5 ms·

>you can't buy/rent movies on Google Play, Amazon, etc. apps on iOS Isn't that a choice Google and Amazon make because they don't want to pay Apple's fees for

>you can't buy/rent movies on Google Play, Amazon, etc. apps on iOS Isn't that a choice Google and Amazon make because they don't want to pay Apple's fees for sales going through their marketplace? If that's the case, it doesn't seem anticompetitive, since everyone is charged the same fees no matter what. Google and Amazon just don't want to pay it. Same thing as the Kindle Store, you can't buy Kindle books through the Amazon app but you can buy them through the browser. Because if you buy them through the app, Apple takes a cut, but they don't through the browser. So Amazon made the choice to not sell books through their app, even though many other merchants sell digital goods through their apps and pay Apple the fee.

Veratyr 9y ago
> If that's the case, it doesn't seem anticompetitive, since everyone is charged the same fees no matter what. Google and Amazon just don't want to pay it. Apple doesn't pay them. Anyone who wants to sell media on iOS has to compete with iTunes while subject to a 30% price handicap. If that's not anticompetitive I don't know what is.
- prklmn 9y ago
  I look at in in the context of physical goods. Grocery stores processs their private label meats. The grocery store also sells name brand meats but those brands have to pay for shelf space. The meat is exactly the same, just processed by two different entities - one who owns the store and one that doesn’t.
  - Veratyr 9y ago
    The situation you describe is a little different because people aren't locked in to a supermarket. If you don't want to pay the premium, you can go to a deli, another supermarket or have it delivered by Amazon. If you don't want to pay Apple a premium, you don't have a choice. You either do it or ditch iOS and lose all your purchases on the platform.
    - prklmn 9y ago
      Maybe the situation is more analogous to joining Costco or Sam's Club where you pay a membership fee, i.e. buying the phone. Your point about losing all your purchases is a good one. I guess you could say you still own your purchases after you ditch iOS, you just can't use them with other platforms - but since all the food you buy gets consumed, it's a unique scenario.
      - Veratyr 9y ago
        The problem is that Sam's Club and CostCo still have alternatives, even with their membership fees. Imagine that you paid $1000 for a 1 year CostCo (iOS) membership which gives you access to CostCo but only on the condition that you live in CostCo Village, where you can only buy Certified Approved™ products from CostCo (which have a 30% markup) and if you choose to leave, you'll lose everything you bought while you were there. Home, furniture, electronics, everything. CostCo Village is a nice place to live and the products sure are nice but imagine 50% of the population living like this. From a consumer perspective it's shitty because you have no choice and from a vendor perspective it's shitty because you either play ball or lose out on half the population. Sure there are Sam's Club (Android) Villages where you can still buy from other chains or independent grocers but it's just stupid that you have to make this choice.
        prklmn 9y ago
        Here’s one, you buy a Mac and use it for 5 years with all your Mac software you bought and then you decide to switch to a pc. None of the software can be used on the pc, and you have to buy it all again for the new machine. Consumer hates it, developer loves it. The intangibility of software makes for a bad comparison to using/buying physical goods. Switching does suck for consumers, but I think you’re very wrong about it being shitty for developers. They have a new opportunity to sell their product! Also, there’s a reason why vendors pay a huge premium for Costco shelf space - it’s worth it. To have instant access to Costco members for vendors is a big deal, otherwise they wouldn’t be there. Another thought...we live in a capitalist society (assuming you live in the US). With the customer base that Costco has, you can’t realistically expect them to give away the most valuable thing they have to vendors, can you? Sure if you run a single convenience store you can’t charge for shelf space, but if you run 1000 of them you probably can. So if you’re Microsoft for example, you need to beg developers to build apps for your mobile OS because the value proposition i.e. paying users just aren’t there. Flip that story on its head and you have Apple. Also, I don’t quite understand what you mean in your last point....
fjksksvdjsjd 9y ago
Anti competitive or not, it’s terrible for consumers.
- freehunter 9y ago
  Well it's terrible for consumers that Intel charges money for their processors too, but such is capitalism.
  - fjksksvdjsjd 9y ago
    But, it’s really not that terrible. Intel has plenty of competition; if you just need “a computer” you can get a rpi for $25. Realistically there’s no way to buy digital video without also fucking yourself into a walled garden that restricts your use of your own licensed content. There is no real competition there for the experience people want—video they can play on whatever they want to, whenever.
    - freehunter 9y ago
      If a $25 Raspberry Pi is in the same league as a full Intel computer, surely a DVD is in the same league as renting a movie on iTunes.
      - fjksksvdjsjd 9y ago
        It is for many cases of computation! I can do my bill paying, writing, and much of my coding work from a raspberry pi; for those things, it’s a suitable replacement. These days you can get an entire phone that outputs to your tv that is hackable, cheap, and has access to relatively quality proprietary software. And yea, a DVD is in the dame league, but it’s a format that deteriorates with age. Not exactly an investment format like vinyl. At least you can back up MP3s and play them with any software you like.

