3 ms·

Tesla is definitely one of the easier cases to think about, the rest are in a grey area. But even with Tesla it's not 100% crystal clear. There might be some b

Tesla is definitely one of the easier cases to think about, the rest are in a grey area. But even with Tesla it's not 100% crystal clear. There might be some buyers who pick Tesla specifically because of the fancy tech features like Summon mode. It's impossible to use Summon mode without the app. So for one of those buyers, the app is an essential part of the purchase, just like HEY subscribers who expect to read emails on their phone.

parsimo2010 6y ago
I don't think every app comes with a clear label attached, but I think most people could decide which apps are the product and which apps are just a feature for the product. For argument's sake, I'll claim the core distinction to be if the only realistic alternative to use a product is through an app on another platform or through a web browser, then the app is the core product and not just a supporting feature. The product can live on servers, but if it weren't for the app then the servers wouldn't matter. I can still drive a Tesla without the app. It's clear that the core product is car, not the app. Some people may have bought it because of a defining feature, but you are not paying $80k for Summon mode. You are paying $80k for a car that has Summon mode. Wells Fargo offers almost all of their functionality through physical branches and ATMs. Having an app is just a feature, a bank account is clearly not an app. I cannot use Netflix without an app or browser on my TV, phone, tablet, or computer. There are movies stored on servers, but I'm not paying $15/month unless I can watch movies. That means Netflix's core product is an app and per Apple's rules they should offer in-app purchases. WeWork is a little harder for me. They are a real estate company but I'm not sure you could call WeWork and get a workspace over the phone nor could you do it in person (you can call a landlord directly, but that is not WeWork's product). I think their core product is that you can book a space online or with an app. I think they need to have in-app signup and purchases. Github is the most gray one for me- once setup, I use it mostly through the command line. I could claim that the core product is not an app, but I don't honestly believe that. I use a significant part of GitHub's feature set through the browser (discovering repositories, clicking through links to read about a package before cloning it).
- baddox 6y ago
  I just don’t think the distinction is actually as clear as you describe it. Most of these apps are clients for a server-based product that you’re paying for. One could argue that the Netflix app isn’t the product, it’s just a video player that you use to connect to the server that you’re paying to have access to. If Netflix just exposed .mp4 links in a web browser, then it would work fine in Safari on an iPhone. Or imagine a cloud-based e-book service that you can just SSH into. Should Apple allow apps marketed simply as SSH clients, but not allow an SSH client branded with that e-book service?
  - parsimo2010 6y ago
    I addressed this. It's not a watertight mathematically provable law, but I think that with the majority of apps, a reasonable person making a good faith effort would have the same conclusion as me. I said if it's the only realistic alternative is to use an app or browser. I also said that the product might "live" on a server, but if you can only access it via app or browser then the product is an app. Most of these products are not clients. A client is something like an RSS reader, where one company makes app but interact with services/products from other companies. Netflix does not sell you a subscription to watch movies and then allow you to watch it with third-party apps. They do not expose .mp4 files, so saying "if they did this" isn't relevant. They try their hardest to force you to watch with their app. Overall, your arguments are silly. People have common sense and can use it. Using misdirection in your words doesn't change what the functionality of the product is. Coming up with strange corner cases that don't exist and aren't viable products aren't good examples. Until an actual commercial e-book service that functions through SSH exists then Apple doesn't need to waste their time addressing it.
    - baddox 6y ago
      I'm not disputing the fact that, barring some controversial edge cases, most people could probably agree on the classification. My point is that Apple clearly appears to be claiming that there are some very clear rules that are followed strictly without any personal judgement about any particular app or company. A lot of their PR about this stuff has been of the form "we're not making any judgments about you, we're just following the rules" (never mind that it's their rules in the first place). But I think that's pretty clearly not the case, and moreover, I think people might be just as upset if Apple's policies said "we just use our common sense to classify apps and determine which features they can use on our platform" and then appeared to apply those determinations inconsistently.
donarb 6y ago
> just like HEY subscribers who expect to read emails on their phone To use the service, you have to use a mobile app (or web app), the service won't let you access via POP/IMAP.
DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
> It's impossible to use Summon mode without the app My Model X does summon using only the keyfob. For Model 3 owners without a keyfob (it's an optional extra) - yeah, I'll give you that.

