4 ms·

I have a choice about where to buy groceries, a meal, clothes, and books. Is it really that hard to understand Apple's hegemony on iOS should be regulated simil

by ece 5y ago

I have a choice about where to buy groceries, a meal, clothes, and books. Is it really that hard to understand Apple's hegemony on iOS should be regulated similar to the way Microsoft was.. I guess for Apple stockholders it might be different.

dylan604 5y ago
Ask people that live in towns where Walmart has cleared out all of the other stores to see what choices are. When people sell items through big box stores, those stores buy the items at wholesale. What happens if Apple changes from the 30% structure to a 50% wholesale/retail?
- ece 5y ago
  You'll notice I compared with Microsoft, another maker of an OS. I don't think analogies work that well when comparing something that is Turing complete vs. not. Fitness apps compete with gyms, movie apps compete with theaters, learning apps might even compete with schools, etc.. an OS provides the capabilities to do all of these things. I'm sorry, but your analogies make zero sense to me. Apple should be regulated at least the same way Microsoft was, and the Open App Markets Act does this, and I'm glad to see it. I don't think small changes like this are really the way to fix what's wrong with iOS and Android, even though the latter is more open.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    Group think here appears to be that apps are not retail products. What are they? Services? Group think here is also that Adobe is evilCorp #1 because of their software as a service model vs a single purchase. Yet that goes contrary to the app devs wanting to constantly hit the user for in-app purchases. It's software as a service in a different manner, but still gotta keep paying to keep using. App devs should have an honest conversation with the devs of pre-app days. You had to have a release completed so that it could be sent to the facilities to make the dis[c|k]s. These had to be way more complete than today with the ability to 100% re-download the actual product that has had extra time to complete. There's also the cost involved in getting those physical objects made. Today's app devs have it so much easier, and yet want so much more.
    - ece 5y ago
      I think devices, OSes, apps and services are all retail products. The extent to which Apple sells a locked down device is the the extent to which it's trying to unfairly control multiple secondary markets. It's irrelevant how easy or hard developers have it, the consumer can pick if they want to pay once or have a subscription for the feature set they want in apps.
      - dylan604 5y ago
        >The extent to which Apple sells a locked down device The closed nature is the only argument that carries water with me as far as being anti-competitive. Every business has to pay to have their product distributed, and the 30% just never sounded unfair to me.
        mthoms 5y ago
        What would be the percentage where you think it starts becoming “unfair”? And how did you arrive at that figure? Honest question.
        dylan604 5y ago
        I have to deal with physical retail products where you have a wholesale price hopefully at least doubling your cost for the product. The MSRP is ususally double the wholesale. So if you sell the product directly, you get to earn the reatil rate directly. If you offer your product directly to a retailer, you only get to make the wholesale value for that sale. If you get to a size where you are selling to a big box store, they will negotiate further into your wholesale rate on the lure of larger volume of sales. So, all of that to say I'm used to getting 50% of the retail price by selling to wholesellers, so being able to have a 70/30 split being offered by Apple would be 20% increase in my earnings.
        ece 5y ago
        Ebay and Amazon take ~10%, you can also sell on your own website through advertising. No options exist for mobile app devs other than the two app stores on two platforms, except for Samsung and Amazon device owners which offer their own stores, and possibly F-Droid.
- foerbert 5y ago
  Is there anybody except Wallmart who will say it's a good thing when the only store in an entire town is Wallmart itself? Why are we trying to hold Apple to standards that we know are bad, but just happen to exist in the real world anyway?
- chrischen 5y ago
  Wouldn't this be like Walmart preventing Kellogs from advertising on their boxes that they can buy this from Amazon for less?
  - sbuk 5y ago
    Why would Walmart allow Kelloggs to advertise their products availability for less in a different store, on Walmart's shelves? Or Kelloggs saying that you can pay them direct and the just help yourself to their product from Walmart? It undermines the whole premise of commerce. If you want direct sales (sideloading, which should be optional), pay for the infrastructure. Don't expect to sell rent free on someone elses...
    - chrischen 5y ago
      Exactly, which is why it doesn’t make sense to allow Apps to advertise themselves to cost less from other places.
smabie 5y ago
I mean you have a choice where to buy "reader apps" as well.

