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

Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

appfairness.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#551

Post by shagie »

edmundsauto wrote: post #206
freedomben wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple's advertising is built on security and privacy — allowing other App Stores on their system would only open up users to invasive tracking & attacks. But why? If sideloading requires explicit user action and acknowledgment of danger, why would this affect their brand of safety and privacy in any way? The users who want a safe controlled environment can easily choose to stay in that environment. I just do not un…

Because these users, regardless of what they previously clicked, will expect Apple to support it. And end to end support is kind of one of the big deals about the iPhone.

(supporting this point)

You can see this sort of thing in an old post by Joel on https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/06/13/how-microsoft-lost...

This references an even older blog post (that has been lost to time) which was quoted:

> Look at the scenario from the customer’s standpoint. You bought programs X, Y and Z. You then upgraded to Windows XP. Your computer now crashes randomly, and program Z doesn’t work at all. You’re going to tell your friends, “Don’t upgrade to Windows XP. It crashes randomly, and it’s not compatible with program Z.” Are you going to debug your system to determine that program X is causing the crashes, and that program Z doesn’t work because it is using undocumented window messages? Of course not. You’re going to return the Windows XP box for a refund. (You bought programs X, Y, and Z some months ago. The 30-day return policy no longer applies to them. The only thing you can return is Windows XP.)

This is the same sort of thing that Apple faces with iOS. If an application breaks when the system is upgraded, it is the system's fault - not the application (at least in the minds of many consumers) and it is also considered to be the responsibility of the operating system vendor to fix the problem.

(This is part of why the Catalina upgrade was such a big deal because it was known that they'd break a lot of things in doing that)

If someone gets an app from a hypothetical 3rd party vendor store, and it breaks on an update of the operating system (or allows you to download an app that doesn't run) - its seen as company that wrote the OS's fault even though there is nothing that the company that wrote the OS can do about it - they can't even refund the app.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#552

Post by marbletiles »

gpm wrote: post #208

All the arguments about what company is most evil entirely miss the point. You don't make a decision on a specific issue based on what company you like more, you base it on who is right on the specific issue. From an ethical perspective that's what having a codified rule of laws is all about. Everyone get's the same rules no matter how much you like them. You don't arbitrarily punish people for doing things you don't…

The wider context around the specific issues can still be useful in deciding what's "best" (distinct from "right"). EG: look at the antitrust case Apple lost over eBook pricing. The rules said they should lose in order to ensure a fair market for eBooks, a minute's consideration of the wider context said that if they lost Amazon would suck up the entire market. Which it did. The net result, even if narrowly within the rules, was a loss for consumers and for competition

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#553

Post by judge2020 »

bogwog wrote: post #489
zepto wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This! Which is why I absolutely reject Epic et al’s position. They want to be part of a small exclusive group of store owners who get to share in the benefits of Apple’s investments. Very different from the device freedom you are calling for. It must also be said that device freedom cannot come at the cost of security and trust. I and presumably you, have the capability to make good decisions about what software to t…

> Which is why I absolutely reject Epic et al’s position. > They want to be part of a small exclusive group of store owners who get to share in the benefits of Apple’s investments. Can you clarify what you mean by this?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-epic-games/apple-sa...

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#554

Post by syspec »

ornitorrincos wrote: post #472
adwi wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s worth noting how hostile Epic’s app store is to its customers. They force you to use it to launch games you’ve already purchased from them, which just means you have to waste processor cycles to wade through a grip of their blaring ads (and can only imagine the data they’re collecting/monetizing from this) Pure enter through the gift shop. The dark patterns are egregious as well; a tech-savvy friend boug…

I have never experienced that, and I use it since it was purely for the unreal engine, could you provide more details? I'm curious. For what its worth, the game store sucks and the ue4 assets store works better, which probably shows where their attention is on

But the GPs anecdote shows where their intent is. They are not virtuous advocates for consumers.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#555

Post by criddell »

M4v3R wrote: post #447
criddell wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it's good for consumers, sure. At one point AT&T was required to allow consumers to buy and connect their own handsets rather than only allowing them to rent from AT&T. Isn't that similar?

> Isn't that similar? No, what you described was a simple change in how the product was distributed. Forcing Apple to engineer a way to add 3rd party app stores on their platform would require significant engineering effort from them and changing their operating system internals significantly.

