3 ms·

No, the problem is that a critical mass of a market is dependant on a single operator of that market, and that operator is not providing equal access to it but

No, the problem is that a critical mass of a market is dependant on a single operator of that market, and that operator is not providing equal access to it but considers itself the owner AND a privileged player there which everyone has to pay to compete with. The audience of iPhone users are that market. - "You have something to sell on my market? Sure, here are the fees, the rules and I take a cut of all your sales" --> "My data shows that people like what you're selling on my market, so I studied all details, decided to build it myself, provide it for less/free and compete with you. Thanks for doing the risky work of proving that potential." "Feel free to stay if you like, your continued success will continue to educate/fund my competing product. If you leave, you have to end business with all customers, as I took measures that they are ONLY able to visit MY market"

tpmoney 2y ago
>You have something to sell on my market? Sure, here are the fees, the rules and I take a cut of all your sales >My data shows that people like what you're selling on my market, so I studied all details, decided to build it myself, provide it for less/free and compete with you. Thanks for doing the risky work of proving that potential. >Feel free to stay if you like, your continued success will continue to educate/fund my competing product. If you leave, you have to end business with all customers, as I took measures that they are ONLY able to visit MY market None of those things really affect the banking, government services, education, ID, health etc apps that the OP was concerned with. They're not selling their apps or even selling any services via their app (except for services which are incidentally forbidden from using IAP in the first place which means the 30% fees don't apply: >3.1.3(e) Goods and Services Outside of the App: If your app enables people to purchase physical goods or services that will be consumed outside of the app, you must use purchase methods other than in-app purchase to collect those payments, such as Apple Pay or traditional credit card entry. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#goods-and-services-outside-of-the-app https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#goo... Nor are they competing with Apple for their applications. At a stretch, you could argue that the banking apps sort of kind of compete with Apple wallet in the credit card space, but like I said, it's a bit of a stretch.
- mthoms 2y ago
  My comment about government services, banking, education and so on was in response to your general assertion that an iPhone is no different than other electronic devices and therefore shouldn't be treated differently by regulators. For the reasons I listed, that's kind of ridiculous. Smartphones are just as important to modern economies/societies as the automobile, air travel, public libraries or news organizations (at least in my opinion). Accordingly... unlike an XBox (which only provides entertainment) smartphones need to have well considered legislation that maximizes the overall benefit to society (while still maintaining a financial incentive for innovation). There's a lot at stake. So, I wasn't trying to cite specific examples where Apple has fallen short in these areas (though I'm aware of a few), I was making a generalization about the relative importance of the smartphone to modern economies and society. It's just not the same thing as other gadgets (even if the technology is similar). Not even close.
- rickdeckard 2y ago
  > None of those things really affect the banking, government services, education, ID, health etc apps that the OP was concerned with. Of course they do. All those entities have to follow terms and conditions of Apple to reach THEIR customers/citizens, requiring them to share crucial information to Apple, the sole gatekeeper with a vested interest to maximize user-profit. > At a stretch, you could argue that the banking apps sort of kind of compete with Apple wallet in the credit card space, but like I said, it's a bit of a stretch. No stretch at all. The market operator also offers financial services directly, while having privileged access (as preloaded app) and a superior level of information (via user profiling) about the users needs and behavior. Other financial service providers have the choice between paying revenue-share to Apple to be integrated with Apple Pay, or have their services only surface if the customer explicitly searches for their app (all while a competitor may pay the rev-share and have higher integration/visibility from the market provider)
fennecfoxy 2y ago
"Thanks for doing the risky work of proving that potential" When people realise that Apple hasn't innovated any new technology pretty much ever (certainly for at least the last 30 years). They always wait until something is proven in the market and then buy their way to it & lock the competition out. "Face ID" = Kinect, "we invented multi-touch" = blatant lie, vision= pre-existing AR/VR...oh sorry "spatial computing" Etc.

tpmoney 2y ago

>You have something to sell on my market? Sure, here are the fees, the rules and I take a cut of all your sales >My data shows that people like what you're selling on my market, so I studied all details, decided to build it myself, provide it for less/free and compete with you. Thanks for doing the risky work of proving that potential. >Feel free to stay if you like, your continued success will continue to educate/fund my competing product. If you leave, you have to end business with all customers, as I took measures that they are ONLY able to visit MY market None of those things really affect the banking, government services, education, ID, health etc apps that the OP was concerned with. They're not selling their apps or even selling any services via their app (except for services which are incidentally forbidden from using IAP in the first place which means the 30% fees don't apply: >3.1.3(e) Goods and Services Outside of the App: If your app enables people to purchase physical goods or services that will be consumed outside of the app, you must use purchase methods other than in-app purchase to collect those payments, such as Apple Pay or traditional credit card entry. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#goods-and-services-outside-of-the-app https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#goo... Nor are they competing with Apple for their applications. At a stretch, you could argue that the banking apps sort of kind of compete with Apple wallet in the credit card space, but like I said, it's a bit of a stretch.

mthoms 2y ago
My comment about government services, banking, education and so on was in response to your general assertion that an iPhone is no different than other electronic devices and therefore shouldn't be treated differently by regulators. For the reasons I listed, that's kind of ridiculous. Smartphones are just as important to modern economies/societies as the automobile, air travel, public libraries or news organizations (at least in my opinion). Accordingly... unlike an XBox (which only provides entertainment) smartphones need to have well considered legislation that maximizes the overall benefit to society (while still maintaining a financial incentive for innovation). There's a lot at stake. So, I wasn't trying to cite specific examples where Apple has fallen short in these areas (though I'm aware of a few), I was making a generalization about the relative importance of the smartphone to modern economies and society. It's just not the same thing as other gadgets (even if the technology is similar). Not even close.
rickdeckard 2y ago
> None of those things really affect the banking, government services, education, ID, health etc apps that the OP was concerned with. Of course they do. All those entities have to follow terms and conditions of Apple to reach THEIR customers/citizens, requiring them to share crucial information to Apple, the sole gatekeeper with a vested interest to maximize user-profit. > At a stretch, you could argue that the banking apps sort of kind of compete with Apple wallet in the credit card space, but like I said, it's a bit of a stretch. No stretch at all. The market operator also offers financial services directly, while having privileged access (as preloaded app) and a superior level of information (via user profiling) about the users needs and behavior. Other financial service providers have the choice between paying revenue-share to Apple to be integrated with Apple Pay, or have their services only surface if the customer explicitly searches for their app (all while a competitor may pay the rev-share and have higher integration/visibility from the market provider)

fennecfoxy 2y ago

"Thanks for doing the risky work of proving that potential" When people realise that Apple hasn't innovated any new technology pretty much ever (certainly for at least the last 30 years). They always wait until something is proven in the market and then buy their way to it & lock the competition out. "Face ID" = Kinect, "we invented multi-touch" = blatant lie, vision= pre-existing AR/VR...oh sorry "spatial computing" Etc.