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

Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

timetoplayfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 865 posts

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#621

Post by blowski »

latexr wrote: post #540
gurpreet- wrote: post #126

Personally, as an app developer, I think Spotify is taking the right stance here. I believe that Apple should take some cuts but not as high as 30%. I believe for some categories like microtransaction based apps Apple should take maybe 5%. Plus, I think that if Apple has a competing service, then it should waive the tax altogether. It's only fair. If the only function of the App Store (or Play Store) is to provide ho…

> I believe for some categories like microtransaction based apps Apple should take maybe 5%. And then every PAID app will switch to FREE and charge for PRO, to circumvent the 30%. Oh, Apple complained it’s not technically a microtransaction? Fine, just separate every feature into a new purchase. > If the only function of the App Store (or Play Store) is to provide hosting and some quality control then I don't see why…

That’s sort of true for the app itself - if the Trello API is down then the Trello app doesn’t work.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#622

Post by Zenbit_UX »

thekyle wrote: post #368
Zenbit_UX wrote: post #142

I guess now I know where Spotify's priorities have been over the last few years as their Android app regressed. Your war with Apple seems to have distracted you from the one platform you are on good terms with. As a premium subscriber it's very frustrating to not be able to pause music on the lockscreen anymore. Or using the headphone controls. Or why a blocked song keeps being played in discover weekly. Get your act…

> As a premium subscriber it's very frustrating to not be able to pause music on the lockscreen anymore. Or using the headphone controls. I just wanted to say that I am also a Spotify Premium subscriber using the Android (Pie) app and I don't have any issues with these two features. I cannot comment on the blocked songs, since I do not use that functionality. Have you checked the forums to see if other users are expe…

I'm on android pie and I'm not the only one having these issues, go to the play store listing and sort reviews by latest version, many are complaining about the lack of lock screen and headset controls.

The app is extremely unstable on Bluetooth as well, I now leave my expensive wireless earbuds at home because Spotify can't handle more than 10 seconds of continuous wireless playback without cutting out.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#623

Post by threeseed »

nradov wrote: post #320
aclimatt wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's not entirely true, Apple can't exactly do what it wants. As other comments point out regarding Microsoft, Microsoft were forced to allow IE to be debundled and other competing browsers installed, because having a monopoly on a platform and using that platform to enforce anti-competitive practices is illegal under anti-trust law. So given Apple's marketshare (not a monopoly per se though pretty substantia…

Microsoft only got in trouble because they originally sold Internet Explorer as a separate product in retail stores. Then when Netscape Navigator became popular, Microsoft responded by bundling IE into Windows for no additional charge. If MS had never released IE separately but instead just made it an OS feature from the start they would have had a more defensible position.

It wasn’t just that. It was also that they went around to the OEMs and bullied them into not signing licensing deals with Netscape.

Microsoft actively and wilfilly went out to hurt Netscape. You can’t really argue Apple is doing the same with Spotify.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#624

Post by laumars »

xvector wrote: post #431
laumars wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had both Android and iPhones and honestly they're much the same. Google gives you a little more freedom in app development but you lose a lot of privacy. Neither company champions jailbreaking. Ultimately there isn't a single consumer handset out there that has the same principles of "now you own the device it's yours to do with as you like". Consumer tech just doesn't operate that way any more.

So you want both freedom over software you install and strong privacy and security. This will be fine for HN folks but will result in the erasure of security and privacy for normal users.

Not necessarily. However I’m under no disillusion that I’m anything but an edge case.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#625

Post by threeseed »

sinnoh wrote: post #491
madeofpalk wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Changing phones takes about an hour.

Changing countries is usually not even possible because of immigration restrictions. And even if you could get past that you are looking at years/decades before you are a proper citizen.

But yes they are totally the same thing.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#626

Post by ukyrgf »

ayvdl wrote: post #18

To whoever is responsible for this page: in the svg files, turn the text into paths, otherwise they look like Arial with terrible kerning. https://i.imgur.com/uLaVwnd.png

As someone who constantly curses their Android app design, seeing them make such a rookie move was a nice bit of schadenfreude.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#627

Post by threeseed »

Jorge1o1 wrote: post #390
bdcravens wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify seems to focus on IAP, but if you purchased Spotify Premium outside of IAP, it works just fine with that app.

But how would you know Spotify Premium even exists if Spotify is prohibited by Apple to make any mention of it?

You’ve never even used Spotify have you ?

They advertise for Spotify Premium constantly on their free tier.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#628

Post by toasterlovin »

WA wrote: post #614
toasterlovin wrote: post #589

Whenever Apple's 30% take on the App Store comes up, people on this website get all up in arms about it. Let me provide some perspective, which I think is sorely lacking: I sell physical goods on Amazon. They charge me 15% for this privilege. The only reason they don't charge more is because physical goods have lower margins than digital goods (my margins after it's all said and done are somewhere between 10-15%). An…

Thing is, unless your app is already somewhat popular, Apple won’t do anything for you. Maybe you get more customers. But maybe an app like Spotify invested enough in marketing to reach new customers without Apple‘s health. The problem is that it’s really hard to measure how many customers Apple really brings and how many would find an app through other means.

Amazon is similar. Listing your products on there does not lead to sales. So, in addition to the 15% cut, I pay Amazon roughly 5-10% more to advertise my products as sponsored listings. But I can tell you that Amazon has resulted in way more sales than advertising on Goole and sending customers directly to our site. There is tremendous value to being on Amazon. Despite the constant declarations of Amazon having a counterfeit product epidemic, customers are comfortable buying on Amazon. They know that Amazon will have their back if we rip them off. As a result, there are lots of consumers who only buy certain classes of goods from Amazon. And it is Amazon, not me, who has cultivated that relationship. It makes sense that they charge me a significant amount to participate.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#629

Post by threeseed »

qhwudbebd wrote: post #199
pjc50 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine if Spotify offered a lower rate for Android users... Wouldn't that send a very clear message to Apple? Apple shrugs and bans Spotify. Next move?

Spotify petitions EU to sanction Apple for abuse of their monopoly on the iOS platform? Which looks a bit like what they've just done...

Again. iOS is not a monopoly.

Having a monopoly over their own product is what every company has.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#630

Post by dysfunction »

CraneWorm wrote: post #567
nevir wrote: post #238

Apple did the same thing to Kindle for iPhone back when it launched. We submitted the original version to Apple with a fully functioning store built into it—and were then stuck in submission limbo. Two weeks later, Apple announces their intent to build in-app purchasing. The kicker: Apple wanted a 30% cut of every book sold on the store …and at the same time, had negotiated with book publishers that the publishers MU…

> Kindle for iPhone You put a walled garden... in another walled garden. On a more serious note: I get it; among Apple users are the most happily paying people that you can find on this planet and if you have a product you want to make it available to them. No wonder they think it their right to take a massive 30% cut.

At least the Kindle and Kindle app can read books from other sources, they don't force you to buy from Amazon.
Post reply on HN