So to stick with the telecom example, if you want to sell telecom equipment or operate a phone company you must include intercept capability for law enforcement. That involves engineering changes in the hardware and software, business operations changes to manage and execute the intercept requests, etc... Is that a closer example?

For Apple it might be less expensive to just make a single policy change - allow apps to use alternate payment providers. That feels somewhat close to forcing AT&T to allow alternate telephone providers.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#556

Post by arrosenberg »

ijidak wrote: post #59
mFixman wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a monopoly, and it's illegal.

I don't believe monopolies are illegal. It's using an advantage in one area to force concessions in an unrelated area that I believe is illegal. For example, Microsoft had an effective monopoly over PC operating systems. That was unfortunate, but not illegal. It was when they used that monopoly to disadvantage a rival browser maker --- Netscape -- that they broke anti-trust law. I'm most interested in seeing what hap…

> It's using an advantage in one area to force concessions in an unrelated area that I believe is illegal.

Can you find me a single example of a monopoly (excluding regulated utilities) that don't use their power to force concessions in an unrelated area? What's the point otherwise?

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#557

Post by Apocryphon »

pb7 wrote: post #504
bluedevil2k wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this type of comment a lot in these discussions on the App Store - "no one is forcing you to make an iOS app". No, no one is holding a gun to your head to make an iOS app. But you know what, people need to make money to pay the mortgage and feed their kids. If you're a programmer who has years of experience, who wants to make money in the field you have years of experience in, the field you likely enjoy doing a…

Oh no, won't someone think of the... talented and skilled white-collar worker in one of the hottest and highest paying industries of all time that can work literally anywhere? Enough with the appeals to emotion.

You just responded to an appeal to emotion with an appeal to emotion.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#558

Post by 7786655 »

boarnoah wrote: post #280
acituan wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic and Spotify are pushing their own walled gardens, they just want to do it with a bigger profit margin. There is absolutely no problem with that because it cures the one and only walled garden problem. If they implement a subpar walled garden, it will be up to the users to exercise choice on using them, which they currently can't. This is the core of the opponent processes of markets. It is irrelevant to demand…

Just for reference Epic has already shown us their playbook on how they plan to bootstrap a separate marketplace with the Epic Games Store on PC. Namely, paying for exclusivity onto their store (or more accurately paying for the developer to not release onto Steam - the current incumbent). I'm not sure how you can argue that they are helping users exercise choice when this is behavior they already engage in.

The users are free to choose not to buy those games. If the developers offered you a deal you don't like, don't take it.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#559

Post by leetcrew »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #500
leetcrew wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

argument by analogy is something like A -> B, C is similar to A in all ways that matter, thus (A -> B) -> (C -> D). analogies are powerful when the other person already agrees that (A -> B) and doesn't notice any important differences between A and C. if you use an analogy where the other person doesn't agree that A -> B in the first place, you'll never get anywhere. if they are really stubborn, they will come up wit…

> C is similar to A in all ways that matter I have never seen this be determine-able in real life scenarios >analogies are not very good in arguments where the other person is resisting the conclusion you want to draw. they can be great when you are trying to teach/explain something to someone who trusts you though. This is a great statement to show why analogies are bad and how they are abused.

I wouldn't agree that analogies are bad, per se. as a sibling to my original comment pointed out, an analogy is essentially an informal isomorphism. this is a perfectly valid way of proving things in math, and it can often lead guide you to valid conclusions in mathematically grounded fields like physics.

>> C is similar to A in all ways that matter

> I have never seen this be determine-able in real life scenarios

this much I can agree on. when discussing human issues, analogies should be understood to be solely a rhetorical device, useful for persuading people, but not so much for getting to the truth of the matter.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#560

Post by jpambrun »

sidibe wrote: post #491
jpambrun wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's dishonest. The situation is identical on Android. Yes. You can "technically" sideload apps, but there is so many hoops to go through that you really can't distribute your application this way.

> there is so many hoops to go through that you really can't distribute your application this way One hoop. Turn on one setting, from there it's just clicking to download an apk and approving the dialog box. The real reason it's hard to distribute your application outside of Play store is discovery.

There is friction with updates as well. But we don't have to argue since even a giant such as Epic didn't manage to do it with the fortnight franchise..
Post reply on HN