Live data from Hacker News

Apple, Epic, and the App Store

stratechery.com

571–580 of 781 posts

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic has a monopoly on selling items inside Fortnite. 3rd party artists can't create anything that can be used inside Fortnite, neither inside the v-bucks store nor outside of it. There's no 3rd party "market" at all. Apple has a market where third parties can market their apps. Apple requires a cut of all purchases made through that store, which alone is not monopolistic. Apple also requires that you sell your iOS…

So, let's say hypothetically Epic allowed the sale of third-party skins in Fortnite. Would a skinmaker would be entitled to demand the following concessions? 1. The ability to install skins outside of the V-bucks store. 2. The ability to pay for Fortnite skins using payment methods other than V-bucks. Alternatively, should Epic not be permitted to impose the following restrictions in their Fortnite store? 1. Skins mu…

Not all monopolies are created equally. Some have greater cost to society. For example, Qualcomm has an essential patent which grants them a monopoly over certain communications technologies but it has been mitigated by requiring them to license it in a fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) way.

A monopoly by Standard Oil was pervasive in all of daily living because by the early twentieth century, they had control of more than 90% of the country's petroleum fuel production and logistics which they abused to keep any competition from ever gaining a foothold. By 1911, they were dissolved by the Supreme Court as per Sherman Antitrust Act.

VBucks and Fortnite are not pervasive in all of daily living, it is a tiny market and the monopoly is one which can easily be managed by society without breaking up the company.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is economics. The price of a product in a competitive market tends to its marginal cost -- the cost to produce one additional unit. The marginal cost of an iPhone is $450 in parts and labor. The R&D costs are fixed costs, not marginal costs, they don't vary whether you sell 1 million iPhones or 10 million iPhones. Most of iOS's costs are fixed. Even if you amortize the cost of it across the number of phones sold…

This obviously comes from a misunderstanding of economics. The price of a good is what people are willing to pay for it. Why are people willing to pay more for Nike’s than Converse? There are literally hundreds of Android phones, yet people are willing to pay more for iPhones. People have been paying a premium for Apple’s goods for forty years. Instead of complaining about the evilness of Apple, maybe the problem is…

"There are literally hundreds of Android phones, yet people are willing to pay more for iPhones."

Because there are hundreds of manufacturers of Android ones, and only one for Apple. Microeconomics states that in a competitive market, price will tend to the marginal cost, and this is exactly what happened in Android. It is not "what people are willing to pay", it's that Android phones have competitive pressures that are downward on price. At the high end, people pay as much for Huawei Mate P30s as they do for iPhones, because there are few phones at that tier.

Your rebuttal actually proves my point exactly. If Apple licensed iOS, and let clone makers sell iPhone clones, the price would plummet, even if all of the features were the same -- same OS, same HW performance, etc.

Apple's creation of their own little walled garden, complete with path dependency, and slick marketing, has created a premium that would not exist if independent manufacturers could sell clones.

This is why PCs were cheaper than Macs, when clearly PCs had WAY WAY better HW than Macs, way better CPUs, GPUs, et al, for much lower price points, yet people paid more for Macs. Even back in the pre-OSX days, the PowerPC days, the Motorola days, people paid more for less, again, because of the way Apple locks in a chuck of their market with incompatible path-dependency.

I mean, I had an Amiga in the 80s, it had 4-channel stereo sound, 4096 colors, multitasking, awesome games, on a great C= monitor, and the comparable machine at the time was this tiny 128k 9" B&W display machine, which was hideously slow because it didn't even have enough RAM, and cost well over 200% more. Amiga had vertically integrated all-custom chips like Apple brags about today. It was the premium machine, so ask yourself why some people paid 200% more. It could do substantially less, graphically, and in terms of software available for it. And before you say "desktop publishing", in college I used TeX to do all of my work, and the output quality was superior with less effort. For the home PC user, it was way way overpriced for underpowered hardware and a paultry software selection. This is what Apple was competing against in the 80s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7rKj0DU8Xs

I'm an iPhone user, I've owned every iPhone since standing in line in 2007 to get one of the first. I use a Macbook as my primary laptop. So I'm not anti-Apple, but frankly all of the things I use iPhone or Macbooks for have NOTHING to do with their locked down App Store, refusal to allow me to install third party browser engines, or specify default apps, or side-load apps.

