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

481–490 of 627 posts

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

#481

Post by CydeWeys »

wins32767 wrote: post #429
wolpoli wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not necessary to break Apple up to implement a policy that requires Apple to apply the same process to their own apps. It works in theory, but when the application team and review team both report to the same CEO, the review team will be pressured to bend the review policy.

And if it's have the policy or be broken up the CEO will be pressured to not let them bend it...

The stick only works if you actually get the stick if it's merited, though. So it could easily end up actually being broken up under your proposal.

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

#482

Post by ClumsyPilot »

kryptozinc wrote: post #475
grishka wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. This would entrench their monopolies even further. It should be legally required that any device that is marketed as a general-purpose computer, whether pocketable or not, and is shipped in a locked state, is fully unlockable by the end user. Without a single network packet sent to manufacturer's servers. That's the only way we as a society could fix this dire situation. In other words, if I buy a phone from Appl…

Sure, though they may chose to wipe iOS from your device if you unlock it. Then you are free to build your own os and execute root level code if you wish.

Okay, so you want to live in a world where you buy a car and the manufacturer will wipe the engine firmware or lock the vehicle if you change oil without their permission? Thats already happening to farming equipment.

You will love in a world where you own nothing, and have less control over your life than a medieval surf - all devices are becoming 'smart', frok door locks to toasters

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

#483

Post by mattl »

bostik wrote: post #436
mikehearn wrote: post #404

I have a question about monopolies and market abuses. Apple released their phone in 2007, the App Store in 2008, and in-app payments in 2009. During that time their marketshare was fairly small, and it didn't start to really grow until they expanded availability to the Verizon network in 2011. Right at launch of the App Store, Apple announced its sales commission would be 30%. Then they extended that same fee to in-a…

30% was highway robbery from the start. Pure and simple. It was merely a less awful deal than most other indie commission models, with sites like Kongregate and their ilk demanding >80%. Against that kind of flaying and skinning, 30% was an improvement! I've said it before. A very good agent, who actually works for their client and arranges them with repeat lucrative contracts, gets 15%. App stores, as gatekeepers to…

30% was the iTunes deal for apps. On iTunes songs were all 99 cents and Apple got 30 cents.

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

#484

Post by smoldesu »

kobalsky wrote: post #374
swiley wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t want my grandma using WhatsApp. The corporation that owns it behaves pathologically as a matter of policy and I have no idea what they’d try to do to her. So yes. That’s a perfect example of how this would be an improvement.

preventing your grandma from using whatsapp through technological friction must be one of the worst ways to handle it. this extremely selfish, I've seen whatsapp let old people enjoy internet like we did as kids. if you want to be a responsible member of the tech community at least take the time to educate your own grandma.

Conversely, eliminating the friction required for Grandma to unwittingly hand over her personal information isn't exactly an altruistic response. It's a lose-lose situation, you may as well just support the more open platform if they're both bunk anyways.

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

#485

Post by kernoble »

sam0x17 wrote: post #415
BeefySwain wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The morally correct thing is always the better thing for shareholders in the long-run Are you asserting that this is the case in reality, or that we should strive for a society and economic system in which this would be true?

Both. I think that when corporations do exploitative things, they are being short-sighted, and will eventually suffer in the long run. And really what I would advocate for is stricter regulations so we don't have to rely on the good will of corporations in general. Their track record is terrible.

The thing is this "long run" is a hypothetical for investors and their finite lifetimes and finite windows of return.

Companies aren't accountable to some infinitely long running algorithm or timeless dynasty of shareholders, they are accountable to living breathing greedy humans who want to make a buck NOW, not when they are dead or for their heirs.

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

#486

Post by grapist420 »

simonh wrote: post #444
bostik wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30% was highway robbery from the start. Pure and simple. It was merely a less awful deal than most other indie commission models, with sites like Kongregate and their ilk demanding >80%. Against that kind of flaying and skinning, 30% was an improvement! I've said it before. A very good agent, who actually works for their client and arranges them with repeat lucrative contracts, gets 15%. App stores, as gatekeepers to…

>30% was highway robbery from the start. That was not at all obvious to anyone in 2008. It's a pretty typical margin from the console industry, which was the main point of reference at the time. Apple spent several billion building the App Store infrastructure, the SDK and setting up the review and payments system and it took years for App Store revenue to catch up with the sunk investment and expenses. Also practica…

nooo aha don’t take away our profit margins haha it was an accident we promise haha

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

#487

Post by megablast »

webmobdev wrote: post #420
realusername wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe that's just a proof that there's not much value created by the app store if they can't convince developers to use it if they had a choice.

Exactly - I've always pointed out that developers for the Apple's ecosystem are being dumbasses. Why would you willingly pay Apple money annually (and then a percentage of your profit too) to develop on their platform when you actually add value to it !? Platforms struggle and / or fail to be successful in the market when developers don't support them. (You just have to look at MS Windows Mobile, Samsung's Tizen OS,…

Monthly fee??

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

#488

Post by judge2020 »

mattl wrote: post #483
bostik wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30% was highway robbery from the start. Pure and simple. It was merely a less awful deal than most other indie commission models, with sites like Kongregate and their ilk demanding >80%. Against that kind of flaying and skinning, 30% was an improvement! I've said it before. A very good agent, who actually works for their client and arranges them with repeat lucrative contracts, gets 15%. App stores, as gatekeepers to…

30% was the iTunes deal for apps. On iTunes songs were all 99 cents and Apple got 30 cents.

Songs were $1.29 for a long time as well. $0.99 songs seemed to be mostly for radio edits and similar.

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

#489

Post by megablast »

bostik wrote: post #436
mikehearn wrote: post #404

I have a question about monopolies and market abuses. Apple released their phone in 2007, the App Store in 2008, and in-app payments in 2009. During that time their marketshare was fairly small, and it didn't start to really grow until they expanded availability to the Verizon network in 2011. Right at launch of the App Store, Apple announced its sales commission would be 30%. Then they extended that same fee to in-a…

30% was highway robbery from the start. Pure and simple. It was merely a less awful deal than most other indie commission models, with sites like Kongregate and their ilk demanding >80%. Against that kind of flaying and skinning, 30% was an improvement! I've said it before. A very good agent, who actually works for their client and arranges them with repeat lucrative contracts, gets 15%. App stores, as gatekeepers to…

> 30% was highway robbery from the start. Pure and simple.

Except it wasn't. Try getting an app published before the app store. It was 70% if you were lucky enough to find someone to publish it.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

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

#490

Post by judge2020 »

kbenson wrote: post #476
simonh wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all, there was nothing inevitable about Apple's success, many analysts, pundits and their competitors have been adamant Apple would fail for the first decade or so of the iPhone. After that these claims started looking a bit thin. You're presuming that market abuse has occurred and that market abuse is the only way to get popular, but I don't see that's a given. Maybe people simply genuinely like iPhones just…

They've expressed anti-competitive behavior from the beginning, but it's advanced over time. It's the confluence of factors that makes it particularly bad in Apple's case. You can't chance the software (OS) on the device. You can't run iOS on a different set of hardware. You can't run any store but the App Store on iOS. You can't deliver software to customers without using the App Store (or jumping through hoops for…

> They've expressed anti-competitive behavior from the beginning, but it's advanced over time.

But is anticompetitive behavior in itself illegal? If so, why is it only being investigated now, 10+ years later?

Post reply on HN