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

341–350 of 665 posts

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

#341

Post by Mattified »

_benton wrote: post #180
ghusto wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is not forced into doing business in Europe, because there are a multitude of other anticompetitive tolerant regions (much larger than Europe mind you) they can do business in. If Apple prefers anticompetitive practices, it can simply only do business in those regions.

I'm curious what becomes the breaking point for them to pull out of a region. Obviously it's about profit but at what point (if any) does it make profitable sense for them to leave?

When there is no more profit and only loss, I reckon. Shareholders would not be happy if they pulled out of a region because they can only make $1 over $10. If that $1 is profit, they'll want it.

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

#342

Post by rTX5CMRXIfFG »

McDyver wrote: post #82
_benton wrote: post #55

This is probably a controversial opinion but I actually use my iPhone because it's locked down with a curated app marketplace and secure payment system. I don't want alternative payment methods or app stores. So I find it distasteful that other companies are seeking to control Apple's product design through the legal system. They're essentially trying to make it impossible to purchase a product I want, which is more…

It's not controversial, you can still have your walled garden as-is. The point of this is so that there is the possibility of escaping that walled garden, arguably welcoming more users into the ecosystem. Nothing would change for you. Just like android users can keep using all things Google, they have the possibility of installing apps from other sources.

Things would actually change—developers would instead choose to distribute via the alternate means instead of the App Store.

So, you see, it doesn’t matter whether Apple has the walled garden or the third-party devs have the walled garden. Either way, users will be forced to accept someone’s distribution policy. But the difference really lies in the trust on Apple and its security and privacy practices, which is a choice that will be robbed from people buying iPhones to use apps exactly for this purpose.

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

#343

Post by fc417fc802 »

callc wrote: post #254
andrewinardeer wrote: post #20

I'm not an Apple enthusiast—my rarely used iPad mini is my only Apple device—but let me play devil’s advocate. If a company invests billions in R&D to create hardware and its integrated software, shouldn’t it have the right to control who or what interacts with it? Why should I be forced to open up the carefully designed ecosystem I’ve built? If my pitch is premium, high-speed hardware and intuitive software so user-…

> Why should I be forced to open up the carefully designed ecosystem I’ve built? I think general purpose computing devices should be open. This is a moralistic argument, putting legal and business reasons to the side. Go ahead and lock down specific purpose computing devices, like ATMs, fridge, mouse firmware. The practice of setting up fiefdoms to become the landlord is an abhorrent practice.

> Go ahead and lock down specific purpose computing devices, like ATMs, fridge, mouse firmware.

There are at least a few grey areas of such a carve-out that I'd like to ask about, but I wonder if it's even necessary. What if there simply weren't any exceptions?

The ATM would still be locked down - the owner would possess the keys. Business as usual.

The fridge and mouse either wouldn't be locked down or the keys might be physically present somewhere on them. Probably either neutral or a win for the consumer depending on the specific circumstances.

Something like a fridge should either be running a proper OS (and thus fully under the control of the user) or else shouldn't be connected to the network in the first place. Unpatchable proprietary network connected black boxes expected to have a service life of well over a decade are a recipe for disaster after all.

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

#344

Post by yard2010 »

bitpush wrote: post #2

> We don’t question Apple’s right to act on behalf of authoritarians for the sake of profit, but Apple’s monopoly over iOS app distribution means it can enforce this perverse policy on all app developers, forcing them to also be complicit. Ouch. Those are some fighting words.

We are living in the wrong timeline.

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

#345

Post by fc417fc802 »

detaro wrote: post #337
sadeshmukh wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steam has a near total monopoly on PC gaming and has an equivalent cut.

You are not required to use Steam to buy games on any device (even on the Steam Deck it's trivial to install games from other sources). It has big market power because gamers actually like it and actively choose it over alternatives (often even those that come pre-installed with the platform, the Windows store and the XBox app). It does not prevent devs from selling their games on multiple stores. It's dominant posit…

Oh hey I wasn't aware of that lawsuit and (IMO) that's really good news. My only real concern with steam as a platform was the off-platform pricing clause.

I figured it was likely unenforceable if a studio simply released a "steam edition" or whatever artificial version differentiation, but at the same time they can always refuse to do business with you for any reason (or no reason even). So at that point the clause feels like them making a blatant threat.

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

#346

Post by thayne »

Nursie wrote: post #326
lenkite wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are free to pay ~30% extra for your preferred customer experience. The rest of us can leverage discounted pricing. Customer Choice for the win! Also, thinking that all businesses will lock one in using friction and timewasting is not a rational argument. There are a lot of honest businesses there forced to pay the Apple Mafia's tax.

> You are free to pay ~30% extra for your preferred customer experience. The rest of us can leverage discounted pricing. Customer Choice for the win! People say this stuff, but recently I re-examined my subscription to a multi-platform VPN service through the App store and found that they priced it cheaper than getting the same package through their website or through their windows client. No idea why.

I'm not sure if it is still the case after the EU cases, but it at least used to be that Apple prohibited you from charging more for paying through the app store. And that leads to increased prices for everyone, regardless of if you even own an iOS device.

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

#347

Post by myaccountonhn »

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #222
wavemode wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's specifically anticompetitive for Apple to force app developers to go through Apple Payments (with a 30% fee to Apple) for all purchases, otherwise their app is disallowed from being sold on the App store. There's no technological reason for app developers to be restricted from using other payment processors - it's purely a strategy for increased revenue for Apple. In antitrust terms, it is a form of Vend…

> There's no technological reason for app developers to be restricted from using other payment processors But there is a customer experience reason. As an iOS user, I very much appreciate that I can ask Apple to cancel some bullshit subscription that used to otherwise try to lock me in behind a labyrinth of added friction and timewasting. Not every problem is technological.

I think that is better solved with regulations, but I'm not from the US.

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

#348

Post by whstl »

_benton wrote: post #324
socalgal2 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has absolutely zero to do with your choice to purchase a different device. It has everything to do with hundreds of thousands of companies' right to do business with customers without Apple in the middle.

What right does a company have to piggyback off of another company? Like think about this logically? Should a grocery store be forced to sell my products without receiving any of the profit? Can I force a cafe to let me serve customers on their premises without giving anything in return?

> What right does a company have to piggyback off of another company?

Apple has no right to piggybacking off of another company's business. Therefore the 30% must go.

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

#349

Post by piperswe »

lenkite wrote: post #264
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's no technological reason for app developers to be restricted from using other payment processors But there is a customer experience reason. As an iOS user, I very much appreciate that I can ask Apple to cancel some bullshit subscription that used to otherwise try to lock me in behind a labyrinth of added friction and timewasting. Not every problem is technological.

You are free to pay ~30% extra for your preferred customer experience. The rest of us can leverage discounted pricing. Customer Choice for the win! Also, thinking that all businesses will lock one in using friction and timewasting is not a rational argument. There are a lot of honest businesses there forced to pay the Apple Mafia's tax.

If businesses don't have to offer the more consumer friendly option, they won't offer it.

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

#350

Post by amelius »

_benton wrote: post #45
amelius wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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,…

> 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. But this is already the case. You own the device, you can do whatever you want with it (legally ofc). If I buy a fridge without a freezer, the fact that I can't freeze food with it doesn't mean I don't own the fridge. Furth…

If you pay for a product and it is tied to a vendor, then you should be able to completely break all ties with that vendor and switch to a different service provider, and still be able to use the product as advertised.

Otherwise you don't own the product.

This basic premise doesn't hold for Apple products.

And by the way, I think consumer rights are more important than rights of companies to do whatever they want.

Post reply on HN