I want Apple to stop locking down freedom and when they sell me a computer or phone, let me OWN IT an do what I want with it. If Apple's ARM OSX Macs turn into a locked down system like their ARM iPad/iPhone, then this Macbook Pro and Mac Pro I own will be the last Apple devices I own, and it's hello Hackintosh or Linux desktop.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#573
post #74

The Hey saga emphasized that Apple has multiple products interacting in a single app store. * Screened apps - Apple only lets "safe" apps into the store. * Discoverability - Apple in theory lets users find apps that they didn't know about before. Customer Acquisition * Payments - Apple makes it easy to accept payments, for their 30% fee. One or all of those are useful and great. Where I have an issue is when they use…

> That feels like using an existing monopoly (actually a duopoly w/ google's similar practices) to force developers to purchase products they don't want. Hey didn't want to accept payments via apple, but Apple's market power and decisions were focused on forcing them to. In order to sell goods in a place like Walmart, a manufacturer is subject to onerous terms. Why is the app store different than a retailer limiting…

I bought my cash register at Wal-Mart and I happily send in 30 percent of my profits there every month.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah hah! I'm glad you brought this up. What did Internet Explorer have? DOMINANT MARKETSHARE. That was the problem - not that a program came bundled with software. Such a basic fact conveniently ignored because Apple Bad. > Without Internet Explorer Windows is literally just a piece of software. A piece of software that can do many things - an iPhone without apps just doesn't work. Apps run everything - from making ph…

Internet Explorer didn't have dominant market share; Windows did. You say the problem wasn't that a program came bundled with software, but that was literally the heart of the antitrust action: the government contended that Microsoft was using their defacto operating system monopoly of Windows to give IE a leg up on non-bundled competitors. > An iPhone without apps just doesn't work. Sure, but an iPhone without an Ap…

The iPhone without an App Store doesn’t work fine to install software.

Remember - they originally said - just use web apps, but developers demanded a way to install software, and Apple developed the App Store in response to that demand.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right, and the rest of us don't want that Please stop speaking for others. I would certainly like to have the ability to install other sources for apps. Since I am part of "the rest of us", for any kind of "us" that came to my mind while reading your posting ("iPhone users" or "Apple customers" or "HN readers"), your statement is patently false. > That's not what I want on my iPhone. Then don't install additional s…

> Please stop speaking for others. Same to you and the GP here. And last I checked there aren’t a lot of customers really complaining about the App Store. It’s just big companies who, although they could have done this years ago, are now going against Apple’s customer protection because it degrades their crappy business practices. > Then don’t install additional stores Then buy a different phone? I want any app that…

> but that’s why I buy an iPhone and I want it to stay that way.

Ok. Now what if I were to tell you that you are perfectly capable of doing this, by simply not installing other app stores.

You dont need to metaphorically break into my house, and force me, at gun point to follow your rules as well.

You can do what you want with your phone, even if other people are able to do what they want with their own phone.

> If I wanted another App Store

Then just don't install the other app store? You have no said why you need to force me to do something, in order for you to get what you want.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This obviously comes from a misunderstanding of economics. The price of a good is what people are willing to pay for it. Why are people willing to pay more for Nike’s than Converse? There are literally hundreds of Android phones, yet people are willing to pay more for iPhones. People have been paying a premium for Apple’s goods for forty years. Instead of complaining about the evilness of Apple, maybe the problem is…

"There are literally hundreds of Android phones, yet people are willing to pay more for iPhones." Because there are hundreds of manufacturers of Android ones, and only one for Apple. Microeconomics states that in a competitive market, price will tend to the marginal cost, and this is exactly what happened in Android. It is not "what people are willing to pay", it's that Android phones have competitive pressures that…

Every single one of Apple’s competitors in the PC market were better capitalized in the 80s through 2005. Especially when Apple was almost bankrupt. The other companies were incompetent. They could have done the same thing.

