Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes • Hacker News Board

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#991

Post by kemiller » Sun, Sep 27, 2020, 4:38 PM UTC

eertami wrote: post #171

kemiller wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No... many people actually appreciate the walled garden as consumers.

Sure, but it's of course surprising such people would be present on HN.

Sigh... I’ll ignore the subtle dig and respond to this straight. I don’t want my daily driver phone that I rely on to do my real hacking to be a science experiment. I want it to be a tool that always works, and I want it to be somebody else’s job to ensure that. No one is perfect at this, not even Apple, but they are the best at it in 2020 and the App Store lock down is part of that. If Android didn’t exist, I might feel that a different balance would be optimal, but it does, and it’s thriving. I’ve developed for the App Store and while it’s a pain in the ass, I actually appreciate that There are standards that must be met and I can’t be undercut by a competitor who is willing to take shortcuts.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#992

Post by tripu » Mon, Sep 28, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

OK, I get that most app publishers can't afford not to sell via the App Store and that iThings are ubiquitous, and I support freer options everywhere (even for Apple users)…

But, come on — this initiative sounds a lot like:

“Drat! We want people who, on their own volition, decided to go for an expensive, unaccountable, closed, locked system to be able to install and use our apps freely! Isn't that fair? I can has freedom?”.

Read that naïve section “our vision”. A vision is something novel. Free software is 35+ years old. And there are open distribution platforms already. Reinventing the wheel.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#993

Post by jonny_eh » Mon, Sep 28, 2020, 5:11 PM UTC

yyyk wrote: post #947

imtringued wrote: post #933

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't read to me that way. >Buyers and sellers can't: >In any communications with another eBay member, refer to or promote external websites that facilitate sales outside of eBay I would count sending a "letter" along with your product to be a form of communication. >Use contact information obtained through an eBay transaction to offer to buy or sell an item outside of eBay This would prevent you from adding the…

You're interpreting this in the way Apple would, not in the way eBay actually does. >>In any communications with another eBay member, refer to or promote external websites that facilitate sales outside of eBay >I would count sending a "letter" along with your product to be a form of communication. This means one can't use eBay's messaging for promotion, but one can use one's own product. The way you're interpreting t…

Indeed, it seems as though communication within the product, or its box, is ok. If you buy an Xbox on ebay, it's allowed to sell you games within the Xbox.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#994

Post by MiroF » Mon, Sep 28, 2020, 5:32 PM UTC

beachy wrote: post #873

Polylactic_acid wrote: post #840

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only find them useful for topics I do not understand because they are very complex and abstract. For example the explanation of linking voltage/current/watts to pipes with flowing water made sense to me because electrons moving through a conductor is too abstract but saying "Voltage is like water pressure, it makes the electricity move faster" makes sense.

I hate the water / electricity analogies because they don't make sense. Voltage is not like water pressure. If you have a high water pressure, water will inexorably be pushed through the pipe to relieve the pressure. That's so regardless of whether the pipe is 1 inch or 1 yard in diameter. Voltage on the other hand means nothing without current. A high voltage on its own - like static electricity - will not move many…

> Voltage on the other hand means nothing without current

How do you propose you have voltage in a conductive medium (pipe) without current?

To me, it's not a bad analogy (nevermind you that electrons flow the opposite direction of current) - and I am well-versed in physics.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#995

Post by temp667 » Mon, Sep 28, 2020, 5:49 PM UTC

jariel wrote: post #935

zaroth wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple does not have a “monopoly on iPhone hardware and iOS”. This is a fundamental misunderstand of the term. You cannot have a monopoly on your own product, because a monopoly is a state of a market and your own product is not a market. Understanding this is fundamental to the actual legal issue at hand. First, the argument against Apple is not that they are bundling an App Store with their iPhone. The argument agai…

"They chose that route for a myriad of very significant reasons relating to user experience, usability, privacy, security, safety, brand & reputation, performance, and accountability." This is incredibly naive. They chose it to be this way for the purposes of profit . Android is testament to the fact that high degree of quality and security and consistency can be maintained without any of the most iOS aggressive rest…

If andorid is great, then folks will pick android. That's fine and competition.

Things are a lot cheaper on android to, so they win on price.

The one android phone I ever purchased

1) Shipped with bloatware in the base install (!!!)

2) Shipped with an older android version.

3) The updates never came

4) The messaging story was CRAP (unsecured SMS / spam SMS)

Meanwhile I'm getting 4-5 years of updates on every iphone I have ever purchased. I've never gotten spam imessages I don't think. etc.

Apple choses these features because they think it will let them charge more for their stuff - which I think it does. Making a product people want by reducing scam behavior shouldn't be illegal, and people wanting your product and being willing to pay extra for it doesn't make you a monopoly. Def makes apple rich though!

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#996

Post by jrnichols » Tue, Sep 29, 2020, 4:06 AM UTC

gpm wrote: post #751

temp667 wrote: post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to agree with apple, but they clearly think the halo effect of having just one reasonably fair app store on their platform increases their platform brand power and profits both. I think they are right. Can I ask a question. When your elderly parents or kids ask for a phone (assuming they are not developers), does it give you no comfort that if its an apple from end to end including app store things wil…

> You don't have to agree with apple, but they clearly think the halo effect of having just one reasonably fair app store on their platform increases their platform brand power and profits both. I think they are right. I agree, but "it makes us more money and gives us more power" has never been a defense against anti-trust law. Indeed if this was not true I imagine that anti-trust law would never have been necessary…

> I worry about the internet a hell of a lot more on IPhones than I do on androids, because I can't install a proper adblocker, because of Apples anti-competitive policies regarding browsers (the ad blocking api's in safari are gimped compared to firefox).

