Apple and Google must allow other in-app payment systems, Korean law declares • Hacker News Board

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

#331

Post by the_solenoid » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:49 PM UTC

All of these policies coming about are for the benefit of already monied interests and do not help small devs, or consumers.

I also take huge umbrage that the framing of this is just as horrible as the framing of paying taxes in the US.

People think, wrongly, that they make $100k, and have to pay 35% of that to the gov.

Wrong. You always only made $65k. There are studies that show wages have always tracked with taxes (up to a point).

Think of it this way - if your taxes went up to 75%, would you still work for 100k? No. Your take home would track in a few years (or sooner) to bring you back up to taking home 65k.

---

So I am nexflix, I charge 9.99 and pay whatever entity processes my payments like 1-2% if even. There is some other costs to this - infrastructure and employees, probably a bunch more.

Apple comes in and says "we build, and maintain a platform, that costs us x amount to maintain, and we sell 100's of millions of devices that utilize this platform, and provide fairly long-term support for those devices. We want you, if you want access to this platform, to pay y% of revenue derived from using this platform. We will call this the apple tax.

Is this fair? If you think taxes are theft, you probably think, "no". But you are wrong. Taxes are the % of your "output" used to keep the commons going. You know roads, bridges, laws, money, military, water, clean air, safe food, yadda yadda.

So the apple tax might be high, but it's mostly irrelevant. As a small dev, you would never have the reach you can have with the app store anywhere else. As a big dev, you look at where you can generate more revenue and think "fuck apple, let's start making legislation so I can use their platform but make more money without paying into it."

These "solutions" are just monied interests wanting more profit. This should only be handled in a way that suits the interest of consumers but they are not at the table.

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

#332

Post by dmitryminkovsky » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:49 PM UTC

horsawlarway wrote: post #300

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”.

It's pretty clearly "Total customer control" not management. Apple has pulled off a really nifty trick of convincing (cough abusively forcing ... cough) companies to concede full control of the customer/business relationship to Apple. From my point of view, you're not really selling anything on the Apple App store - you're giving Apple the right to resell your digital products. In exchange they keep all analytics dat…

> From my point of view, you're not really selling anything on the Apple App store - you're giving Apple the right to resell your digital products.

In my understanding that that’s the contractual relationship the developer and user enter into with Apple.

Personally I think this isn’t all bad considering it provides a uniform experience for the user, which lowers cognitive load for the user and might makes the user more willing to purchase. Once they know what app purchasing is like, they can confidently purchase more apps. And they know that no matter who develops an app, in the event of a dispute they will deal directly with Apple.

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

#333

Post by squeaky-clean » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

noptd wrote: post #290

justapassenger wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Having to forward a link to family members every so often seems well worth it to me.

You either overestimate your family's tech literacy, or you have a household of people working in tech if you think it's as simple as reading a link for the average consumer.

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

#334

Post by spywaregorilla » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

cletus wrote: post #209

Good. I've been saying this awhile, most notably when Apple (of course followed by Google) introduced a discount on commission for smaller developers. This is completely backwards. I know why they did it. They wanted some positive PR that didn't cost them anything. Thing is, it's the larger publishers who are going to lobby regulators and challenge things in court. It's those same publishers who already have their ow…

> Game theory will tell you that there is essentially no downside to (3). Worst case you will be back on the app store at 30% or will leave.

Worst case is you want to be on the app store at 30% but are not allowed back in.

> I stand by my position that end users don't actually want competing third-party app stores

I disagree. More stores bring more competition. Both in terms of platform costs and in terms of promos for customer acquisition.

The epic game store is kind of crap, but their weekly free game setup has offered some great content. I haven't given them a single dollar and I've gotten a number of titles including Control, Enter the Gungeon, Alien Isolation, etc.

I say let them fight

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

#335

Post by throwawaysea » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

This needs to be taken much further, to allow alternate app stores, as well as direct installation of apps. People must be allowed control and ownership of their hardware.

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

#336

Post by leshenka » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

ilikehurdles wrote: post #329

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.

I don't think you'll lose this. It will be like "sign in with aplle" — you will be able to use different purchase algorithms, or apple pay.

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

#337

Post by pessimizer » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

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).

It's weird using the argument that it's a shell game as a positive argument. "It's not a money grab, it's just a hidden fee!"

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

#338

Post by eropple » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

jclardy wrote: post #227

cletus wrote: post #209

Good. I've been saying this awhile, most notably when Apple (of course followed by Google) introduced a discount on commission for smaller developers. This is completely backwards. I know why they did it. They wanted some positive PR that didn't cost them anything. Thing is, it's the larger publishers who are going to lobby regulators and challenge things in court. It's those same publishers who already have their ow…

That's exactly it, so many users are afraid that this will mean every random app you download will have a credit card entry field. Nope. Those random apps will still benefit from the simplicity of the system IAP, one tap, auth, done. The ones asking for a credit card will drop in ratings and search results. The big players are the ones that will switch, amazon, Netflix, Spotify, Hulu, etc. And beyond that, competitor…

It's more than just one-time IAP, though. I'm generally "whatever" on what payment processor people use, but one of the things that does concern me is subscription management. To me there is a lot of value to having a central place where all my subscriptions are and where they can be canceled easily, even if I don't have the app installed anymore.

YOLOing something with Stripe doesn't give me that without a bunch of fundamentally opt-in stuff on the part of the developer, and that's pretty concerning. If the platforms can (and do) solve this, then I feel a lot better about it.

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

#339

Post by dmitryminkovsky » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:57 PM UTC

madeofpalk wrote: post #330

judge2020 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Nothing like a business exposing its alleged cost structure to try and justify passing on costs. It’s the worst argument. It’s not even an argument. It induces me to somehow be part of their business, when I’m not an employee, board member or even a shareholder. It’s TMI.

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

#340

Post by commoner » Tue, Aug 31, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

snarf21 wrote: post #128

vbezhenar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of alternative app stores for Android. Google restricts them, but not severely. Android 12 will lift some important restrictions from alternative app stores. I'm not trying to portrait Google as innocent, there's still work to be done. But they are absolutely in different leagues with Apple when it comes to user freedom.

While true, they wouldn't be so generous if they were making it on the backend via search. They don't care that much what store the user uses as long as they search on Google. Do they offer any "user freedom" there?

Google does make more money from other revenue sources, but I don't think this is the best example. Chrome (on all platforms) allows the user to set any custom search engine as the default. On the other hand, Safari limits users to four choices: Google, Yahoo, Bing, and DuckDuckGo.