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

Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 593 posts

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#381

Post by valparaiso »

xdennis wrote: post #338
qeternity wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They draw a line between digital and physical purchases.

You've explained how those two are different, but not why Apple is entitled to money from digital goods but not physical ones.

Because that’s their business model which was stated by judge in Epic vs Apple case. Such types of business are legal for decades. You can’t change that for Apple by not damaging everyone else. Like Epic sells nearly same Fortnite skins for kids making millions and not allowing any independent designers to sell them in Fortnite skin market.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#382

Post by immackay »

manigandham wrote: post #339
dwaite wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation needed? (For Playstation, XBox)

Physical disks.

The only point I seem to see from you throughout this post is that you can use physical disks on playstation/xbox, but even that is dependent on having a playstation/xbox with a disk drive. Additionally, Sony/Microsoft still receive a cut from those sales.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#383

Post by dwaite »

earthnail wrote: post #175
filoleg wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Well for that comparison to work, we'd also have to assume Microsoft disabled installing unsigned software as well. Look no further than Xbox Store and how well you can run unsigned code on it. Sure, you can buy a physical game copy, but there are two issues with that: 1. Diskless versions of consoles are becoming more commonplace, thus removing that option. 2. If you buy retail, it is still a cut to Microsoft, just…

Gaming console hardware is heavily subsidized by those cuts. Apple hardware, in contrast, is sold with profit.

While this is true - with the caveat that the goal for console manufacturers _is_ to make a profit as they optimize and ramp up production - people generally leave out the part where they make a compelling argument based on this situation.

For instance, the primary complaint Epic has is not that Apple gives preferential treatment and deals to some companies - it is that they WOULDN'T give one to Epic. https://www.imore.com/epic-games-would-have-accepted-special...

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#384

Post by manigandham »

immackay wrote: post #382
manigandham wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physical disks.

The only point I seem to see from you throughout this post is that you can use physical disks on playstation/xbox, but even that is dependent on having a playstation/xbox with a disk drive. Additionally, Sony/Microsoft still receive a cut from those sales.

The point is there is still an alternative. It's not quite the same as they act as publishers and distribution partners in gaming vs mobile devices. There should absolutely be more access to stores there too though, with Steam and Epic on Xbox or Playstation.

Why is this so controversial for you?

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#385

Post by heavyset_go »

prepend wrote: post #359
Daishiman wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being pedantic. It's the second of only two alternatives; it counts as monopoly power here and everywhere.

It’s vastly smaller though so doesn’t have the market power that a monopoly would have. When there’s a market with only two players where #1 has 75% of the market and #2 has 24%, describing #2 as being part of a monopoly is inaccurate. That’s like saying that Apple had a monopoly with Microsoft in the 90s because between the two of them they had the whole market.

> When there’s a market with only two players where #1 has 75% of the market and #2 has 24%, describing #2 as being part of a monopoly is inaccurate.

It's very strange that you think worldwide market share has anything to do with market share in the US when it comes to antitrust laws in the US.

iOS has 60% of the market in the US[1], with Android taking the remainder. Apple and Google form an effective duopoly in the mobile OS, app distribution and app payment markets. They both form a mobile app distribution cartel that engages in price-fixing[2].

Again, your colloquial definition of monopoly doesn't matter when it comes to antitrust laws in the US. Please read this[3].

[1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/ios-more-popular-in-japan-and-us-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_fixing

[3] https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#386

Post by stale2002 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #376
stale2002 wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s work they don’t want to do Well when you are engaging in illegally anti-competitive behavior, you have to take some actions to correct that. But also, I am sure that other companies would even be willing to put in the effort to jailbreak the phone, in some combined effort, if they knew that Apple wouldn't try to engage in illegal anti-competitive practices to stop it. Apple can't just break the law like this…

Have they been found to be breaking the law? Also if they are, are these good laws anyway?

Congratulations on having now made a falsifiable prediction!

I will absolutely make sure to save this comment, and come back to you in a couple months.

I think that at least some, of Apple's decisions are illegally anti-competitive, and that the judge in the epic vs apple case, will at least partially rule against Apple, on some fronts.

And your position, is that you think that nothing at all that Apple is doing is illegal, and that no judge will rule against them, on anything at all.

We'll see who was right, in a couple months, and I can show you this comment then!

But in my opinion, that is a very strong statement that you seem to be making, where you think that absolutely nothing about Apple's practices are illegally anti-competitive.

We'll see if you are right! I think that the judge will rule, at least partially against Apple, on at least some counts, (although probably not on every single count).

> if they are, are these good laws anyway?

Anti-trust law? Yes, it has been around for decades, and is pretty uncontroversial. I don't think that most people support the Standard Oil railroad monopoly, for example.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#387

Post by wernercd »

immackay wrote: post #331
manigandham wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are alternate ways to get software on those platforms. There isn’t on Apple mobile devices.

There is indeed alternative ways to get software on Apple mobile devices. Why is this such a common belief? Edit: your point seems to be revolving around the access to physical disks for playstation/xbox, which is 1. Limited to devices that have a disk drive, 2. Limited to software that would similarly be sold on the sony/xbox stores, and 3. Still gives sony/microsoft a cut of the sale. Edit 2: No, I'm not talking ab…

The "alternative way" is to install web apps... which is tied to webkit... which is a neutered browser technology that's purposely hamstrung as to not interfere with the app store.

Using the web apps as a defense only shows that you won't admit to the massive problems with it - from bluetooth restrictions to lack of hardware level driver support.

That isn't a realistic option... it's a deflection from the subpar user experience Apple supports to enforce their mafia level protection racket.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/6/22421912/iphone-web-app-pw...

Anyone who pushes Web Apps as a viable option is being disingenuous about what it provides or purposely ignorant.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#388

Post by tpmoney »

manigandham wrote: post #363
tpmoney wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like the same question anyone who's happy with the way Apple runs things could ask those that want the government to step in and change it? Why not just go use Android, where things are exactly how you want them to be? Why limit everyone else rather than make a choice for yourself?

Because nobody is limited by having more choice. It's quite literally the opposite situation.

So how does Apple limit anyone by offering their choice? Anyone who wants a phone environment where you can install any app and app store you want merely needs to buy and Android phone instead of an iPhone. And anyone who wants a phone environment where developers are far more restricted and are required to behave in certain ways can buy an iPhone instead of an Android. Seems to me everyone wins.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#389

Post by _jal »

mkishi wrote: post #273
amelius wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably the argument is that they (1) host the software in the cloud which costs them money, and (2) they review software for e.g. security issues which costs them money. Anyway, the EU is coming for them: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/euro... > The Digital Markets Act (DMA) establishes a set of narrowly defined objective criteria for qualifying a large online platform as a so-called “gatek…

It does cost them money, but I can't wrap my mind on why that's not subsidized by the rest of the Apple machine. Didn't customers pay a premium for Apple hardware because of the unified ecosystem and superior security to begin with? And developers also pay a premium to be on the App Store ($99+30%) because it costs them money to create the infrastructure and ensure safety? I'm pretty ignorant on the whole situation,…

> Didn't customers pay a premium for Apple hardware because of the unified ecosystem and superior security to begin with

Not defending Apple, but offering forever-services for one-time fees is a great way to go out of business. I would not expect the App Store to be subsidized by hardware sales.

Also, assuming you accept the premise in the first place, it makes sense to charge the developer, who is the one generating work for reviewers.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#390

Post by valparaiso »

That’s just ridiculous. Person wants to make money on Apple install user base which they were growing for years by investing billions and doesn’t want to pay fee for possibility to make business on platform in which they didn’t invest a penny.
Post reply on HN