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

Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 289 posts

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#41

Post by saagarjha »

misnome wrote: post #18
capableweb wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple CEO Tim Cook defended the company’s App Store commission structure in his sworn testimony before the House Antitrust Subcommittee on Wednesday. > “We treat every developer the same. We have open and transparent rules,” Cook said, in his testimony. “It’s a rigorous process, because we care so deeply about privacy and security and quality. We do look at every app before it goes on,” he added. Slightly different…

You seem to have missed out the crucial piece on context from that source, in that it's talking explicitly about app review and not IAP commission.

Which also has special-case rules (or lack of enforcement thereof…)

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#42

Post by qwytw »

hh3k0 wrote: post #24
apendleton wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lying to Congress is a crime (distinct from perjury), but it's unusual for anyone to be tried for/convicted of it though. Michael Cohen, Trump's lawyer, is a (rare) recent example.

Cook was under oath, no? So as per my understanding, it is perjury on top of lying to congress. I am, however, not a lawyer.

Also you didn't read what Cook actually said in the preceding and following sentences.

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#43

Post by passivate »

vkou wrote: post #19
djyaz1200 wrote: post #12

Tech companies that reach monopoly scale (like Apple, Facebook, Amazon) should have to disclose all their agreements and honor a "Most Favored Nation" clause giving all companies the same pricing and access as the best negotiated agreement with any one company. This is the most reasonable way I can think of without breaking them up to prevent them picking winners and losers as new opportunities emerge. If you have a…

Sure, but why limit this to tech companies? Let's also apply this to banks, landlords, governments, grocery chains, and employers in general. Why should I not get the best wages, negotiated employment agreement, interest rates, lease terms, and deal with the IRS on taxes that I really don't want to pay as my most successful peer? Banks bend over backwards for their VIP customers, why shouldn't they do the same for me…

"but why limit.. " assumes we do things in an absolute manner. But we don't. All rules and regulations are arbitrary to an extent. We have different rules depending on the situation, the entity, etc. We get to pick and choose the rules that we think will benefit society the most.

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#44

Post by kristjansson »

Borrow a million dollars from the bank, you have a problem. Borrow a billion dollars from the bank, you and the bank have a problem.

Why should it be a surprise that a partner in a stronger negotiating position negotiates a better deal than is offered at the door?

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#45

Post by monocasa »

misnome wrote: post #18
capableweb wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple CEO Tim Cook defended the company’s App Store commission structure in his sworn testimony before the House Antitrust Subcommittee on Wednesday. > “We treat every developer the same. We have open and transparent rules,” Cook said, in his testimony. “It’s a rigorous process, because we care so deeply about privacy and security and quality. We do look at every app before it goes on,” he added. Slightly different…

You seem to have missed out the crucial piece on context from that source, in that it's talking explicitly about app review and not IAP commission.

Isn't complying with IAP rules part of app review?

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#46

Post by [deleted] »

trowapplea12132 wrote: post #36
djyaz1200 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having this requirement when dealing with tech monopolies is uniquely helpful because in some cases there is no alternative. We can always rent, shop or bank other places. I'd argue where there isn't a thriving marketplace of choice monopolies should have to have the same rules with all their partners.

You can always use other software as well. The only reason HN believe Apple to be a monopoly is because the product they purchased does what it was advertised to do - security through chain of trust via an good-but-imperfect organization. It's only a legal monopoly if the courts say so, and the judge in Epic v Apple defined the market in a way that actually made sense - they aren't a monopoly on mobile game purchases…

[deleted]

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#47

Post by tshaddox »

monocasa wrote: post #45
misnome wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have missed out the crucial piece on context from that source, in that it's talking explicitly about app review and not IAP commission.

Isn't complying with IAP rules part of app review?

The amount of commission that Apple receives from an IAP isn't something that's in the code for an app. It's not something that could be part of the app review process. It's an arrangement between Apple and the developer.

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#48

Post by djyaz1200 »

trowapplea12132 wrote: post #36
djyaz1200 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having this requirement when dealing with tech monopolies is uniquely helpful because in some cases there is no alternative. We can always rent, shop or bank other places. I'd argue where there isn't a thriving marketplace of choice monopolies should have to have the same rules with all their partners.

You can always use other software as well. The only reason HN believe Apple to be a monopoly is because the product they purchased does what it was advertised to do - security through chain of trust via an good-but-imperfect organization. It's only a legal monopoly if the courts say so, and the judge in Epic v Apple defined the market in a way that actually made sense - they aren't a monopoly on mobile game purchases…

Apple as of years ago was capturing over 90% of all the margin in smartphones (https://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/23/apple-captures-record-91-per...). I'd argue that represents a monopoly in paid smartphones. Our option as users is either buy a phone from Apple or accept what is essentially a free service from Google (you have to buy the hardware)... who are giving that away to solidify their search monopoly. This to me doesn't represent a thriving marketplace of user choice.

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#49

Post by shkkmo »

arthurofbabylon wrote: post #32

Of note, it appears that Netflix’s gripe wasn’t so much about the 70/30 split as colloquially observed, but that Apple’s IAP saw more “voluntary churn” than Netflix’s direct purchase. Am I reading that right? Would this churn discrepancy apply to other services besides Netflix (like developer tools, access to smaller content libraries, etc)? Finally, what did Apple do to address their “voluntary churn” problem?

There were a number of issues. My understanding is that Netflix was not paying 30% but rather was paying 15% due to their special agreement with Apple. According to the emails, it was Apple's refusal to go below 15% that triggered Netflix to begin testing not allowing payment via IAP. The "voluntary churn", "promotion coordination" and "revenue sharing" offers are from Apple trying to sweeten the pot to keep Netlfix from dumping IAP completely.

Re: Apple execs describe a “unique arrangement” with Netflix (2018)

#50

Post by throwaway78981 »

echelon wrote: post #2

Steve Jobs and Tim Cook are the iPhone Al Capone. There's no technical reason software needs to be distributed this way. It's only greed. I hope this mounting evidence leads to a single verdict from the DOJ: "no more app stores" for common computing devices. (Please don't rehash the video game console argument.)

From February this year - Apple App store is home to multi-million dollar scams. The method the guy used to find this is so childish it's a wonder how Apple could have missed. Also Apple employs some dark patterns if you wanna report scams.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/8/22272849/apple-app-store-s...

Post reply on HN