Live data from Hacker News

Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

timetoplayfair.com

731–740 of 865 posts

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify has already turned off the ability for new accounts to pay to upgrade to a premium account inside their iOS app last year. You pay for your account on Spotify's own web site, which bypasses Apple getting any cut at all. https://support.spotify.com/us/account_payment_help/subscrip... Netflix has done the same thing. https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/8471988/spotify-... In my book, the problem is that…

> In my book, the problem is that you are not allowed to provide a link to your payment website inside your app. This is especially damaging to small companies. Most people have heard of Spotify, Netflix, Pandora, etc. So it's somewhat natural for them (if not a bit akward) to go to the website if they can't get premium in the app. But for small companies that connection isn't immediately obvious. In my company for i…

Most(every?) app that I’ve signed up for requires an email address. Some apps then send a verification or welcome email. If you mention and link to paid subscription upgrades in that email, will Apple pull your app?

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#732
post #698
post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think apple's subscription feature is worth paying 30% more for spotify? Do you think spotify should just suck it up and take the hit to keep prices the same because apple is providing a service (access and subscription handling) worth 30% of the price? Not even Amazon charges that much. I don't know if the anti-competitive practices mentioned are illegal, but they're certainly scummy. The company that owns th…

What if Apple Music is for free? Should be Apple be punished then, like MS for IE being free?

Then Apple is using its success in one market (Selling phones) to price-dump in another market (music).

It would be the poster child of an anti-trust case.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In my book, the problem is that you are not allowed to provide a link to your payment website inside your app. This is especially damaging to small companies. Most people have heard of Spotify, Netflix, Pandora, etc. So it's somewhat natural for them (if not a bit akward) to go to the website if they can't get premium in the app. But for small companies that connection isn't immediately obvious. In my company for i…

Most(every?) app that I’ve signed up for requires an email address. Some apps then send a verification or welcome email. If you mention and link to paid subscription upgrades in that email, will Apple pull your app?

Will people actually read the email? Will they remember it at the time they actually want to upgrade their account?

(An "email me a payment link" button would almost certainly get rejected by Apple)

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s like demanding newpapers pay full price for ad space on their own pages. Just absurd. What does it even mean, Apple owns Apple Music.

Not absurd. Different departments in the same company have budgets of their own. If a department wants to buy an ad from their own paper, it should affect their remaining budget, just as it should show up on the Ad department's revenue.

Sure, but this would not affect Apple music, it’s not like they would shut it down. The Apple eco-system is so popular because Apple takes a holistic approach, they wouldn’t mind at all losing money on Apple music if it increased iPhone earnings.

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They state in their timeline that after many years Apple did allow Spotify.

Until last year there was not an API that allowed apps to download music to the local storage of the watch and play it back in the background. https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2018/504/

[deleted]

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#737
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.

Or in other words: Apple users are the product that Apple sells to publishers, for 30%?

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#738
> Apple decides to open up the App Store to outside app developers and lures them in by the hundreds. They ask users – want to order a pizza, find your nearest florist, or look up how to do the Soulja Boy dance? “There’s an app for that.”

We already had the web for those things ...

Re: Spotify to Apple: Time to Play Fair

#739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most(every?) app that I’ve signed up for requires an email address. Some apps then send a verification or welcome email. If you mention and link to paid subscription upgrades in that email, will Apple pull your app?

Will people actually read the email? Will they remember it at the time they actually want to upgrade their account? (An "email me a payment link" button would almost certainly get rejected by Apple)

“We’ve just sent a verification code to the email you provided, please type the 4 digit code here:_ _ _ _”

It could even be 2 digits (the same 2 digits for everyone), you’re just looking to get their eyes on the email letting them know additional paid subscriptions are available on your website.

Post reply on HN