Live data from Hacker News

Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

protocol.com

71–80 of 375 posts

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#72

I really hope the concept of "you can't be anti-competitive if you own the entire ecosystem" dies.

I mean I really haven't heard a good argument against it. Everyone is just complaining that 30% is too high, or it shouldn't apply to IAP for some reason. None of the questions the judged asked really get to the heart of the matter: why should the government get to tell Apple how to run their app store? What makes app stores different than the xbox marketplace or ebay? If the app store was more specific with the types of apps they allow (ex. no more IAP apps), would that make it better or worse?

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#73
post #52

The best result for customers is that there are alternate ways of putting apps on their own phones that do not require apple's permission. Then the customers that trust apple to protect them will just stay with the app store. The customers that try the alternate ways may find problems, but they will also find enormous positive changes in their ability to do new things on their phone. Personally, I would like the abil…

The best outcome for everybody is that the maximum % commission of these stores is regulated, perhaps to a maximum of 10-15%.

Do that and the need for alternate stores, alternate payments etc. goes away.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#74
post #39

I can buy a book directly on the Amazon iOS app, but I can't buy an ebook. That seems like the most fundamental problem to me and a clear case that this is anticompetitive behavior.

This weirded me the heck out when I switched from Android last year. I can't buy for my Kindle from the iOS Amazon app, but I can log into amazon.com, buy for the Kindle there, and then read in my Kindle app on iOS.

It suggests a way anyone can circumvent Apple's restrictions too. Introduce an app whose only job is to act as a content player but has no content of its own, then have customers go to your website to buy the content, and then download it to your app. Epic can sell one game that is empty and make every actual game DLC.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#76

Remember that when the iPhone was launched there was no app store. All you could do was 'install' a web app. Now we have progressive web apps with full offline functionality, but installing them is a nightmare. You have to dig through the share menu from Safari (tough luck if you use another browser) to install one, and Apple removes it after some time limit. Maybe a half measure would be to make that process less re…

Push notifications also don't work with web apps. Totally hamstrung platform.

Isn’t that an os issue? Push notifications work on desktop websites…

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#77
post #68
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The slogans are easy but you need to define what "ecosystem" is so we understand the system-wide implications of these attitudes. Can I for example go to Walmart and setup my own store inside their store without having to ask them? Can I do the same in your local mom-and-pop store?

The closest comparable platforms are probably the consoles. Should Xbox/PlayStation/Nintendo be forced to allow 3rd party app stores on their devices?

Why not? Everybody benefits from open marketplaces. The PC has been like this, and though Steam is dominant, it's not even close to a monopoly.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except what you state already exists. I can load the Walmart app on iOS and order a TV from Walmart, not Apple. Apple is preventing Epic from doing the same - buy in-app merchandise through Epic's app on iOS.

Can you buy any digital goods on iOS with the Walmart app?

Yes, digital downloads for Nintendo, Xbox. Digital gift cards for Xbox, Playstation, and Nintendo, including credit for Playstation Store and Nintendo eStore.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#79
post #52

The best result for customers is that there are alternate ways of putting apps on their own phones that do not require apple's permission. Then the customers that trust apple to protect them will just stay with the app store. The customers that try the alternate ways may find problems, but they will also find enormous positive changes in their ability to do new things on their phone. Personally, I would like the abil…

The best outcome for everybody is that the maximum % commission of these stores is regulated, perhaps to a maximum of 10-15%. Do that and the need for alternate stores, alternate payments etc. goes away.

If I want an alternate store, it’s not to safe ~$20/year in commission, it’s to gain access to functionality to which Apple restricts access.

Re: Judge in Fortnite case holds Tim Cook's feet to the fire

#80
post #39

I can buy a book directly on the Amazon iOS app, but I can't buy an ebook. That seems like the most fundamental problem to me and a clear case that this is anticompetitive behavior.

One bit of context to add: Amazon opted out selling ebooks one the app due to the the 30% fee imposed on purchasing in app/digital goods. They’re not disallowed from selling ebooks. I mention this because it’s both an important distinction and the same subject as Epic’s lawsuit.

But I can also fund a Robinhood account directly from my bank account through the iOS app and buy cryptocurrency.

Or I can go on the ebay iOS app and buy a PDF ebook from a seller.

The mechanism of "in-app purchases" doesn't scale to ebay or Amazon or any other store where you might have millions of SKUs. Not to mention that you can't even buy Kindle books on the iOS app, even if you already have credit on Amazon (gift card, rewards points, etc.).

Post reply on HN