3 ms·

Spotify is the company that filed the complaint against Apple. What I find interesting is that the article doesn’t mention Apple Music, which is a competitor o

by whazor 3y ago

Spotify is the company that filed the complaint against Apple. What I find interesting is that the article doesn’t mention Apple Music, which is a competitor of Spotify. For Spotify it is unfair that they need to pay a 30% fee, while Apple Music doesn’t need to. Thus for 8$ per month, you would get more music. The problem seems not to be the fee, but that Spotify cannot promote its own payment service.

neodymiumphish 3y ago
So Apple should be forced to allow Spotify to offer a payment alternative outside of the App Store? Should this allowance be made for just services competing with Apple, or should we be allowed to dictate how Apple does their business across the board? Slack doesn’t compete with Apple directly, should they be allowed to sue over the 30% fee?
- a_wild_dandan 3y ago
  Smartphones are just small PCs with touch screens. They should have similar vendor/customer dynamics: no app store monopoly, no inserting yourself in my private business transactions to extort some rent seeking 30% middleman fee, etc. The present behavior of this "mobile PC" duopoly is absolutely nuts, and needs a reckoning for their anti-consumer behavior.
  - neodymiumphish 3y ago
    All of that is a known entity before buying an iPhone though. You don't have a right to change the terms you agreed to before/at purchase. I'd rather not be limited to Apple's app store, but if I buy an iPhone, I'm accepting its involvement in the purchase. I don't get to go back and say "oh yeah, and I demand that you remove these conditions." Android allows for alternative app stores, yet they're barely worth mentioning. That's a tell that the market doesn't care whether a smartphone ties users to a single app vendor or not. > no inserting yourself in my private business transactions to extort some rent seeking 30% middleman fee, etc Except that Spotify can avoid the 30% fee, so that's hardly a good description.
    - chrisjj 3y ago
      > I'm accepting its involvement in the purchase. You had no choice. You may be OK with that. Not everyone is.

by whazor 3y ago

neodymiumphish 3y ago

So Apple should be forced to allow Spotify to offer a payment alternative outside of the App Store? Should this allowance be made for just services competing with Apple, or should we be allowed to dictate how Apple does their business across the board? Slack doesn’t compete with Apple directly, should they be allowed to sue over the 30% fee?

a_wild_dandan 3y ago
Smartphones are just small PCs with touch screens. They should have similar vendor/customer dynamics: no app store monopoly, no inserting yourself in my private business transactions to extort some rent seeking 30% middleman fee, etc. The present behavior of this "mobile PC" duopoly is absolutely nuts, and needs a reckoning for their anti-consumer behavior.
- neodymiumphish 3y ago
  All of that is a known entity before buying an iPhone though. You don't have a right to change the terms you agreed to before/at purchase. I'd rather not be limited to Apple's app store, but if I buy an iPhone, I'm accepting its involvement in the purchase. I don't get to go back and say "oh yeah, and I demand that you remove these conditions." Android allows for alternative app stores, yet they're barely worth mentioning. That's a tell that the market doesn't care whether a smartphone ties users to a single app vendor or not. > no inserting yourself in my private business transactions to extort some rent seeking 30% middleman fee, etc Except that Spotify can avoid the 30% fee, so that's hardly a good description.
  - chrisjj 3y ago
    > I'm accepting its involvement in the purchase. You had no choice. You may be OK with that. Not everyone is.