There was no lock in with Macs - the same Software was available for Windows and more. Have you ever thought that it wasn’t just about the hardware?

Did Apple have a lock in on marketing that kept Microsoft and Google incapable of marketing their own devices?

Did Apple stop Commodore and Atari from executing?

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#577

I think it’s absurd that you can neither buy a kindle book from the iOS kindle app nor the Amazon app. How user unfriendly! And yet, Apple runs their own digitsl bookstore... since there’s no way to remove 30% revenue from apple’s own venture, they’re using a monopoly position to monopolize another market. Oh, but Apple isn’t a monopoly because there’s Android. Why did we think Microsoft was a monopoly? You could alw…

I don't think we need to stick to an existing law and second guess what courts think. We need new legislation that lowers the cost of switching across popular platforms down to a single click of a button. That'll solve a big chunk of the problem

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, let's say hypothetically Epic allowed the sale of third-party skins in Fortnite. Would a skinmaker would be entitled to demand the following concessions? 1. The ability to install skins outside of the V-bucks store. 2. The ability to pay for Fortnite skins using payment methods other than V-bucks. Alternatively, should Epic not be permitted to impose the following restrictions in their Fortnite store? 1. Skins mu…

Not all monopolies are created equally. Some have greater cost to society. For example, Qualcomm has an essential patent which grants them a monopoly over certain communications technologies but it has been mitigated by requiring them to license it in a fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) way. A monopoly by Standard Oil was pervasive in all of daily living because by the early twentieth century, they had…

> A monopoly by Standard Oil was pervasive in all of daily living because by the early twentieth century, they had control of more than 90% of the country's petroleum fuel production and logistics which they abused to keep any competition from ever gaining a foothold.

The key point here is that 90% market share constituted monopoly power, whereas Apple's 46% share of the smartphone market likely does not.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, but you're not. Yes, Epic is trying to make money. But if Epic is allowed to open their own store it would be very good for small developers. Those things aren't mutually exclusive.

If they manage to land their store on iOS, expect them to do the same anti-competitive things they did in the PC market... paying studios to exclusively put their games on the Epic Store only. Even games fund raised by communities, and games already announced to be launching on other platforms. I don't see that as much of a win.

Developers being paid to make games sounds great. Why is Epic a bad guy for paying developers?

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#580

"But Apple needs to fund the App Store. XCode, payment processing, reviewers, it all costs money". Yes, very little in comparison. Apple made $50 billion in revenue from the App Store in 2019. $50 BILLION. The data centers costs to serve up this are miniscule in comparison. Apple could build 50 datacenters PER YEAR EVERY YEAR for that revenue. Reviewers? A staff of 10,000 fulltime reviewers paid $200k per year would…

Per page 19 of Apple's FY 2019 annual report [0], the net sales for the 'Services' category (consisting of the following) was $46.291 billion.

> Services net sales include sales from the Company’s digital content stores and streaming services, AppleCare, licensing and other services. Services net sales also include amortization of the deferred value of Maps, Siri and free iCloud services, which are bundled in the sales price of certain products.

Undoubtedly, the App Store makes up a large chunk of that $46.291 billion, but not all of it. We don't know how much money Apple actually makes off of the App Store. For all we know, Apple attributes 50% of the iPhone's profit margin to "Maps, Siri, and free iCloud services" which would dramatically skew the numbers. Services also includes digital media, AppleCare, and licensing which are all non-trivial sources of revenue.

[0]: https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/1a91911...

Post reply on HN