Veratyr 9y ago

> If that's the case, it doesn't seem anticompetitive, since everyone is charged the same fees no matter what. Google and Amazon just don't want to pay it. Apple doesn't pay them. Anyone who wants to sell media on iOS has to compete with iTunes while subject to a 30% price handicap. If that's not anticompetitive I don't know what is.

prklmn 9y ago
I look at in in the context of physical goods. Grocery stores processs their private label meats. The grocery store also sells name brand meats but those brands have to pay for shelf space. The meat is exactly the same, just processed by two different entities - one who owns the store and one that doesn’t.
- Veratyr 9y ago
  The situation you describe is a little different because people aren't locked in to a supermarket. If you don't want to pay the premium, you can go to a deli, another supermarket or have it delivered by Amazon. If you don't want to pay Apple a premium, you don't have a choice. You either do it or ditch iOS and lose all your purchases on the platform.
  - prklmn 9y ago
    Maybe the situation is more analogous to joining Costco or Sam's Club where you pay a membership fee, i.e. buying the phone. Your point about losing all your purchases is a good one. I guess you could say you still own your purchases after you ditch iOS, you just can't use them with other platforms - but since all the food you buy gets consumed, it's a unique scenario.
    - Veratyr 9y ago
      The problem is that Sam's Club and CostCo still have alternatives, even with their membership fees. Imagine that you paid $1000 for a 1 year CostCo (iOS) membership which gives you access to CostCo but only on the condition that you live in CostCo Village, where you can only buy Certified Approved™ products from CostCo (which have a 30% markup) and if you choose to leave, you'll lose everything you bought while you were there. Home, furniture, electronics, everything. CostCo Village is a nice place to live and the products sure are nice but imagine 50% of the population living like this. From a consumer perspective it's shitty because you have no choice and from a vendor perspective it's shitty because you either play ball or lose out on half the population. Sure there are Sam's Club (Android) Villages where you can still buy from other chains or independent grocers but it's just stupid that you have to make this choice.
      - prklmn 9y ago
        Here’s one, you buy a Mac and use it for 5 years with all your Mac software you bought and then you decide to switch to a pc. None of the software can be used on the pc, and you have to buy it all again for the new machine. Consumer hates it, developer loves it. The intangibility of software makes for a bad comparison to using/buying physical goods. Switching does suck for consumers, but I think you’re very wrong about it being shitty for developers. They have a new opportunity to sell their product! Also, there’s a reason why vendors pay a huge premium for Costco shelf space - it’s worth it. To have instant access to Costco members for vendors is a big deal, otherwise they wouldn’t be there. Another thought...we live in a capitalist society (assuming you live in the US). With the customer base that Costco has, you can’t realistically expect them to give away the most valuable thing they have to vendors, can you? Sure if you run a single convenience store you can’t charge for shelf space, but if you run 1000 of them you probably can. So if you’re Microsoft for example, you need to beg developers to build apps for your mobile OS because the value proposition i.e. paying users just aren’t there. Flip that story on its head and you have Apple. Also, I don’t quite understand what you mean in your last point....

fjksksvdjsjd 9y ago

Anti competitive or not, it’s terrible for consumers.

freehunter 9y ago
Well it's terrible for consumers that Intel charges money for their processors too, but such is capitalism.
- fjksksvdjsjd 9y ago
  But, it’s really not that terrible. Intel has plenty of competition; if you just need “a computer” you can get a rpi for $25. Realistically there’s no way to buy digital video without also fucking yourself into a walled garden that restricts your use of your own licensed content. There is no real competition there for the experience people want—video they can play on whatever they want to, whenever.
  - freehunter 9y ago
    If a $25 Raspberry Pi is in the same league as a full Intel computer, surely a DVD is in the same league as renting a movie on iTunes.
    - fjksksvdjsjd 9y ago
      It is for many cases of computation! I can do my bill paying, writing, and much of my coding work from a raspberry pi; for those things, it’s a suitable replacement. These days you can get an entire phone that outputs to your tv that is hackable, cheap, and has access to relatively quality proprietary software. And yea, a DVD is in the dame league, but it’s a format that deteriorates with age. Not exactly an investment format like vinyl. At least you can back up MP3s and play them with any software you like.