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

Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 174 posts

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#51

Post by hayst4ck »

tibbydudeza wrote: post #48

A simple solution to the problem - force Google/Apple to implement API's to allow the loading/code signing verification of applications on their respective platforms. On the PC we have GOG/Steam/EA/Windows Store etc ... why can't mobile device be the same ???.

Lets say we have an app ecosystem where you can OK third party apps, and one where that's not possible. Let's say people voted with their dollars that the one where it's not possible is a better ecosystem.

Should the one with the closed ecosystem be forced open, especially if the company says that the ecosystem being closed is one of the primary factors in their success and why people prefer it?

Apple dictated to companies that they will implement privacy labels. If the ecosystem was open, they could not do that. The big companies could make people jump through hoops to avoid it or put a lot of support into a competitive app platform if iphones were an open platform.

I am very in favor of privacy labels, and I think it is a direct result of the closed ecosystem and apples opinionated stance. I think it is a key competitive advantage for apple that the app store remain closed so it can dictate to companies that privacy labels are now a requirement, or HTTPS is a requirement, or anything else.

When people say force apple to allow third party app stores, I hear "why do we need Dropbox when there is rsync?" Just because you know that an app is violating your privacy doesn't mean parents do, they can't meaningfully compare and contrast app stores. I hear people not understanding that an app store is a commons in the tragedy of the commons sense, and all commons need a regulator to not turn to garbage.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#52

Post by asiachick »

hayst4ck wrote: post #40

I really like the Apple app store a lot. I like it because I trust it more than alternatives (google play). I like it because it feels more secure. I like the unified purchase interface. I don't think you can say with a straight face that the Google experience is better than the Apple experience for your parents. I moved my parents to Apple devices because it's safer. I especially like it because apple is using their…

If you trust Macy's and you don't trust Bloomingdale's then just keep shopping at Macy's. There's no need for you to ban Bloomingdale's for everyone else. A store and the vehicle I drive to get their shouldn't be tied. Imagine buying a car from Apple and it only being able to drive to Apple licenses stores.

Apple can still have the App Store and most users will still only use it. (see Google Play). Banning other stores does zero for Apple and their customers. All it does is ban competition.

If you continue to only use the App store from your POV nothing will have changed. You'll still get the same trusted experience.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#53

Post by hayst4ck »

asiachick wrote: post #52
hayst4ck wrote: post #40

I really like the Apple app store a lot. I like it because I trust it more than alternatives (google play). I like it because it feels more secure. I like the unified purchase interface. I don't think you can say with a straight face that the Google experience is better than the Apple experience for your parents. I moved my parents to Apple devices because it's safer. I especially like it because apple is using their…

If you trust Macy's and you don't trust Bloomingdale's then just keep shopping at Macy's. There's no need for you to ban Bloomingdale's for everyone else. A store and the vehicle I drive to get their shouldn't be tied. Imagine buying a car from Apple and it only being able to drive to Apple licenses stores. Apple can still have the App Store and most users will still only use it. (see Google Play). Banning other stor…

I don't understand this argument. You are using car and store but apple isn't selling a phone and an app store, it's selling you the Apple experience (and my understanding is that is literally how apple thinks about it), and if you don't like it, you can easily buy one of the many android phones.

> Banning other stores does zero for Apple and their customers.

I don't think this is true at all. Apple gets to retain all apps on the app store despite implementing a very unpopular with business but pro consumer policy like privacy labels. With multiple app stores, the apps might vote on a different store, and all of a sudden as a comsumer, I have to install 20 different app stores to get the full set of apps I want.

> Banning other stores does zero for Apple and their customers.

If you can't come up with 3 good faith explanations of why a closed app store is good, then you're not critically thinking about the situation or responding in good faith.

3 reason's a locked down app store is bad: - Ties the apps closer to the OS creating a form of vendor lock in for both consumers and app makers - I can't fully utilize my device, it comes limited in specific ways. - Gives apple too much power over apps, especially apps it directly competes with.

Your argument is that there's no good faith explanation for a closed app store being better. If you can't think of any, that is a failure of yours, not a failure of Apples. Once you make a list of pros and cons, you realize that there are pros and cons and that someone might actually choose one set of limitations even if you philosophically don't agree with it.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#54

Post by Someone1234 »

dylan604 wrote: post #49
Someone1234 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has a monopoly for apps stores on iOS devices. > A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. Commodity: Apps sales on iOS. Only supplier: Apple. Apple use their monopolistic market position to enforce a 30% levy on third parties. It has nothing at all to do with Google, since Google cannot compete with Apple to provide app stores on iOS. Even bringing G…

>- Price maker: Decides the price of the good or product to be sold, but does so by determining the quantity in order to demand the price desired by the firm. >Yes. We are talking the app store here, right? How does Apple set the prices of the apps? The devs release their apps at the price they want. Free, Freemium, Paid, In App Purchases, etc. >- Price discrimination: A monopolist can change the price or quantity of…

> We are talking the app store here, right? How does Apple set the prices of the apps?

