4 ms·

So Apple wants a 30% cut on the money that could easily go to small business owners and artists. A $2T company that makes tens of billions in profit every year

So Apple wants a 30% cut on the money that could easily go to small business owners and artists. A $2T company that makes tens of billions in profit every year can't help being as extractive as it can in the middle of pandemic when everyone is struggling. How can anyone be okay with this blatant abuse of power? How does it matter if the event is online or offline. If it's happening on a Zoom call or in a coffee shop. Apple isn't just harming big companies like Fortnite, it's harming individual creators. If this isn't case for anti-trust, I don't know what is.

abjgwts 6y ago
Abuse of power? They have guidelines every developer must follow. Give one a break, what about the rest?
- echelon 6y ago
  Trump has guidelines. It doesn't make them fair or right. And I'm not trying to be political, just draw an analogy to counter your argument. A lot of people hold Apple in high esteem. Maybe because they like the company or the aesthetic. But think about all of the innovation and capital locked up in one place. It's bad for the world. Edit: why am I flagged for making a polite and well intentioned argument? Nothing deserves this sort of loyalty where people are flagged for civil discourse. I'm appalled.
  - coronadisaster 6y ago
    the question is, do YOU have guidelines?
- CivBase 6y ago
  Let the rest go as well. Would it kill Apple to make an exception for charitable purchases? And even if they don't make an exception, it's ridiculous that they wont even let developers be transparent about where the money goes.
- shubhamjain 6y ago
  It's nothing but exploitive to keep online events in the same category as in-app purchases. There is a cost to conducting an event—offline or online. Secondly, Apple is well-aware that creators can't conduct offline events that easily because of the pandemic. Hiding behind "it's-rules" is just a trademark of an Evil Corp.
- rbecker 6y ago
  Change the guidelines? Defending a company with "they are following the rules they themselves have written" is so bizarrely common.
- dang 6y ago
  Please don't post unsubstantive and/or flamewar style comments to HN. These threads are getting exceedingly repetitive. They're also getting nastier. We don't want those qualities here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - abjgwts 6y ago
    I’m being downvoted flagged and accused of “flamewar“ for simply saying that Apple has a set of rules developers must follow and they can’t make exceptions otherwise where would it end?
    - dang 6y ago
      Actually I think I misread your comment. I thought "Give one a break" was snark, but you were talking about developers. Sorry!
      - abjgwts 6y ago
        Ah I can see that now :)
metric10 6y ago
Yeah, but in this instance we’re talking about Facebook. I could care less about what Apple charges them. I do feel for indie developers and don’t support the 30% fee, but in the case of $FB (or zoom) allow me to introduce you to the world’s tiniest violin... Also, I’m sure FB is only piling on because of the privacy changes to iOS which harm FB’s core advertising business. FB would charge 30% in a heart beat. Again, I would do away with the 30% fee, but please find me someone other than Facebook to feel sorry for.
- murphy214 6y ago
  This money isn't going to facebook though? Facebook doesn't even take a cut of it. I imagine fb's intentions were to let the customer know that if 30% of the effective donation/payment had not gone to the recipient it wasn't fb taking a cut.
nuker 6y ago
> that could easily go to small business owners and artists What about the children? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children
threatofrain 6y ago
Apple has improved the experience of phone and software for elderly folks and kids by giving them the Apple choice, where before if you wanted to use Microsoft Office, you either did it Microsoft's way or you don't use Microsoft Office (!). Facebook can still communicate anything they want to customers through the channels <they> pay for. Facebook is also free to pursue any kind of financial arrangement they want with customers via channels which they can maintain and pay for. But now through Apple's way, folks can have a one-stop shop to manage any runaway subscriptions, which is an unprecedented consumer benefit. Now folks don't need to maintain 10 different financial relationships... merely because they have 10 apps. Before consumers only had one choice. Now they have two — Microsoft's way, or Apple's way. I'm still struggling to see how this hurts <consumers>, as opposed to the overarching story that Apple takes Very Good care of their customers. Without Apple in the middle, the Microsoft and Adobe's of the world each already have enough power to force customers to do things their way.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

abjgwts 6y ago

Abuse of power? They have guidelines every developer must follow. Give one a break, what about the rest?

echelon 6y ago
Trump has guidelines. It doesn't make them fair or right. And I'm not trying to be political, just draw an analogy to counter your argument. A lot of people hold Apple in high esteem. Maybe because they like the company or the aesthetic. But think about all of the innovation and capital locked up in one place. It's bad for the world. Edit: why am I flagged for making a polite and well intentioned argument? Nothing deserves this sort of loyalty where people are flagged for civil discourse. I'm appalled.
- coronadisaster 6y ago
  the question is, do YOU have guidelines?
CivBase 6y ago
Let the rest go as well. Would it kill Apple to make an exception for charitable purchases? And even if they don't make an exception, it's ridiculous that they wont even let developers be transparent about where the money goes.
shubhamjain 6y ago
It's nothing but exploitive to keep online events in the same category as in-app purchases. There is a cost to conducting an event—offline or online. Secondly, Apple is well-aware that creators can't conduct offline events that easily because of the pandemic. Hiding behind "it's-rules" is just a trademark of an Evil Corp.
rbecker 6y ago
Change the guidelines? Defending a company with "they are following the rules they themselves have written" is so bizarrely common.
dang 6y ago
Please don't post unsubstantive and/or flamewar style comments to HN. These threads are getting exceedingly repetitive. They're also getting nastier. We don't want those qualities here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- abjgwts 6y ago
  I’m being downvoted flagged and accused of “flamewar“ for simply saying that Apple has a set of rules developers must follow and they can’t make exceptions otherwise where would it end?
  - dang 6y ago
    Actually I think I misread your comment. I thought "Give one a break" was snark, but you were talking about developers. Sorry!
    - abjgwts 6y ago
      Ah I can see that now :)

metric10 6y ago

Yeah, but in this instance we’re talking about Facebook. I could care less about what Apple charges them. I do feel for indie developers and don’t support the 30% fee, but in the case of $FB (or zoom) allow me to introduce you to the world’s tiniest violin... Also, I’m sure FB is only piling on because of the privacy changes to iOS which harm FB’s core advertising business. FB would charge 30% in a heart beat. Again, I would do away with the 30% fee, but please find me someone other than Facebook to feel sorry for.

murphy214 6y ago
This money isn't going to facebook though? Facebook doesn't even take a cut of it. I imagine fb's intentions were to let the customer know that if 30% of the effective donation/payment had not gone to the recipient it wasn't fb taking a cut.

nuker 6y ago

> that could easily go to small business owners and artists What about the children? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

threatofrain 6y ago

Apple has improved the experience of phone and software for elderly folks and kids by giving them the Apple choice, where before if you wanted to use Microsoft Office, you either did it Microsoft's way or you don't use Microsoft Office (!). Facebook can still communicate anything they want to customers through the channels <they> pay for. Facebook is also free to pursue any kind of financial arrangement they want with customers via channels which they can maintain and pay for. But now through Apple's way, folks can have a one-stop shop to manage any runaway subscriptions, which is an unprecedented consumer benefit. Now folks don't need to maintain 10 different financial relationships... merely because they have 10 apps. Before consumers only had one choice. Now they have two — Microsoft's way, or Apple's way. I'm still struggling to see how this hurts <consumers>, as opposed to the overarching story that Apple takes Very Good care of their customers. Without Apple in the middle, the Microsoft and Adobe's of the world each already have enough power to force customers to do things their way.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]