EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint • Hacker News Board

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#551

Post by thaumasiotes » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 5:57 PM UTC

nolok wrote: post #537

tokyoseb wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Credit card fees are already regulated the EU, i.e. card interchange fees are capped at 0.3%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee#European_Union As to why it's not a fixed payment: I'm not sure if some of their costs/liabilities would scale with the size of the transactions?

Vast oversimplification: it's because of chargebacks and fraud. It works kind of like an insurance, someone needs to take the loss at some point and fixed amount doesn't work for that (or would massively hike the fees for cheap sales). That's why when EU capped the fee "so low" we also massively pushed for 3D secure deployment, so those lower fees would still easily cover it.

> (or would massively hike the fees for cheap sales)

I've come to the viewpoint that this would be a good thing. I think we've moved too far in the direction of never paying for anything with cash.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#552

Post by sixstringtheory » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 5:58 PM UTC

codys wrote: post #358

moffatman wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you considered the loss of the 30% from each apple music customer's previous subscription to a competitor. There's no unfair advantage, the maximum profit apple can make by switching a customer away from spotify is spotify's profit.

This assertion ignores that apple makes a profit off the 30% cut. In other words: it doesn't correspond to a real cost to Apple.

Disagree. If Apple only had their Music app, they wouldn’t have to maintain the whole ecosystem that comes along with the app store that allows Spotify to exist as an iOS app. Maintaining that system is where the 30% goes. Would anyone then say Apple had an unfair advantage as to who could have a streaming platform on iOS?

Spotify would be free then and are now to make a web based player like youtube or soundcloud.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#553

Post by thaumasiotes » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 5:59 PM UTC

vlozko wrote: post #531

ziml77 wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some reason a flat fee hadn't even crossed my mind, but that makes a lot of sense. The cost of an application doesn't change the distribution costs at all.

There’s fixed components to the cost as well as variable ones. Storage/CDN distribution is relatively fixed. I would say so is access to developer tools and APIs. What’s variable are services that an app may take advantage of, such as push notifications, geolocation queries, iCloud access, and App Store approvals. More established companies tend to release new versions on a weekly or bi-weekly basis.

> What’s variable are services that an app may take advantage of, such as push notifications

Why are push notifications an Apple service? Wouldn't we be better off moving that into the apps?

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#554

Post by joshstrange » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 6:02 PM UTC

inetknght wrote: post #545

joshstrange wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has resulted in apps as simple as text editors or todo apps needlessly becoming subscription services I'm torn on this. Of course I prefer to pay once for software but that's not really realistic in today's world where iOS (or Android) development is rarely "Write once, post online, walk away". It's an ongoing process and there aren't very many apps out there that are "done" (even the big players). I understand tha…

> I'm torn on this. Of course I prefer to pay once for software but that's not really realistic in today's world where iOS (or Android) development is rarely "Write once, post online, walk away". It's an ongoing process and there aren't very many apps out there that are "done" (even the big players). Why is that? The user interface hasn't significantly changed since the iPhone was launched. Why do apps need to be rew…

I’m sorry but your comment is completely divorced from the situation on the ground when it comes to app development. The UI has changed overtime, sometime substantially, and there is now an entirely new language (Swift) you can write your apps in as well as a new design language based on that new language (SwiftUI). On top of that, APIs change version to version of iOS and customers expect things that are now possible on newer iOS versions even if your app was written on an older version. Also, a lot of app developers work directly with their app’s communities to focus on what their users want.

Drafts, Apollo, Things, Overcast, and more are apps I pay subscriptions on so that they continue to add new features and keep compatibility with new iOS releases.

Have you not dealt with the annoyance of an app that hasn’t been updated for a newer OS? Or one that isn’t even providing “table stakes” to other apps in it’s category?

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#555

Post by paulmd » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 6:04 PM UTC

tolmasky wrote: post #494

Evan__ wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re “not forced to use them” in exactly the same way you’re not forced to use Apple.

There's a fairly big difference between a duopoly, which, for the record, major government services rely on (if you want the COVID tracking app its either iOS or Android, if you want an app that your senator will use, you probably have to make it for iOS, etc.), and services that you can actually wholesale replace in your product like a payment processor. Not to mention certain school courses that are taught with iOS…

Consoles are also effectively a duopoly, and yet Microsoft has argued that they should be allowed to keep third-party app stores off the Xbox while also signing on to the lawsuit to try and force Apple to open up their own.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#556

Post by otachack » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

joshstrange wrote: post #554

inetknght wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm torn on this. Of course I prefer to pay once for software but that's not really realistic in today's world where iOS (or Android) development is rarely "Write once, post online, walk away". It's an ongoing process and there aren't very many apps out there that are "done" (even the big players). Why is that? The user interface hasn't significantly changed since the iPhone was launched. Why do apps need to be rew…

I’m sorry but your comment is completely divorced from the situation on the ground when it comes to app development. The UI has changed overtime, sometime substantially, and there is now an entirely new language (Swift) you can write your apps in as well as a new design language based on that new language (SwiftUI). On top of that, APIs change version to version of iOS and customers expect things that are now possibl…

And new devices + resolutions! Literally in just the past 5 years we got the bigger phones, notches, etc.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#557

