3 ms·

Humans applying policy will be inconsistent. The alternative is Google where algorithms apply policy, and if they misapply a policy to you're simply screwed. I

by zaroth 6y ago

Humans applying policy will be inconsistent. The alternative is Google where algorithms apply policy, and if they misapply a policy to you're simply screwed. I think the inverse to "Apple employed humans make a judgement call" is "Apple is no longer allowed to control their App Store". I don't like that option, because the curated App Store is a big reason why I bought an iPhone.

mikenew 6y ago
> Humans applying policy will be inconsistent. This is not my argument. It is not just inconsistent, it is selective. Major players are given far more leeway than small ones. There are obvious antitrust concerns, such as Spotify being required to give Apple 30% of it's revenue for it's service that competes with Apple Music[0]. There are concerns about freedom of speech and information, such as Apple removing an app that notified the user when there was a U.S. drone strike[1], or the Hong Kong protest app that China pressured them into removing. Or blocking all VPN apps in China. And even if the argument at the end of the day is "I don't care; I like having a curated app store", why does that imply that Apple should be able to force users into only using theirs? How do you lose anything if users are allowed to install apps from other places, in some cases where there are serious human rights issues at stake? 0: https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/16/apple-pay-and-ios-app-store-under-formal-antitrust-probe-in-europe/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/16/apple-pay-and-ios-app-stor... 1: https://theintercept.com/2017/03/28/after-12-rejections-apple-accepts-app-that-tracks-u-s-drone-strikes/ https://theintercept.com/2017/03/28/after-12-rejections-appl...
- zaroth 6y ago
  It’s just one data point, but on the topic of IAP and revenue share, Spotify actually pays Apple 0.075% of its total revenue. It’s a 15% fee on 680,000 out of their 100,000,000 subscribers. The 30% fee drops to 15% after one year, and Spotify hasn’t accepted IAP in several years, so everyone paying for Spotify through Apple is paying the 15% rate. I do think larger clients should reasonably pay lower rates, as there’s a more equal/symbiotic value proposition between the two parties.
donmcronald 6y ago
You can still sideload or use an alternate store on Android. The experience isn't very good, but it's still an option. I think if the fees were split out people would lose their minds on more expensive apps because they'd recognize it isn't good value. Ex: Hey: $70 / year App Store Fee: $30 / year Also, did Hey get the prices wrong or are they talking about keeping the prices the same and eating the 30%? If they want $99 in their pocket, they need to charge ~43% more. Assuming Apple takes 30% of the sale price: - 99 * 1.43 = $141.57 - 141.57 * .3 = $42.47 for Apple - 141.57 * .7 = $99.10 for Hey So by taking 30% of revenue, it increases prices by 43% because if someone is taking 30% of your revenue, you need to increase your prices by 43% to break even.
- uhryks 6y ago
  I may be wrong as I don't have the rules under the hand but iirc Apple's rules state that the in-app purchases prices must be set as to not push users to go pay outside the app. So raising your price may result in a takedown of your app, meaning you have to eat the 30% if you want to stay on the store.
  - KayL 6y ago
    What if I offer discount code for outside payment?
bogwog 6y ago
> I think the inverse to "Apple employed humans make a judgement call" is "Apple is no longer allowed to control their App Store". I think the right alternative is "Users should have a choice of app stores"
- ryanlol 6y ago
  And they do, if you want play store or huawei store instead of apple app store you can just get an android phone. Nobody is forced to buy an iPhone, there is no monopoly at play here.
  - thw0rted 6y ago
    In the mid-90s no one was "forced" to buy a Windows computer. How did that work out for Microsoft?
redwall_hp 6y ago
> I don't like that option, because the curated App Store is a big reason why I bought an iPhone. You can have a curated app store but still...not gatekeep what software the user can install. Installs via web pages, app store listings that are deprioritized or hidden from the default search view. I'd go so far as they should be legally compelled to do that at a bare minimum. There are myriad apps that users wanted, but Apple nixed them. Whether it's shady rentseeking like the Hey instance or content they find objectionable. How many times have social media sites like Tumblr or Reddit had to deal with their pearl-clutching over nudity? Screw them, they have no right. I can't even imagine how miserable desktop computing would be if that were the paradigm over the last 30 years.

