Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair • Hacker News Board

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#491

Post by sinnoh » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:51 PM UTC

madeofpalk wrote: post #331

coldacid wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that if I don't like one store, I can always go to another. That's the case with Android, and at least to an extent with Windows (even store apps can be distributed and installed by package if you don't want to use their store, plus classic Windows apps are still a thing). With iOS, it's Apple's way or no way at all. There's no competition.

You 100% can go to another one - go to Android.

that's like saying it's impossible to have a monopoly in a country because you can just move countries.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#492

Post by berbec » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:52 PM UTC

Hamuko wrote: post #86

darklion wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which raises the question: to what degree does a platform owner have a responsibility to support the businesses of others? Rephrased, Spotify seems to think it has a /right/ to run its software on Apple platforms in an identical fashion to Apple's first-party software. Does that mean Apple has an obligation to provide an equivalent technical capacity for literally any software that runs on its devices? An app store?…

You can also ask if Netflix has a /right/ to send their videos to consumers using Comcast's network. Or if Bing has a /right/ to be accessible on Google Chrome.

Thanks to recent FCC rule changes, the answer in the USA is: "For Now...."

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#493

Post by mithr » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:53 PM UTC

gumby wrote: post #317

mcrae wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the article, it mentions several times that Apple has rejected apps for linking to the web page to upgrade, or for even mentioning it is possible to upgrade (when IAP is not enabled).

The article says so but I just tried to watch a video on iOS amazon video and it tells me to “Buy through the Amazon website or on your TV”. So I’m sure Spotify could say the same.

I believe it's about the type of product you're paying for -- the Spotify site specifically says Apple doesn't allow _content subscription_ services to be advertised through apps. In addition, I bet Prime gets away with it because it's not _purely_ a content subscription service.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#494

Post by iwasakabukiman » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:53 PM UTC

fxfan wrote: post #150

iwasakabukiman wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Vendors should be prevented from shipping an App Store with their OS. So then how would a novice user get apps the first time they boot up their phone? They would have to know where to get apps from. That seems like an easy way for users to end up downloading a bunch of malware because they think it's the official Apple or Google app store when it's just a random website. Having a built in app store has huge advant…

EU style choice (which cost MS 700M)- Show list of available app stores

I feel like that would solve the problem that GP was referencing but just create a whole bunch of other issues for users and developers.

"Find Spotify on [list of ten app stores here]." One of the advantages for users and developers is that if you want an app on iOS (and for the most part) Android, you know exactly where to find it.

It's by no means a dealbreaker, but something to consider.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#495

Post by Angostura » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:54 PM UTC

sinnoh wrote: post #482

Angostura wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At that time Microsoft completely dominated desktop operating systems to the extent that it was an effective monopoly. It them attempted to leverage that position to try and squash other browser makers. I agree that Apple is trying to squash Spotify, but I don't believe it doesn't have an effective monopoly on mobile phones.

no one is arguing it has a monopoly on mobile phones, the argument is and has always been that they have a monopoly on the ios software ecosystem they've built.

Yes, but from an anti-trust perspective, 'a monopoly on this thing I built' isn't an issue - arguably every company has a monopoly on that. It becomes an issue if 'this thing I built' captures an overwhelming economic sector, to the extent that consumers have no choice.

Currently consumers do have a choice - and more chose Android than Apple.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#496

Post by dclusin » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:55 PM UTC

Given the increasing importance of smart phones in our lives it seems like we would benefit by having a modern day equivalent of the Carterfone decision[1] for smartphones.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carterfone

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#497

Post by intellix » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:55 PM UTC

georgespencer wrote: post #44

Can someone help me stop playing the world's smallest violin here? Spotify knowingly built a low margin business living in the pocket of the labels (who force Spotify towards razor thin margins) and Apple/Google (who have, since before Spotify launched, operated app stores for their platforms which are to some extent curated and which are not free market economies). Spotify feels aggrieved that Apple does not allow i…

As an avid user of Spotify well before I switched from Android to iPhone. It annoys me to no extent how everything used to work over there like it was first party.

On iOS unless everything else is only partiality supported. iTunes in comparison to Spotify was a joke when it was first released and they're shoving it down our throats constantly.

Never really used Siri until I bought a pair of AirPods. How am I not able to tell it to play music via Spotify?

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#498

Post by writepub » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:56 PM UTC

joshstrange wrote: post #476

writepub wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The complaint is that Apple is withholding certain APIs from public access, though nothing technical prevents it from doing so, other than anti-trust issues. There is certainly truth to that! When Apple is both an app publisher, and API publisher, these anti trust issues are bound to pop up

> The complaint is that Apple is withholding certain APIs from public access, though nothing technical prevents it from doing so And once Spotify proves that then maybe we can have a discussion. There is no data to support that claim. I can think of a number of reasons why they weren't ready to provide audio API's like battery reasons. Also Apple has released audio API's both before Apple Music (iPhone) and after (Wa…

I don't think this goes to trial, but it's trivial to prove unfair API advantages to the manufacturer. Either provide the same API to others, or concede to anti-competitive charges.

NO ONE is willing to give Apple the benefit of doubt, after they have unilaterally, retroactively mucked with app store rules to kill competition. The most egrageous case was with Steam, whose game streaming app was found to be non compliant after apple retroactively applied change of policy.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#499

Post by bilbo0s » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:57 PM UTC

nikofeyn wrote: post #474

jonhohle wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They bundled _while_ having a monopoly. They could have bundled or they could have had a monopoly, but doing both is where it crosses the anti-trust line since your customers are effectively captive. What does Apple have a monopoly on? What does Amazon have a monopoly on? Google arguably has a monopoly on search which could put them in an unfavorable position should an antitrust case be brought against them (maybe wh…

> What does Apple have a monopoly on? i feel this is dangerous thinking. maybe apple doesn't have a monopoly on a particular market in terms of market share, but their influence on businesses, markets, policies, etc. is massive and is basically indistinguishable from a market monopoly. with their amount of money and position in the market, they have near limitless influence on other companies and ways of abusing this…

>but their influence on businesses, markets, policies, etc. is massive and is basically indistinguishable from a market monopoly...

That won't hold up well in a court of law. That's the problem, we need to change the law. Because the law as it is currently written, just doesn't see something like Apple as anything close to a monopoly.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#500

Post by ppeetteerr » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:57 PM UTC

coldacid wrote: post #365

ppeetteerr wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then use an Android device. No one is holding you down

As a developer, tell that to the users. Speaking of which, even just developing for iOS is a painful chore compared to Android. Unfortunately when the client and the users want iPhones, folks like us have to develop for them. In this world, it's fuck or walk.

As a developer, you should be listening to your users, not telling them what to use.

Also, iOS is a treat to build on. Not sure what your source on that is, but they don't have the device and OS fragmentation of Android, to say the least.