5 ms·

They should take whatever percentage they want, even 100%, as long as they allow alternative ways to get apps onto the iPhone and to charge for in-app purchases

They should take whatever percentage they want, even 100%, as long as they allow alternative ways to get apps onto the iPhone and to charge for in-app purchases. The problem isn’t that their price is too high, it’s that it’s the only game in town. Allow alternatives and then the price they choose can compete with the rest of them. We can see exactly how valuable of a service it really is.

nolok 5y ago
Oh I absolutely agree. Like another commenter said below, another similar thing are payment processors fees, but it works because 1. you're free to use another one, or checks, or cash, or bitcoin, or anything else, and 2. the EU has strongly regulated their fees and imposed massive limits on what they can charge in %.
- Sebb767 5y ago
  But are they similar? One could argue that Visa and PayPal have a monopoly on payments processed via the Visa network/PayPal credit. Consumers are free to choose another ecosystem, but if they don't, the business is forced to make business with them. Similarly, the consumer can choose to buy an Android (or have to phones/tablets), but if they choose Apple only, the business needs to work with Apple.
  - trinix912 5y ago
    Yes, but if you have a VISA card you can still withdraw the money and pay in cash right? That's an alternative that doesn't involve switching over to another ecosystem. Also, the EU regulations cap the fees and set up identical rules for everyone (unlike Apple where its own services are left through without a second thought even though they don't necessarily operate to the code).
    - Sebb767 5y ago
      > Yes, but if you have a VISA card you can still withdraw the money and pay in cash right? That's an alternative that doesn't involve switching over to another ecosystem. Isn't VISA somewhat similar to an ecosystem? It's not perfect (you can not switch over all apps when switching from/to Android), but you still need to change something on your side. Yes, exchanging a plastic card is easier than switching a phone, but it's not fundamentally a different paradigm. > Also, the EU regulations cap the fees and set up identical rules for everyone I agree that this is a good idea, but it's not a fundamental problem with Apple's payment structure.
  - ARandumGuy 5y ago
    They're not similar, because Visa isn't in the music streaming business. Apple is directly competing with Spotify with their Apple Music streaming service. Since Apple has complete control over the iPhone ecosystem, they can set the rules to harm other streaming service, or let their own service completely break the rules. These anti-competitive rules aren't just about Company A relying on Company B to do business. It's about Company B also directly competing with Company A.
sixstringtheory 5y ago
People will always take the cheaper option, so might as well make that the only option instead of causing what will surely be claimed in the future as a decision trap for consumers. Hey, maybe 30% already was the cheaper option and they did just that? Allowing sideloading apps or alternative app stores will send the platform straight to hell, by opening up new exploit vectors in an already insanely complex system, and/or creating new and perverse incentive models for app developers and app store providers. We’re going to turn smartphones and the app ecosystem into what has become of journalism in the digital age of information because we want nice things for cheap/free. Cheap/fast/good. Apple has always aimed for the last two. You’re going to have to sacrifice one to get the “cheap” part.
- wvenable 5y ago
  The iPhone itself is never the cheaper option.
- tolmasky 5y ago
  For starters, the AppStore is not "good" (from a customer perspective -- it sucks, the search is basically unusable except for exact string matches, and still then it shows you the competitor's ad for almost the whole screen before what you're actually looking for), and I don't even know what "fast" means in this context. Probably not review time, and definitely not "quickness of features" -- it took 5 years just to get demo videos. In reality, the fast/cheap/good thing (while for starters not being some actual "law"), is meant to apply to engineering and not market dynamics. You seem to have a lot of faith in Apple having performed some secret formula 10 years ago to determine the cheapest price. I guess we don't need free markets for price signals at all! If we all had Apple's formula, we could have a completely government run system that determined the right price for everything. What a wonderful system that would be! Anyways, I've covered in many other comments how Apple would be better off by allowing alternatives since they'd no longer be forced to balance this fine line of appearing "fair" while "strict": From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26796547 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26796547 > This is one of the tricky parts about AppStore discussions, it's not about being for or against the AppStore. In fact, I wish the AppStore was MUCH pickier about the apps it let in, and I also wish there was an alternative to the AppStore to catch cases that didn't meet that strict bar. Then the AppStore could actually be about curation as opposed to fear-induced isolationism. Then Apple wouldn't have to inadvertently have political side-effects when it disallowed apps like HKMap.live. > Being on the AppStore could still be advantageous beyond just "either that or you don't get to be on the iPhone at all.” Apple payment processing, iCloud integrations, Family-sharing, etc. could all be tied to being ON the AppStore, so there'd still be a huge incentive to try to ship that way. And side-loading doesn't have to be easy or even on by default.
m463 5y ago
Right - look up: monopoly - "A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity." and monopsony - "The microeconomic theory of monopsony assumes a single entity to have market power over all sellers as the only purchaser of a good or service." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony basically customers can only buy apps from apple AND developers can only sell apps to apple.

nolok 5y ago

Oh I absolutely agree. Like another commenter said below, another similar thing are payment processors fees, but it works because 1. you're free to use another one, or checks, or cash, or bitcoin, or anything else, and 2. the EU has strongly regulated their fees and imposed massive limits on what they can charge in %.