This is silly. Who determines what a "proper adblocker" is? There are plenty of adblockers available for iOS. In fact, you can even use Firefox AS an adblocker.

This is a non-issue.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#997

Post by lern_too_spel » Tue, Sep 29, 2020, 11:13 PM UTC

zepto wrote: post #990

lern_too_spel wrote: post #867

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android allows the user to prevent data from going to third parties as well. The difference is it also allows the user to prevent data from from going to the OS manufacturer. This is strictly greater privacy. You are wrong about GPS location requests: "By enabling Location Services for your devices, you agree and consent to the transmission, collection, maintenance, processing, and use of your location data and locat…

I’m not wrong. Your quote supports my assertion. You seem to be ignoring these important words: “...in an anonymous and encrypted form” Apple doesn’t end up knowing where you are. Even though colloquially we can say they ‘send your location’, they don’t actually learn where you are. This invalidates support for your claim about how iOS privacy is worse than Android.

> “...in an anonymous and encrypted form”

This is not so hard to reverse given that Apple also has your location tied to your identity from other Apple services you use. Once you match that location to the encrypted user, who is often seen requesting their location data from work or home, you get the encrypted user's location data identified.

Compare to Android, where you don't have to send your location data anywhere to get your GPS location. iOS location privacy is strictly worse.

You also ignored the fact that every app install gets reported to Apple tied to your identity, which is arguably even more egregious.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#998

Post by jrnichols » Tue, Sep 29, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

jrnichols wrote: post #996

gpm wrote: post #751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't have to agree with apple, but they clearly think the halo effect of having just one reasonably fair app store on their platform increases their platform brand power and profits both. I think they are right. I agree, but "it makes us more money and gives us more power" has never been a defense against anti-trust law. Indeed if this was not true I imagine that anti-trust law would never have been necessary…

> I worry about the internet a hell of a lot more on IPhones than I do on androids, because I can't install a proper adblocker, because of Apples anti-competitive policies regarding browsers (the ad blocking api's in safari are gimped compared to firefox). This is silly. Who determines what a "proper adblocker" is? There are plenty of adblockers available for iOS. In fact, you can even use Firefox AS an adblocker. Th…

I am not surprised to see a downvote. It's sad to see that the Apple hatred from reddit has spilled over here as well. Was anything I said inaccurate?

No, it wasn't. OP there made a ridiculous complaint and demonstrated a lack of technical knowledge. Yet I get voted down for being correct?

I see.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#999

Post by kelnos » Fri, Oct 02, 2020, 4:52 AM UTC

moate wrote: post #914

kelnos wrote: post #906

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we, though? I feel like most ebooks on Amazon are priced similarly to their paperback counterparts, or at least not significantly lower to the point that it reflects the fact that they don't have to manufacture a physical good or get someone to drive a truck to bring it to me.

I mean you’re tying value to cost which is weird for art (which is the majority of e-books, novels) This is like complaining a painting is too expensive because the canvas and paint only cost 100 dollars. The major value of a book, to a consumer, is the words it contains not the paper it’s printed on.

> The major value of a book, to a consumer, is the words it contains not the paper it’s printed on.

Yes, and that's exactly my point.

If a paperback book is priced at $10, and it costs $2 to manufacture, $1 to ship, and $3 to market (made-up numbers, but the values don't matter), with the rest going to the author/publisher, then we're saying that piece of art is worth $4. If the e-book edition costs $8, perhaps that $3 marketing cost is still there, but the marginal cost of storage and distribution is probably a few cents... so somehow now that piece of art is worth $7? That doesn't add up.

I mean, I get it: the price you pay for something is generally just the highest price that the market will bear, a price that maximizes profit... and the "intrinsic value" of something doesn't matter or maybe doesn't even exist. Even the cost to produce it may not matter, if the seller wants to use a particular item as a loss-leader.

What I object to is, back when e-books started being a thing, the big promise was that they'd be so much cheaper than physical books, because the marginal cost to "produce" and "ship" one is near-zero. But of course that promise never materialized; it was just marketing to get people to buy Kindles.

Re: Epic, Spotify, and Tinder form advocacy group to push for app store changes

#1000

Post by ViViDboarder » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 3:49 PM UTC

eigen wrote: post #874

ViViDboarder wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they have to open up secure payments? Is that an API that first party apps on the App Store access? Or are the apps that access it part of the operating system? This is mostly targeted at apps like Apple Music where Apple allows deep Siri integration without allowing the same to competing apps.

> This is mostly targeted at apps like Apple Music where Apple allows deep Siri integration without allowing the same to competing apps. it seems that, according to Spotify, Siri works with Spotify. https://support.spotify.com/us/article/siri/

They added support in the last year or so on iOS an CarPlay if you say “Play something on Spotify”, but it will not be default. They gave themselves an advantage there for years.

Here’s a timeline on Spotify and Apple https://www.timetoplayfair.com/timeline/