by zaroth 6y ago

mikenew 6y ago

> Humans applying policy will be inconsistent. This is not my argument. It is not just inconsistent, it is selective. Major players are given far more leeway than small ones. There are obvious antitrust concerns, such as Spotify being required to give Apple 30% of it's revenue for it's service that competes with Apple Music[0]. There are concerns about freedom of speech and information, such as Apple removing an app that notified the user when there was a U.S. drone strike[1], or the Hong Kong protest app that China pressured them into removing. Or blocking all VPN apps in China. And even if the argument at the end of the day is "I don't care; I like having a curated app store", why does that imply that Apple should be able to force users into only using theirs? How do you lose anything if users are allowed to install apps from other places, in some cases where there are serious human rights issues at stake? 0: https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/16/apple-pay-and-ios-app-store-under-formal-antitrust-probe-in-europe/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/16/apple-pay-and-ios-app-stor... 1: https://theintercept.com/2017/03/28/after-12-rejections-apple-accepts-app-that-tracks-u-s-drone-strikes/ https://theintercept.com/2017/03/28/after-12-rejections-appl...

zaroth 6y ago
It’s just one data point, but on the topic of IAP and revenue share, Spotify actually pays Apple 0.075% of its total revenue. It’s a 15% fee on 680,000 out of their 100,000,000 subscribers. The 30% fee drops to 15% after one year, and Spotify hasn’t accepted IAP in several years, so everyone paying for Spotify through Apple is paying the 15% rate. I do think larger clients should reasonably pay lower rates, as there’s a more equal/symbiotic value proposition between the two parties.

donmcronald 6y ago

You can still sideload or use an alternate store on Android. The experience isn't very good, but it's still an option. I think if the fees were split out people would lose their minds on more expensive apps because they'd recognize it isn't good value. Ex: Hey: $70 / year App Store Fee: $30 / year Also, did Hey get the prices wrong or are they talking about keeping the prices the same and eating the 30%? If they want $99 in their pocket, they need to charge ~43% more. Assuming Apple takes 30% of the sale price: - 99 * 1.43 = $141.57 - 141.57 * .3 = $42.47 for Apple - 141.57 * .7 = $99.10 for Hey So by taking 30% of revenue, it increases prices by 43% because if someone is taking 30% of your revenue, you need to increase your prices by 43% to break even.

uhryks 6y ago
I may be wrong as I don't have the rules under the hand but iirc Apple's rules state that the in-app purchases prices must be set as to not push users to go pay outside the app. So raising your price may result in a takedown of your app, meaning you have to eat the 30% if you want to stay on the store.
- KayL 6y ago
  What if I offer discount code for outside payment?

bogwog 6y ago

> I think the inverse to "Apple employed humans make a judgement call" is "Apple is no longer allowed to control their App Store". I think the right alternative is "Users should have a choice of app stores"

ryanlol 6y ago
And they do, if you want play store or huawei store instead of apple app store you can just get an android phone. Nobody is forced to buy an iPhone, there is no monopoly at play here.
- thw0rted 6y ago
  In the mid-90s no one was "forced" to buy a Windows computer. How did that work out for Microsoft?

redwall_hp 6y ago

> I don't like that option, because the curated App Store is a big reason why I bought an iPhone. You can have a curated app store but still...not gatekeep what software the user can install. Installs via web pages, app store listings that are deprioritized or hidden from the default search view. I'd go so far as they should be legally compelled to do that at a bare minimum. There are myriad apps that users wanted, but Apple nixed them. Whether it's shady rentseeking like the Hey instance or content they find objectionable. How many times have social media sites like Tumblr or Reddit had to deal with their pearl-clutching over nudity? Screw them, they have no right. I can't even imagine how miserable desktop computing would be if that were the paradigm over the last 30 years.