4 ms·

It is absolutely ridiculous that Apple and Google demand 30% cut of all transactions happening in the apps that run on their OS. Imagine if Windows had done tha

by yashg 4y ago

It is absolutely ridiculous that Apple and Google demand 30% cut of all transactions happening in the apps that run on their OS. Imagine if Windows had done that or if Netscape/Firefox/Opera had demanded 30% cut of transactions happening on their browsers. Back in the days when App Stores hadn't launched Android and iOS did not exist, apps for platforms like Palm, Pocket PC, Symbian, Blackberry etc worked like how Windows software still works today - you bought them directly from the developer's website. Stores like Handdango and Pocketgear were multi platform app stores who were taking 30% cut. I remember even back then there were voices being raised against those fees. But back then, those were not the only ways one could distribute their apps. None of the smartphone platforms back then mandated developers to distribute their apps only through their store. Even when Android launched, it was open and these stores carried Android apps as well. Apple launched the app store and changed everything in the name of security and user experience. It was just a shameless money grab by a giant corporation. Microsoft got all the flack just for bundling a browser for free with OS while Google and Apple have been arm twisting developers into paying 30% of their revenue for years.

birdyrooster 4y ago
Microsoft got the flack for using their near total market dominance in PC operating systems to destroy Netscape. Short memories I guess...
- rjmunro 4y ago
  This is true, but what Google do with the play store (install it by default, take 30% of everything, make it hard to install without it) is so much worse. And Apple's app store where you can't even get around it if you want to is an order of magnitude worse again.
- nly 4y ago
  Microsoft never prevented you from installing anything you like on their OS.
- simiones 4y ago
  Yes, by giving IE away for free while bundling it with Windows, at a time when Netscape was trying to sell their browser - basically the polar opposite of what Google and Apple are doing with their app stores. Since then, it has become completely expected that any consumer OS includes a bundled web browser for free. Not that MS is not doing many other shady things to try to control what you do and push their products in today's Windows, mind you. The only point is that, as bad as consumer computing was in the 90s, it's much much worse today in terms of user and developer freedom/choice.
  - andresgottlieb 4y ago
    No. By blackmailing hardware vendors. If they shipped their computers with Netscape installed, they wouldn't let them license Windows.
IanCal 4y ago
Google are currently having significant issues with antitrust about how they deal with the play store and their requirements on manufacturers.
binkHN 4y ago
> ...Apple and Google demand 30% cut of all transactions happening in the apps that run on their OS. While I too think 30% is ridiculous, Google is the only one of the two here that allows for alternative app stores and side loading. Yes, the side loading process could be better, but Apple provides no such option.
deergomoo 4y ago
It really boils my piss how Apple refuses to acknowledge that their relationship with developers is symbiotic. Sure, Apple has built up a platform with tens of millions of paying customers, and invests in development of APIs (though they certainly aren’t investing in any fucking documentation or quality control). But anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see that without third party apps there would be nothing left to invest in. Did Windows Phone fail because the devices and system software were inherently worse? Of course not, it failed because Microsoft couldn’t convince developers to support it. I know it’s in company interests to act this way—to the tune of dozens of billions of dollars—but when you read some of the things Cook, Federighi, and Schiller said during the Epic trial, it gives an impression that they genuinely do believe that all economic activity on an iPhone or iPad is thanks solely to Apple. Absolute lunacy.
- animitronix 4y ago
  Symbiotic? I think parasitic, or possibly predatory, night be a battery description :-/
- biztos 4y ago
  It has prevented me from pursuing a couple of business ideas that would not be viable if we didn’t have iPhone coverage. When I see that their own software quality is lagging years behind the hardware despite effectively unlimited funding; and the App Store is so chaotic that big-name apps can do Porn while startups have to fear the underpaid reviewer’s wrath on every random detail — Well I don’t feel like that’s a very stable bet to place on your business. And it makes me sad because the devices, especially the MacBooks, are still the best on many measures.
  - syeare 4y ago
    Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe you are mistaken because pornographic content is forbidden on both major app stores so I find it unlikely Apple would allow even a big company to have such an app on their platform
    - 4y ago
grishka 4y ago
> Even when Android launched, it was open and these stores carried Android apps as well. Android is still open and you still absolutely can DIY your app distribution. You can completely ignore the existence of Google and their services if you so desire. As a user, you can set up your new phone completely offline, then disable all Google services, and only then give it an internet connection.

by yashg 4y ago

birdyrooster 4y ago

Microsoft got the flack for using their near total market dominance in PC operating systems to destroy Netscape. Short memories I guess...

rjmunro 4y ago
This is true, but what Google do with the play store (install it by default, take 30% of everything, make it hard to install without it) is so much worse. And Apple's app store where you can't even get around it if you want to is an order of magnitude worse again.
nly 4y ago
Microsoft never prevented you from installing anything you like on their OS.
simiones 4y ago
Yes, by giving IE away for free while bundling it with Windows, at a time when Netscape was trying to sell their browser - basically the polar opposite of what Google and Apple are doing with their app stores. Since then, it has become completely expected that any consumer OS includes a bundled web browser for free. Not that MS is not doing many other shady things to try to control what you do and push their products in today's Windows, mind you. The only point is that, as bad as consumer computing was in the 90s, it's much much worse today in terms of user and developer freedom/choice.
- andresgottlieb 4y ago
  No. By blackmailing hardware vendors. If they shipped their computers with Netscape installed, they wouldn't let them license Windows.

IanCal 4y ago

Google are currently having significant issues with antitrust about how they deal with the play store and their requirements on manufacturers.

binkHN 4y ago

> ...Apple and Google demand 30% cut of all transactions happening in the apps that run on their OS. While I too think 30% is ridiculous, Google is the only one of the two here that allows for alternative app stores and side loading. Yes, the side loading process could be better, but Apple provides no such option.

deergomoo 4y ago

It really boils my piss how Apple refuses to acknowledge that their relationship with developers is symbiotic. Sure, Apple has built up a platform with tens of millions of paying customers, and invests in development of APIs (though they certainly aren’t investing in any fucking documentation or quality control). But anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see that without third party apps there would be nothing left to invest in. Did Windows Phone fail because the devices and system software were inherently worse? Of course not, it failed because Microsoft couldn’t convince developers to support it. I know it’s in company interests to act this way—to the tune of dozens of billions of dollars—but when you read some of the things Cook, Federighi, and Schiller said during the Epic trial, it gives an impression that they genuinely do believe that all economic activity on an iPhone or iPad is thanks solely to Apple. Absolute lunacy.

animitronix 4y ago
Symbiotic? I think parasitic, or possibly predatory, night be a battery description :-/
biztos 4y ago
It has prevented me from pursuing a couple of business ideas that would not be viable if we didn’t have iPhone coverage. When I see that their own software quality is lagging years behind the hardware despite effectively unlimited funding; and the App Store is so chaotic that big-name apps can do Porn while startups have to fear the underpaid reviewer’s wrath on every random detail — Well I don’t feel like that’s a very stable bet to place on your business. And it makes me sad because the devices, especially the MacBooks, are still the best on many measures.
- syeare 4y ago
  Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe you are mistaken because pornographic content is forbidden on both major app stores so I find it unlikely Apple would allow even a big company to have such an app on their platform
  - 4y ago

grishka 4y ago

> Even when Android launched, it was open and these stores carried Android apps as well. Android is still open and you still absolutely can DIY your app distribution. You can completely ignore the existence of Google and their services if you so desire. As a user, you can set up your new phone completely offline, then disable all Google services, and only then give it an internet connection.