Yes we're talking about the app STORE not the apps. Apple exclusively sets the price for the store the apps are sold on (and any services the apps sell): 30% (+- first $1M).

> The devs release their apps at the price they want.

We're talking about what Apple charges developers, not what developers charge customers.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#55

Post by Someone1234 »

threeseed wrote: post #47
Someone1234 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has a monopoly for apps stores on iOS devices. > A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. Commodity: Apps sales on iOS. Only supplier: Apple. Apple use their monopolistic market position to enforce a 30% levy on third parties. It has nothing at all to do with Google, since Google cannot compete with Apple to provide app stores on iOS. Even bringing G…

iOS App Stores is not an industry though any more than Tesla car operating systems or Ikea screws are. They are intrinsic parts of the objects and have never existed independently of them.

See United States v. Microsoft Corp. That was a landmark decision that essentially says that things like the App Store are in fact eligible to be declared monopolies for the purposes of anti-trust.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#56

Post by wdn »

threeseed wrote: post #38
eruleman wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. It's a duopoly, a cartel. A system controlled by two players who move in coordination with one another. techcrunch.com/2021/03/16/google-play-drops-commissions-to-15-from-30-following-apples-move-last-year

You need to be careful as words matter. Apple and Google are not a cartel by any definition and they do not in anyway coordinate with each other. Either of these are criminal. Google reducing their margins to better compete with Apple is no different to how every market works.

Apple and Google’s action is no more than a cartel than Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile in the late 90s and early 2000s. They just don’t compete against each other.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#57

Post by rektide »

hayst4ck wrote: post #53
asiachick wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you trust Macy's and you don't trust Bloomingdale's then just keep shopping at Macy's. There's no need for you to ban Bloomingdale's for everyone else. A store and the vehicle I drive to get their shouldn't be tied. Imagine buying a car from Apple and it only being able to drive to Apple licenses stores. Apple can still have the App Store and most users will still only use it. (see Google Play). Banning other stor…

I don't understand this argument. You are using car and store but apple isn't selling a phone and an app store, it's selling you the Apple experience (and my understanding is that is literally how apple thinks about it), and if you don't like it, you can easily buy one of the many android phones. > Banning other stores does zero for Apple and their customers. I don't think this is true at all. Apple gets to retain al…

> With multiple app stores, the apps might vote on a different store, and all of a sudden as a comsumer, I have to install 20 different app stores to get the full set of apps I want.

Fear of freedom here is just remarkable. Oh no! What if I had choices! What if there wasn't a monopolist protecting me!

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#58

Post by rektide »

The fact that iOS won't let any other browser run on the platform is really the "it's not in our interest to allow iMessage on any other platform" keystone of this monopoly.

Maybe maybe users could have an ok experience on the web, online, that might make the app-store monopoly not be so insufferable. But Apple also can restrict & deny any online & web experiences they don't like, since they prevent any browser &c competition on their devices.

> This is only true because Apple prevents other vendors from bringing the modern, secure engines they ship to every other OS to iOS.

https://mobile.twitter.com/slightlylate/status/1385669199842...

Apple isn't just in a monopoly, they're radically restraining the entire web to keep their monopoly, to make sure their monopoly is an important one, that there's no threat from standards-based online technologies.

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#59

Post by [deleted] »

Someone1234 wrote: post #45
c3534l wrote: post #16

I feel like the entire world has forgotten what a monopoly is. Apparently both Apple and Google are monopolies despite being competitors of one another. Programmers clearly talk about developing apps for one platform or another and sometimes give up on developing for one because the approval process was annoying or arbitrary. Consumers have a choice in the phones they buy and whether to even use a phone app for that…

Apple has a monopoly for apps stores on iOS devices. > A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. Commodity: Apps sales on iOS. Only supplier: Apple. Apple use their monopolistic market position to enforce a 30% levy on third parties. It has nothing at all to do with Google, since Google cannot compete with Apple to provide app stores on iOS. Even bringing G…

[deleted]

Re: Google and Apple attacked on app store 'monopoly'

#60

Post by hellisothers »

Someone1234 wrote: post #45
c3534l wrote: post #16

I feel like the entire world has forgotten what a monopoly is. Apparently both Apple and Google are monopolies despite being competitors of one another. Programmers clearly talk about developing apps for one platform or another and sometimes give up on developing for one because the approval process was annoying or arbitrary. Consumers have a choice in the phones they buy and whether to even use a phone app for that…

Apple has a monopoly for apps stores on iOS devices. > A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. Commodity: Apps sales on iOS. Only supplier: Apple. Apple use their monopolistic market position to enforce a 30% levy on third parties. It has nothing at all to do with Google, since Google cannot compete with Apple to provide app stores on iOS. Even bringing G…

This argument falls apart when you consider anybody is the sole provider of anything. I’m the sole provider of my approval, therefore I’m a monopoly? So then you have to decide at what scale this argument makes sense and nobody is going to agree on that.
Post reply on HN