by ece 5y ago

dylan604 5y ago

Ask people that live in towns where Walmart has cleared out all of the other stores to see what choices are. When people sell items through big box stores, those stores buy the items at wholesale. What happens if Apple changes from the 30% structure to a 50% wholesale/retail?

ece 5y ago
You'll notice I compared with Microsoft, another maker of an OS. I don't think analogies work that well when comparing something that is Turing complete vs. not. Fitness apps compete with gyms, movie apps compete with theaters, learning apps might even compete with schools, etc.. an OS provides the capabilities to do all of these things. I'm sorry, but your analogies make zero sense to me. Apple should be regulated at least the same way Microsoft was, and the Open App Markets Act does this, and I'm glad to see it. I don't think small changes like this are really the way to fix what's wrong with iOS and Android, even though the latter is more open.
- dylan604 5y ago
  Group think here appears to be that apps are not retail products. What are they? Services? Group think here is also that Adobe is evilCorp #1 because of their software as a service model vs a single purchase. Yet that goes contrary to the app devs wanting to constantly hit the user for in-app purchases. It's software as a service in a different manner, but still gotta keep paying to keep using. App devs should have an honest conversation with the devs of pre-app days. You had to have a release completed so that it could be sent to the facilities to make the dis[c|k]s. These had to be way more complete than today with the ability to 100% re-download the actual product that has had extra time to complete. There's also the cost involved in getting those physical objects made. Today's app devs have it so much easier, and yet want so much more.
  - ece 5y ago
    I think devices, OSes, apps and services are all retail products. The extent to which Apple sells a locked down device is the the extent to which it's trying to unfairly control multiple secondary markets. It's irrelevant how easy or hard developers have it, the consumer can pick if they want to pay once or have a subscription for the feature set they want in apps.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      >The extent to which Apple sells a locked down device The closed nature is the only argument that carries water with me as far as being anti-competitive. Every business has to pay to have their product distributed, and the 30% just never sounded unfair to me.
      - mthoms 5y ago
        What would be the percentage where you think it starts becoming “unfair”? And how did you arrive at that figure? Honest question.
        dylan604 5y ago
        I have to deal with physical retail products where you have a wholesale price hopefully at least doubling your cost for the product. The MSRP is ususally double the wholesale. So if you sell the product directly, you get to earn the reatil rate directly. If you offer your product directly to a retailer, you only get to make the wholesale value for that sale. If you get to a size where you are selling to a big box store, they will negotiate further into your wholesale rate on the lure of larger volume of sales. So, all of that to say I'm used to getting 50% of the retail price by selling to wholesellers, so being able to have a 70/30 split being offered by Apple would be 20% increase in my earnings.
        ece 5y ago
        Ebay and Amazon take ~10%, you can also sell on your own website through advertising. No options exist for mobile app devs other than the two app stores on two platforms, except for Samsung and Amazon device owners which offer their own stores, and possibly F-Droid.
foerbert 5y ago
Is there anybody except Wallmart who will say it's a good thing when the only store in an entire town is Wallmart itself? Why are we trying to hold Apple to standards that we know are bad, but just happen to exist in the real world anyway?
chrischen 5y ago
Wouldn't this be like Walmart preventing Kellogs from advertising on their boxes that they can buy this from Amazon for less?
- sbuk 5y ago
  Why would Walmart allow Kelloggs to advertise their products availability for less in a different store, on Walmart's shelves? Or Kelloggs saying that you can pay them direct and the just help yourself to their product from Walmart? It undermines the whole premise of commerce. If you want direct sales (sideloading, which should be optional), pay for the infrastructure. Don't expect to sell rent free on someone elses...
  - chrischen 5y ago
    Exactly, which is why it doesn’t make sense to allow Apps to advertise themselves to cost less from other places.

smabie 5y ago

I mean you have a choice where to buy "reader apps" as well.