5 ms·

Why are people desensitized to such Apple tactics? You'd think there would be much more backlash but somehow people just think this is okay and move on.

healthdare 3y ago
[dead]
jaimex2 3y ago
It's pretty sad that developers and companies just take it as a 'just the cost of doing business' You should always self host where possible at a discount. I personally would never publish anything on Apple's ecosystem as there's no alternatives.
- calsy 3y ago
  How do you self host an app? And if you can, how could you possibly reach the audience the size the app store offers? Never publish anything on Apple's ecosystem as there no alternative... so don't publish at all is what you mean? All these crazy ideas come from people who don't work in app development, clearly.
  - jjav 3y ago
    > All these crazy ideas come from people who don't work in app development, clearly. Since the dawn of computers, it has always been possible to write and publish software directly from the developer to the consumer. This is the normal state. Apple has broken this on iOS with their model where they are the sole arbiter, gatekeeper and tax extractor, of every application.
    - 10729287 3y ago
      ... and they're working on breaking it on the personnal computer too. For security reasons, obviously.
      - paulmd 3y ago
        No, they’re not. macOS is a fully-functional Unix environment, and apple has been as welcoming towards Asahi as they can be while staying officially 100% divorced from all activity related to it (Asahi has seen apple do releases with enabling work for the bootloader that had no possible purpose other than enabling third-party OS).
        jjav 3y ago
        > macOS is a fully-functional Unix environment Out of the box it is not. As root I can't read or write files that the permissions say I can, among other problems. It is still possible to disable all this but they make it more and more difficult. If I were to bet, I'd bet that the roadmap is to eventually make OSX be iOS, where you can't do anything except what apple specifically lets you do.
    - calsy 3y ago
      Apps for mobile devices! not personal computers. Self hosted PWA's are absolutely available to open on mobile.. and no one uses them.
      - jjav 3y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39418412 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39418412
  - jaimex2 3y ago
    > All these crazy ideas come from people who don't work in app development, clearly. iOS releases. Yes, and by choice. And if they keep at it with OSX I won't continue releasing to that either. Call me crazy but I'm not the one writing sob stories on HN about how Apple cucked my app which seems to be a HN weekly.
wilg 3y ago
Everyone complains about Apple tactics all the time. What are you talking about?
lolinder 3y ago
I'm not sure what more you're expecting, there's a thread on HN every few weeks with hundreds of people complaining about Apple's tactics. If what you're really asking is why Apple doesn't cave to the pressure, it's because they don't care about people ranting on the internet about their tactics. But there's no shortage of outrage around here, and it doesn't just go away. 6 days ago: Apple confirms it's breaking iPhone web apps in the EU on purpose (800 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 9 days ago: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules (330 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39346527 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39346527 27 days ago: Apple announces changes to iOS, Safari, and the App Store in the European Union (2486 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39132453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39132453 36 days ago: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission (1300 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364 62 days ago: Apple allows some iOS apps to track user locations via lists of nearby SSIDs (300 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38720656 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38720656 75 days ago: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access (1222 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38574888 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38574888 3 months ago: Developer account removed by Apple (425 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364
- TiredOfLife 3y ago
  Those threads are mainly hundreds of commenters defending Apple
  - lolinder 3y ago
    At the top level, yes, but there's plenty of opposition within the threads and in lower-rated comments. It's a contentious topic with no clear answers, which is why the Apple threads often turn into huge discussions.
    - addandsubtract 3y ago
      It's also problematic arguing about a tech company on a tech forum where people are either employed at or hold shares in. Even owning an iPhone gives people a vested interest the discussions.
dkarras 3y ago