Sebb767 5y ago
But are they similar? One could argue that Visa and PayPal have a monopoly on payments processed via the Visa network/PayPal credit. Consumers are free to choose another ecosystem, but if they don't, the business is forced to make business with them. Similarly, the consumer can choose to buy an Android (or have to phones/tablets), but if they choose Apple only, the business needs to work with Apple.
- trinix912 5y ago
  Yes, but if you have a VISA card you can still withdraw the money and pay in cash right? That's an alternative that doesn't involve switching over to another ecosystem. Also, the EU regulations cap the fees and set up identical rules for everyone (unlike Apple where its own services are left through without a second thought even though they don't necessarily operate to the code).
  - Sebb767 5y ago
    > Yes, but if you have a VISA card you can still withdraw the money and pay in cash right? That's an alternative that doesn't involve switching over to another ecosystem. Isn't VISA somewhat similar to an ecosystem? It's not perfect (you can not switch over all apps when switching from/to Android), but you still need to change something on your side. Yes, exchanging a plastic card is easier than switching a phone, but it's not fundamentally a different paradigm. > Also, the EU regulations cap the fees and set up identical rules for everyone I agree that this is a good idea, but it's not a fundamental problem with Apple's payment structure.
- ARandumGuy 5y ago
  They're not similar, because Visa isn't in the music streaming business. Apple is directly competing with Spotify with their Apple Music streaming service. Since Apple has complete control over the iPhone ecosystem, they can set the rules to harm other streaming service, or let their own service completely break the rules. These anti-competitive rules aren't just about Company A relying on Company B to do business. It's about Company B also directly competing with Company A.

sixstringtheory 5y ago

People will always take the cheaper option, so might as well make that the only option instead of causing what will surely be claimed in the future as a decision trap for consumers. Hey, maybe 30% already was the cheaper option and they did just that? Allowing sideloading apps or alternative app stores will send the platform straight to hell, by opening up new exploit vectors in an already insanely complex system, and/or creating new and perverse incentive models for app developers and app store providers. We’re going to turn smartphones and the app ecosystem into what has become of journalism in the digital age of information because we want nice things for cheap/free. Cheap/fast/good. Apple has always aimed for the last two. You’re going to have to sacrifice one to get the “cheap” part.

wvenable 5y ago
The iPhone itself is never the cheaper option.
tolmasky 5y ago
For starters, the AppStore is not "good" (from a customer perspective -- it sucks, the search is basically unusable except for exact string matches, and still then it shows you the competitor's ad for almost the whole screen before what you're actually looking for), and I don't even know what "fast" means in this context. Probably not review time, and definitely not "quickness of features" -- it took 5 years just to get demo videos. In reality, the fast/cheap/good thing (while for starters not being some actual "law"), is meant to apply to engineering and not market dynamics. You seem to have a lot of faith in Apple having performed some secret formula 10 years ago to determine the cheapest price. I guess we don't need free markets for price signals at all! If we all had Apple's formula, we could have a completely government run system that determined the right price for everything. What a wonderful system that would be! Anyways, I've covered in many other comments how Apple would be better off by allowing alternatives since they'd no longer be forced to balance this fine line of appearing "fair" while "strict": From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26796547 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26796547 > This is one of the tricky parts about AppStore discussions, it's not about being for or against the AppStore. In fact, I wish the AppStore was MUCH pickier about the apps it let in, and I also wish there was an alternative to the AppStore to catch cases that didn't meet that strict bar. Then the AppStore could actually be about curation as opposed to fear-induced isolationism. Then Apple wouldn't have to inadvertently have political side-effects when it disallowed apps like HKMap.live. > Being on the AppStore could still be advantageous beyond just "either that or you don't get to be on the iPhone at all.” Apple payment processing, iCloud integrations, Family-sharing, etc. could all be tied to being ON the AppStore, so there'd still be a huge incentive to try to ship that way. And side-loading doesn't have to be easy or even on by default.

m463 5y ago

Right - look up: monopoly - "A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity." and monopsony - "The microeconomic theory of monopsony assumes a single entity to have market power over all sellers as the only purchaser of a good or service." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony basically customers can only buy apps from apple AND developers can only sell apps to apple.