Post by paulmd » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

AlexandrB wrote: post #435

nolok wrote: post #391

Lots of comments around the line of "ok maybe 30% is too much, but we can all agree they offer a valuable service, so what percentage should they take ?" Uhhhh, not a percentage ? Do you imagine AWS billing you a % of your revenue instead of a given price for a given service ? Give a price to be listed in store, to be reviewed, to be downloaded by a user, ... And let company pay what they owe you. Let them pay throug…

I recently had a change of heart on this issue when the prevalence of fraudulent apps on the App Store was documented[1]. It's hard to argue that Apple is providing significant benefit to either consumers or developers for their 30% cut when they seem incapable of reigning in obvious fraud. In addition, I think Apple pushing subscriptions as a solution for long term app funding (instead of upgrade pricing or other op…

it's all relative - no system is perfect, some bad apps do slip through the cracks.

compared to Android, though? far far better, Google literally doesn't even try to police that sort of stuff, they just list it all anyway and take their cut, when this stuff comes to light Apple delists it but Google is perfectly satisfied to keep raking in their cut. That's the difference.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#558

Post by sixstringtheory » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

fastball wrote: post #384

zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

Yeah, my stance has always been that companies should exist to: 1. deliver value. 2. capture a fraction of that value. I think it is pretty clear in most cases that 30% is well above the value Apple is actually delivering with their App Store. It's not like Apple is building the apps for other people. You still have to build the app entirely on your own, the only thing Apple is doing is letting you distribute your ap…

> I think it is pretty clear in most cases that 30% is well above the value Apple is actually delivering with their App Store.

You’re entitled to your opinion. And maybe it is not valuable to you. But I doubt you even know the costs to run the service so my opinion is that you are speaking from a place of ignorance.

Part of the value of the service is that you don’t have to go and build it yourself. I’m going to bet that you’d die before you built it. How valuable is your life?

> Shit-tier apps get thru every day, and great apps get knocked for arbitrary reasons.

My opinion is this will get much worse. Just because you are a cute tinkerer who just wants to publish the app you made for your grandma doesn’t mean there aren’t people out there who can’t wait to get their malware onto the platform that carries the most wealthy consumers.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#559

Post by tolmasky » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

paulmd wrote: post #555

tolmasky wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a fairly big difference between a duopoly, which, for the record, major government services rely on (if you want the COVID tracking app its either iOS or Android, if you want an app that your senator will use, you probably have to make it for iOS, etc.), and services that you can actually wholesale replace in your product like a payment processor. Not to mention certain school courses that are taught with iOS…

Consoles are also effectively a duopoly, and yet Microsoft has argued that they should be allowed to keep third-party app stores off the Xbox while also signing on to the lawsuit to try and force Apple to open up their own.

I feel like you stopped reading my comment as soon as you hit the word "duopoly". Look at the specific reasons I gave why phone AppStores are different: they are increasingly necessary for everyday life. COVID-tracking, political interaction, school courses, paying for parking, etc. etc. The day XBox becomes one of the few ways to do these things, and not primarily a means to play video games, then it would be appropriate for the calculus to change there too. You can bring up Keurig coffee cups too, but the implications just aren't the same.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#560

Post by inetknght » Fri, Apr 30, 2021, 6:15 PM UTC

joshstrange wrote: post #554

inetknght wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm torn on this. Of course I prefer to pay once for software but that's not really realistic in today's world where iOS (or Android) development is rarely "Write once, post online, walk away". It's an ongoing process and there aren't very many apps out there that are "done" (even the big players). Why is that? The user interface hasn't significantly changed since the iPhone was launched. Why do apps need to be rew…

I’m sorry but your comment is completely divorced from the situation on the ground when it comes to app development. The UI has changed overtime, sometime substantially, and there is now an entirely new language (Swift) you can write your apps in as well as a new design language based on that new language (SwiftUI). On top of that, APIs change version to version of iOS and customers expect things that are now possibl…

> your comment is completely divorced from the situation on the ground when it comes to app development

Perhaps it is.

> The UI has changed overtime, sometime substantially,

How so? I see an app in the store. I install it. An icon shows up on my screen. I tap it to open it. A window is shown where I can type text in. If I receive a phone call or text message, something is displayed on the screen to alert me to that fact. I can tap on that to be brought to the event source. Or I can ignore it. When I close the app, there's usually some way for changes to be saved (sometimes automatically).

This workflow, as the user sees it, hasn't changed.

> there is now an entirely new language (Swift) you can write your apps in as well as a new design language based on that new language (SwiftUI).

Did that deprecate compatibility with apps written in the older language?

> APIs change version to version of iOS and customers expect things that are now possible on newer iOS versions even if your app was written on an older version

Like what? The context was a text editor app and todo apps. What has changed here?

> Also, a lot of app developers work directly with their app’s communities to focus on what their users want.

That's pretty cool. What about basic features without needing a subscription?

> Have you not dealt with the annoyance of an app that hasn’t been updated for a newer OS? Or one that isn’t even providing “table stakes” to other apps in it’s category?

Yup. It's almost always an app that's written in some trendy language, using some cloud feature, or some paid-for app. I use lots of free software on my laptop without that problem.

Notably, text editors from 30 years ago still work fantastically. Email clients from 30 years ago still mostly work great (unless using certain popular anti-consumer cloud email providers). Games from 20 years ago are a hit or a miss. A lot of times they work just fine with an emulator.

And I've already paid for all of those. Once.

Why should the iPhone be any different?