parsimo2010 6y ago

I don't think every app comes with a clear label attached, but I think most people could decide which apps are the product and which apps are just a feature for the product. For argument's sake, I'll claim the core distinction to be if the only realistic alternative to use a product is through an app on another platform or through a web browser, then the app is the core product and not just a supporting feature. The product can live on servers, but if it weren't for the app then the servers wouldn't matter. I can still drive a Tesla without the app. It's clear that the core product is car, not the app. Some people may have bought it because of a defining feature, but you are not paying $80k for Summon mode. You are paying $80k for a car that has Summon mode. Wells Fargo offers almost all of their functionality through physical branches and ATMs. Having an app is just a feature, a bank account is clearly not an app. I cannot use Netflix without an app or browser on my TV, phone, tablet, or computer. There are movies stored on servers, but I'm not paying $15/month unless I can watch movies. That means Netflix's core product is an app and per Apple's rules they should offer in-app purchases. WeWork is a little harder for me. They are a real estate company but I'm not sure you could call WeWork and get a workspace over the phone nor could you do it in person (you can call a landlord directly, but that is not WeWork's product). I think their core product is that you can book a space online or with an app. I think they need to have in-app signup and purchases. Github is the most gray one for me- once setup, I use it mostly through the command line. I could claim that the core product is not an app, but I don't honestly believe that. I use a significant part of GitHub's feature set through the browser (discovering repositories, clicking through links to read about a package before cloning it).

baddox 6y ago
I just don’t think the distinction is actually as clear as you describe it. Most of these apps are clients for a server-based product that you’re paying for. One could argue that the Netflix app isn’t the product, it’s just a video player that you use to connect to the server that you’re paying to have access to. If Netflix just exposed .mp4 links in a web browser, then it would work fine in Safari on an iPhone. Or imagine a cloud-based e-book service that you can just SSH into. Should Apple allow apps marketed simply as SSH clients, but not allow an SSH client branded with that e-book service?
- parsimo2010 6y ago
  I addressed this. It's not a watertight mathematically provable law, but I think that with the majority of apps, a reasonable person making a good faith effort would have the same conclusion as me. I said if it's the only realistic alternative is to use an app or browser. I also said that the product might "live" on a server, but if you can only access it via app or browser then the product is an app. Most of these products are not clients. A client is something like an RSS reader, where one company makes app but interact with services/products from other companies. Netflix does not sell you a subscription to watch movies and then allow you to watch it with third-party apps. They do not expose .mp4 files, so saying "if they did this" isn't relevant. They try their hardest to force you to watch with their app. Overall, your arguments are silly. People have common sense and can use it. Using misdirection in your words doesn't change what the functionality of the product is. Coming up with strange corner cases that don't exist and aren't viable products aren't good examples. Until an actual commercial e-book service that functions through SSH exists then Apple doesn't need to waste their time addressing it.
  - baddox 6y ago
    I'm not disputing the fact that, barring some controversial edge cases, most people could probably agree on the classification. My point is that Apple clearly appears to be claiming that there are some very clear rules that are followed strictly without any personal judgement about any particular app or company. A lot of their PR about this stuff has been of the form "we're not making any judgments about you, we're just following the rules" (never mind that it's their rules in the first place). But I think that's pretty clearly not the case, and moreover, I think people might be just as upset if Apple's policies said "we just use our common sense to classify apps and determine which features they can use on our platform" and then appeared to apply those determinations inconsistently.

donarb 6y ago

> just like HEY subscribers who expect to read emails on their phone To use the service, you have to use a mobile app (or web app), the service won't let you access via POP/IMAP.

DaiPlusPlus 6y ago

> It's impossible to use Summon mode without the app My Model X does summon using only the keyfob. For Model 3 owners without a keyfob (it's an optional extra) - yeah, I'll give you that.