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

Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 627 posts

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#321

Post by Reason077 »

makecheck wrote: post #316

The Mac App Store gives a hint at what would happen if there was any choice. The amount of software actually available for the Mac is far, far greater than what’s listed in the store. Furthermore, while some quality and notable apps are still in the Mac App Store, many well-known apps are not there. The number of lousy apps is also extremely high every time I go to search or just look at the front page, to the point…

This is about allowing alternative payment systems for purchases made in-app.

Not necessarily alternative app stores / install mechanisms, which is a separate issue.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#322

Post by giyokun »

MDWolinski wrote: post #112
ToruiDev wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But at least for apple you already pay a 100$/year fee for them to distribute your apps.

I'm sure Apple will say that fee is to help pay for the development of the developer tools.

Because Apple doesn't need those tools internally to develop their OS and apps?

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#323

Post by tpae »

This is a bit hypocritical from the South Korean government. If you worked in IT in South Korea, you would know their payment systems are complete garbage. They won't let you integrate with anything else, and consumers have to use Internet Explorer with ActiveX to be able to make any purchases

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#324

Post by ezekg »

Reason077 wrote: post #321
makecheck wrote: post #316

The Mac App Store gives a hint at what would happen if there was any choice. The amount of software actually available for the Mac is far, far greater than what’s listed in the store. Furthermore, while some quality and notable apps are still in the Mac App Store, many well-known apps are not there. The number of lousy apps is also extremely high every time I go to search or just look at the front page, to the point…

This is about allowing alternative payment systems for purchases made in-app. Not necessarily alternative app stores / install mechanisms, which is a separate issue.

But they are tightly related. Russia just issued a similar warning concerning iOS app distribution.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#325

Post by makeitdouble »

DocTomoe wrote: post #308
Analemma_ wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple very pointedly does _not_ offer total customer management. As an iOS developer, I don’t know who my customers are; I can’t contact them; I can’t offer them a refund, demo, or promo code; I can’t have any kind of relationship with them whatsoever. It’s infuriatingly archaic and useless. Whatever that system is, it certainly isn’t “total customer management”.

That sounds like a problem, but as a customer, I see that as a feature. I do not want to be mailbombed by everyone who has ever written an app I used for some time in the past.

The other side of the coin is the app can’t refund from their side, nor stop your subscription or fire you as a client either. They need to wait for you to do it, which can brew complicated situations.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#326

Post by elisbce »

As an app developer, I'm shocked that people just don't get it.

The 30% cut of in-app purchase that Apple/Google collected is NOT a payment processing fee and has largely nothing to do with payment services. It is primarily a way to ensure the app developers pay a fair amount of "use tax" on using and benefiting from the entire ecosystem, including but not limited to reaching billions of users, covering the cost of developing and maintaining the ecosystem, tools and cloud services, etc.

It is really no different from paying income taxes to the IRS for being a US resident and enjoying all the benefits of living in the US. Whether it is fair to collect 30% tax is debatable, but the idea is the same, collect a simple tax since it is extremely hard to quantify all the obvious and non-obvious benefits that are provided by the ecosystem.

Since Apple/Google is not the IRS, they can't audit all your app's income sources. If your app gives users a way to pay via 3rd party payment services, you can effectively evade that tax. And that is already happening with some apps TODAY, some of which actually very big (e.g. some Chinese broadcasting apps). Do you think this is fair to Apple/Google?

So the issue here is not just about choices. If the government allows 3rd-party payment services to be used by the apps, they should at the same time provide a feasible solution to audit the app income and negotiate a fair amount of use tax to pay the ecosystem.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#327

Post by dmitryminkovsky »

Analemma_ wrote: post #246
dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I very much agree that this app stores market abuse thing needs to end, and I am also really glad to see that at least one country is responding like this. > a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. I want to point out, though, that the service Apple provides is not merely payment processing. They offer total customer management. Which, when integrated with their entire developer offering (Test…

Apple very pointedly does _not_ offer total customer management. As an iOS developer, I don’t know who my customers are; I can’t contact them; I can’t offer them a refund, demo, or promo code; I can’t have any kind of relationship with them whatsoever. It’s infuriatingly archaic and useless. Whatever that system is, it certainly isn’t “total customer management”.

This is true. I should have used the term “billing management.” The opaqueness you mention I like to think of as a firewall between the developer and the user in terms of billing. I can truly say to the user: “I’m sorry, but I can’t help you with that.” Many times that’s bad, many times that’s good, and not because I don’t want to deal with users but because I like when users have uniform, familiar experiences that they understand. The clearly divided responsibilities (developer provides software, Apple provides billing) helps maintain focus on product.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#328

Post by pessimizer »

justapassenger wrote: post #281
swiley wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about getting rid of App Stores altogether unless they follow an f-droid like model? (Selection of alternative repos, Published source, declaring potentially unwanted behavior etc.)

You want to explain to your grandma how to get the right repo so she can get WhatsApp?

If I'm happy right now with Apple/Google management, the way I would explain it to my grandmother is "don't change anything, just use the default" or "pick [Apple/Google] from the list."

Why does everyone pretend like this is hard?

-----

edit: The things I have a hard time explaining to my grandmother are when she asks "How do I turn this off?" or "Why did everything change and why can't you change it back?"

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#329

Post by ilikehurdles »

As a consumer, I’m pretty sad about this. I don’t miss the days of having to go through 5 different user flows to cancel 5 different subscriptions. With iTunes, all of my purchases and subscriptions are in once place. Losing that sucks.

Re: Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares

#330

Post by madeofpalk »

judge2020 wrote: post #257
ehsankia wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but the point is that developers should have the option of rolling out their own solution if they don't need all the features Apple provides or agree with the fee. This in turn creates competition which may reduce rates all around.

The common argument against that is that the 30% also goes to actually developing iOS - you could envision the margin Apple makes on every iPhone as one that goes towards the R&D costs of developing the hardware, while the post-sale revenue goes towards the post-sale costs of developing iOS (and all the updates they test/push out for 5+ years after the device is released).

This isn't a common argument, it's just Apple's argument.
Post reply on HN