I don't understand why it is wrong for Apple to profit from the platform they created and maintain. What is there to complain about other than things being expensive? If you create a platform, are you somehow obligated to let people make money off of the platform on their own terms for free? Apple is not a monopoly. Any competitor can compete with them on price / fees and win if Apple really does not provide enough value to people to justify their prices. I genuinely hope that it happens. I just don't agree with the common heuristic of "hey you have a good thing going there, you shouldn't be allowed to have anything that good!" Why is Apple not taking 99% of the revenue and takes 30%? Because if they took 99% nobody would develop for their platform. So there is a sweet spot between 99% and 0% where the services and market they provide is good enough that the fee is worth it. Currently it works for everyone as Apple's and developers' business is still booming after all those years. Developers want more, Apple also wants more, everyone wants more, all is natural. Wanting to optimize your gains is natural for everyone. It is not illegal, and should not be.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  > I don't understand why it is wrong for Apple to profit from the platform they created and maintain. Part of it is the double-dipping. Consider why you'd be opposed to Toyota claiming 30% of the revenue of all gas that you buy for your Camry, or why you don't like ads in things you pay for. > Apple is not a monopoly. Until they allow third-party app stores and sideloading worldwide, and without any of the malicious compliance like intentionally breaking PWAs along with it, they are.
  - dkarras 3y ago
    If the value I get from Toyota is not worth the hassle, I would not buy it under those terms! That is the point. If Toyota is the only car I was allowed to buy, or if Toyota bought out all its competitors, that would be a different issue. >Until they allow third-party app stores and sideloading worldwide, and without any of the malicious compliance like intentionally breaking PWAs along with it, they are. How? Do you know what monopoly is? You being upset at how you can use a device you are in no way have to buy and use does not make the brand a monopoly.
alberth 3y ago
This is a super tricky topic, which is why it sparks so much dialog. Like … - video game platforms, what about them? They all have similar platform fees & requirements that Apple has but yet they are getting a pass on this topic. - other platforms. Why is it ok that YouTube takes 40% cut of ad revenue from content creators? - analogy to in-store retail. Imagine Apple is like your neighborhood Walmart. If Walmart is going to put a product on its shelf, they are only going to do so long as they can mark it up and sell it for a profit. Why is Apple not allowed to do the same for their “virtual shelf” (aka App Store)? - if people think 30% is too high, what is the right rate? Is it 25? 20? Something less? Who decides what’s fair? - Security. There’s no question that Apple being the single facilitation mechanism for payments drives out fraud and provides a better consumer experience & trust (for both the consumer and Apple). To much fraud on their platform, through rogue sideloading payments, could deter the consumer experience of Apple and effect the adoption of their products. Why should Apple be forced to allow a new fraud vector and put consumers at risk? This will deteriorate their brand. And much more. Note: I’m not saying I agree with Apple or its tactics, but it’s also not black or white either. This is a very tricky topic that is way more nuanced than most people acknowledge. And obviously there isn’t much precedent for this either.
- jjav 3y ago
  > If Walmart is going to put a product on its shelf[...] Because if walmart marks it up too high I can get the same thing from target or the local shop or from amazon or from tons of other places. So they are under competitive pressure to keep their markup low enough they don't chase customers away. > Why is Apple not allowed to do the same for their “virtual shelf” (aka App Store)? It is enraging because there is no competitive pressure on them. If the fees are too high, unlike with walmart, what are you going to do? There's nothing you can do. If walmart starts charging $100 for a bar of soap I can get for $1 at target, I'm going to target. If apple raises their cut to 200%, there's nothing you can do. > Who decides what’s fair? Ideally, a competitive free market. But apple does not allow that.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    Are you writing this from the perspective of the consumer or the app developer? From the consumer perspective, you have a clear recourse: don't buy Apple phones if you don't want to (or can't afford to) pay for the markup that devs have to place due to the Apple tax. It's that simple. I have an Android phone and install most of my apps through F-Droid for free. No one forced you to buy an iPhone, and no one will force you to buy one again the next time you need a new phone. From the developer perspective you have a bit of a stronger moral point in that there are a substantial number of US customers that you cannot reach without passing through the App Store, but the current legal situation in the US is pretty clear [0]: US consumers knowingly choose to buy iPhones even though they know that they're choosing a locked-in platform, so there isn't a single-brand aftermarket and there is no monopoly. [0] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21-16506/21-16506-2023-04-24.html https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21...
fennecfoxy 3y ago
Because Apple are veeeery good at public perception of their company. Hell, every time they add a new hardware feature, they present it like they invented it (often they haven't) and consumers eat it up. They've given themselves this image of everything we make just works, is designed perfectly and consumers are happy to accept any and all rules and conditions imposed on them to live in the Apple ecosystem, it's all very Stockholm Syndrome. Apple could be taking 30% of donations to orphanages or for children with cancer thru an app and fans would be like "well it's expensive to run the app store!1!1" (no, it's really, really not...$173bn profit 2023).

