop them from clicking them, my only solution is to have them use iOS devices.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#306

Post by ShroudedNight »

ubermonkey wrote: post #230
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you want other stores, use a different platform. But that's the problem. They're forcing you to choose both together when it should be an independent variable. App developers also don't get to choose which phone their customers have already bought.

That isn't a problem, though. You're not entitled to dictate terms to the vendor here in any sense other than "I'll buy that" or "I won't buy that." Computer developers don't get to choose which computer their customers have, either. Seriously, I have no idea why people get so salty about this.

> You're not entitled to dictate terms to the vendor here in any sense other than "I'll buy that" or "I won't buy that."

Society, as a collective, does reserve that right through anti-trust laws.

> Computer developers don't get to choose which computer their customers have, either.

Both Microsoft, and Steam monopoly powers have been called into question previously. Microsoft was specifically required to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#307

Post by scarface74 »

henryfjordan wrote: post #302
scarface74 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Movies - if you buy a music on iTunes from most of the major studios, you can sync your purchases with Amazon Video, Google Play Movies and Vudu using Movies Anywhere. Blame the studios that refuse to cooperate for the ones you can’t. Music - any music you buy from iTunes has been DRM free for over a decade. Books - if that’s a concern, buy ebooks from Amazon - like everyone else dies. As far as buying apps, most mon…

With all monopoly/monopsony discussions, it all comes down to the degree to which the monopolist leverages their position. It's not illegal to have a monopoly, only to abuse it. Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony each compete rather vigorously to attract studios to produce games for their platforms. Nintendo classically has ups-and-downs in this arena, given their unconventional hardware choices. The Switch is attracting…

Apple has also commissioned exclusives - Apple Arcade has over 100 exclusive games.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#308

Post by filleduchaos »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #214
ubermonkey wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be possible, but I see no reason to compel it. If you want other stores, use a different platform.

> If you want other stores, use a different platform. But that's the problem. They're forcing you to choose both together when it should be an independent variable. App developers also don't get to choose which phone their customers have already bought.

Out of curiosity, do you own any consoles?

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#309

Post by filleduchaos »

chrisweekly wrote: post #84
mikece wrote: post #77

Having Apple take a 30% cut of sales in exchange for not having to run an e-commerce operation is far less odious than having to pay $5,000 for a MacBook Pro which has less RAM, a smaller SSD, and less powerful processor than $2,500 worth of Dell, Lenovo, HP, or Acer gear. The hardware is the real rip-off to me. I would gladly pay a reasonable fee if I could write my apps in VS Code on Debian and then ship the code t…

(Agrees, and ponders lack of macOS cloud offerings to address this use case.)

Is there a lack or have you simply never sought any out?

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#310

Post by ldoughty »

zbyte64 wrote: post #215
ldoughty wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda miss the point of the article, which focused on monopsony -- sole buyer. If your want to sell on the east coast (Apple), you need to put your product in wooden boxes no larger than X and documentation must be written in French, and you must have 10 employees that speak French. If you want to sell to the West coast, you put your product in plastic bags, and everything is in Spanish, and your employees need to sp…

Bingo. All this talk about market shares is not about monopsony. Arguably Android is also monopsony.

I meant to put (Android) in for West coast, but yes, I arguably agree it's a very similar situation, though Google/Android is less restrictive / closed off... They are more like the old "Internet explorer" were Microsoft had to defend bundling their own app over competitors'
Post reply on HN