healthdare 3y ago

[dead]

jaimex2 3y ago

It's pretty sad that developers and companies just take it as a 'just the cost of doing business' You should always self host where possible at a discount. I personally would never publish anything on Apple's ecosystem as there's no alternatives.

calsy 3y ago
How do you self host an app? And if you can, how could you possibly reach the audience the size the app store offers? Never publish anything on Apple's ecosystem as there no alternative... so don't publish at all is what you mean? All these crazy ideas come from people who don't work in app development, clearly.
- jjav 3y ago
  > All these crazy ideas come from people who don't work in app development, clearly. Since the dawn of computers, it has always been possible to write and publish software directly from the developer to the consumer. This is the normal state. Apple has broken this on iOS with their model where they are the sole arbiter, gatekeeper and tax extractor, of every application.
  - 10729287 3y ago
    ... and they're working on breaking it on the personnal computer too. For security reasons, obviously.
    - paulmd 3y ago
      No, they’re not. macOS is a fully-functional Unix environment, and apple has been as welcoming towards Asahi as they can be while staying officially 100% divorced from all activity related to it (Asahi has seen apple do releases with enabling work for the bootloader that had no possible purpose other than enabling third-party OS).
      - jjav 3y ago
        > macOS is a fully-functional Unix environment Out of the box it is not. As root I can't read or write files that the permissions say I can, among other problems. It is still possible to disable all this but they make it more and more difficult. If I were to bet, I'd bet that the roadmap is to eventually make OSX be iOS, where you can't do anything except what apple specifically lets you do.
  - calsy 3y ago
    Apps for mobile devices! not personal computers. Self hosted PWA's are absolutely available to open on mobile.. and no one uses them.
    - jjav 3y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39418412 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39418412
- jaimex2 3y ago
  > All these crazy ideas come from people who don't work in app development, clearly. iOS releases. Yes, and by choice. And if they keep at it with OSX I won't continue releasing to that either. Call me crazy but I'm not the one writing sob stories on HN about how Apple cucked my app which seems to be a HN weekly.

wilg 3y ago

Everyone complains about Apple tactics all the time. What are you talking about?

lolinder 3y ago

I'm not sure what more you're expecting, there's a thread on HN every few weeks with hundreds of people complaining about Apple's tactics. If what you're really asking is why Apple doesn't cave to the pressure, it's because they don't care about people ranting on the internet about their tactics. But there's no shortage of outrage around here, and it doesn't just go away. 6 days ago: Apple confirms it's breaking iPhone web apps in the EU on purpose (800 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 9 days ago: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules (330 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39346527 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39346527 27 days ago: Apple announces changes to iOS, Safari, and the App Store in the European Union (2486 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39132453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39132453 36 days ago: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission (1300 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364 62 days ago: Apple allows some iOS apps to track user locations via lists of nearby SSIDs (300 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38720656 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38720656 75 days ago: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access (1222 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38574888 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38574888 3 months ago: Developer account removed by Apple (425 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38394364

TiredOfLife 3y ago
Those threads are mainly hundreds of commenters defending Apple
- lolinder 3y ago
  At the top level, yes, but there's plenty of opposition within the threads and in lower-rated comments. It's a contentious topic with no clear answers, which is why the Apple threads often turn into huge discussions.
  - addandsubtract 3y ago
    It's also problematic arguing about a tech company on a tech forum where people are either employed at or hold shares in. Even owning an iPhone gives people a vested interest the discussions.

dkarras 3y ago

I don't understand why it is wrong for Apple to profit from the platform they created and maintain. What is there to complain about other than things being expensive? If you create a platform, are you somehow obligated to let people make money off of the platform on their own terms for free? Apple is not a monopoly. Any competitor can compete with them on price / fees and win if Apple really does not provide enough value to people to justify their prices. I genuinely hope that it happens. I just don't agree with the common heuristic of "hey you have a good thing going there, you shouldn't be allowed to have anything that good!" Why is Apple not taking 99% of the revenue and takes 30%? Because if they took 99% nobody would develop for their platform. So there is a sweet spot between 99% and 0% where the services and market they provide is good enough that the fee is worth it. Currently it works for everyone as Apple's and developers' business is still booming after all those years. Developers want more, Apple also wants more, everyone wants more, all is natural. Wanting to optimize your gains is natural for everyone. It is not illegal, and should not be.

josephcsible 3y ago
> I don't understand why it is wrong for Apple to profit from the platform they created and maintain. Part of it is the double-dipping. Consider why you'd be opposed to Toyota claiming 30% of the revenue of all gas that you buy for your Camry, or why you don't like ads in things you pay for. > Apple is not a monopoly. Until they allow third-party app stores and sideloading worldwide, and without any of the malicious compliance like intentionally breaking PWAs along with it, they are.
- dkarras 3y ago
  If the value I get from Toyota is not worth the hassle, I would not buy it under those terms! That is the point. If Toyota is the only car I was allowed to buy, or if Toyota bought out all its competitors, that would be a different issue. >Until they allow third-party app stores and sideloading worldwide, and without any of the malicious compliance like intentionally breaking PWAs along with it, they are. How? Do you know what monopoly is? You being upset at how you can use a device you are in no way have to buy and use does not make the brand a monopoly.

alberth 3y ago

This is a super tricky topic, which is why it sparks so much dialog. Like … - video game platforms, what about them? They all have similar platform fees & requirements that Apple has but yet they are getting a pass on this topic. - other platforms. Why is it ok that YouTube takes 40% cut of ad revenue from content creators? - analogy to in-store retail. Imagine Apple is like your neighborhood Walmart. If Walmart is going to put a product on its shelf, they are only going to do so long as they can mark it up and sell it for a profit. Why is Apple not allowed to do the same for their “virtual shelf” (aka App Store)? - if people think 30% is too high, what is the right rate? Is it 25? 20? Something less? Who decides what’s fair? - Security. There’s no question that Apple being the single facilitation mechanism for payments drives out fraud and provides a better consumer experience & trust (for both the consumer and Apple). To much fraud on their platform, through rogue sideloading payments, could deter the consumer experience of Apple and effect the adoption of their products. Why should Apple be forced to allow a new fraud vector and put consumers at risk? This will deteriorate their brand. And much more. Note: I’m not saying I agree with Apple or its tactics, but it’s also not black or white either. This is a very tricky topic that is way more nuanced than most people acknowledge. And obviously there isn’t much precedent for this either.

jjav 3y ago
> If Walmart is going to put a product on its shelf[...] Because if walmart marks it up too high I can get the same thing from target or the local shop or from amazon or from tons of other places. So they are under competitive pressure to keep their markup low enough they don't chase customers away. > Why is Apple not allowed to do the same for their “virtual shelf” (aka App Store)? It is enraging because there is no competitive pressure on them. If the fees are too high, unlike with walmart, what are you going to do? There's nothing you can do. If walmart starts charging $100 for a bar of soap I can get for $1 at target, I'm going to target. If apple raises their cut to 200%, there's nothing you can do. > Who decides what’s fair? Ideally, a competitive free market. But apple does not allow that.
- lolinder 3y ago
  Are you writing this from the perspective of the consumer or the app developer? From the consumer perspective, you have a clear recourse: don't buy Apple phones if you don't want to (or can't afford to) pay for the markup that devs have to place due to the Apple tax. It's that simple. I have an Android phone and install most of my apps through F-Droid for free. No one forced you to buy an iPhone, and no one will force you to buy one again the next time you need a new phone. From the developer perspective you have a bit of a stronger moral point in that there are a substantial number of US customers that you cannot reach without passing through the App Store, but the current legal situation in the US is pretty clear [0]: US consumers knowingly choose to buy iPhones even though they know that they're choosing a locked-in platform, so there isn't a single-brand aftermarket and there is no monopoly. [0] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21-16506/21-16506-2023-04-24.html https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21...

fennecfoxy 3y ago

Because Apple are veeeery good at public perception of their company. Hell, every time they add a new hardware feature, they present it like they invented it (often they haven't) and consumers eat it up. They've given themselves this image of everything we make just works, is designed perfectly and consumers are happy to accept any and all rules and conditions imposed on them to live in the Apple ecosystem, it's all very Stockholm Syndrome. Apple could be taking 30% of donations to orphanages or for children with cancer thru an app and fans would be like "well it's expensive to run the app store!1!1" (no, it's really, really not...$173bn profit 2023).