4 ms·

I'm not a fancy lawyer or some kind of top flight ceo but I feel like "being able to cancel subscriptions" doesn't require a 30% cut off the top for apple. Al

I'm not a fancy lawyer or some kind of top flight ceo but I feel like "being able to cancel subscriptions" doesn't require a 30% cut off the top for apple. Also, as a customer, presumably you could choose to use apple's store.

boredatoms 1y ago
Some vital apps will stop using apple’s store entirely if they could, it’ll proliferate
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  If we unpack this argument we can precisely pinpoint the issue. In order for this argument to be true, Apple would need to have market power. Having market power is the thing that makes tying etc. an antitrust violation. Because it can be used for more than allowing people to cancel subscriptions. Like charging a 30% margin in a market where it's normally 3%, or excluding apps that compete with Apple software or services, or requiring customers to use a specific combination of hardware, operating system, app store and services, even if the customer only wants one of those things and binding them together then eliminates competition from any company that can't supply all of them. Which are exactly the sort of things that antitrust rules are meant to prevent.
  - al_borland 1y ago
    Steam and Android charge a similar 30% fee in their stores. When I hear about a 3% fee, I think of the interchange fees for a credit card. That doesn’t have the same overhead as hosting the software, handling the updates, managing the front end, reviews, etc. I can only assume that 2-3% of the 30% are going to Visa, as I’m sure Apple is paying interchange fees to process the payments. 30% probably still creates a very healthy margin, which could be trimmed (and has been for companies making less than $1m). But it is right in line with the rest of the industry, at least for the other big players.
    - thedevilslawyer 1y ago
      Not sure about steam, but it does not fly for android, since sideloading, and alternative stores has always been an option. Having the ability to move out acts as a great check against unreasonable rent-seeking.
    - troupo 1y ago
      > Steam and Android charge a similar 30% fee in their stores. You are free to install any game you want through any other different service on the same OS where Steam runs. Steam doesn't say "oh, for every transaction you make in those other stores on the same OS we'll take the 30% commission anyway"
    - rpdillon 1y ago
      The difference is on my Android phone, I use F-Droid, and I sideload using Obtainium, and on my Steam Deck, I install Heroic Launcher and install games from GOG.
      - al_borland 1y ago
        Proton also offers subscriptions through the Play Store. If the issue is the 30% cut hurting non-ad-funded businesses, shouldn’t this be against all these companies charging 30%, not just Apple? Or not have subscriptions in the Play Store, if Google doesn’t have the same requirements against linking out to other payment options? The outrage against Apple in this regard has never felt consistently applied based.
        rpdillon 1y ago
        You didn't address anything I wrote. The issue is not the 30%, it's the lack of choice. Apple locks businesses into having to support Apple Pay to access the user base of Apple users. Google doesn't do this: apps can be distributed via F-Droid or just downloaded from the net. Steam doesn't do this: you can just run apps you bought years ago, or bought from GOG, even on devices built by Valve. I'll say the same thing, another way: Apple is the only smartphone manufacturer that forces you to install apps through their services only.
- bitpush 1y ago
  So you're saying Apple's artificial stronghold is the only reason why apps are using it. Isnt that super-duper bad look on them? It is one thing to say "listen, people are using our product even though there's another choice" but it is another to say "if we give them a choice, nobody will use us"

boredatoms 1y ago

Some vital apps will stop using apple’s store entirely if they could, it’ll proliferate

AnthonyMouse 1y ago
If we unpack this argument we can precisely pinpoint the issue. In order for this argument to be true, Apple would need to have market power. Having market power is the thing that makes tying etc. an antitrust violation. Because it can be used for more than allowing people to cancel subscriptions. Like charging a 30% margin in a market where it's normally 3%, or excluding apps that compete with Apple software or services, or requiring customers to use a specific combination of hardware, operating system, app store and services, even if the customer only wants one of those things and binding them together then eliminates competition from any company that can't supply all of them. Which are exactly the sort of things that antitrust rules are meant to prevent.
- al_borland 1y ago
  Steam and Android charge a similar 30% fee in their stores. When I hear about a 3% fee, I think of the interchange fees for a credit card. That doesn’t have the same overhead as hosting the software, handling the updates, managing the front end, reviews, etc. I can only assume that 2-3% of the 30% are going to Visa, as I’m sure Apple is paying interchange fees to process the payments. 30% probably still creates a very healthy margin, which could be trimmed (and has been for companies making less than $1m). But it is right in line with the rest of the industry, at least for the other big players.
  - thedevilslawyer 1y ago
    Not sure about steam, but it does not fly for android, since sideloading, and alternative stores has always been an option. Having the ability to move out acts as a great check against unreasonable rent-seeking.
  - troupo 1y ago
    > Steam and Android charge a similar 30% fee in their stores. You are free to install any game you want through any other different service on the same OS where Steam runs. Steam doesn't say "oh, for every transaction you make in those other stores on the same OS we'll take the 30% commission anyway"
  - rpdillon 1y ago
    The difference is on my Android phone, I use F-Droid, and I sideload using Obtainium, and on my Steam Deck, I install Heroic Launcher and install games from GOG.
    - al_borland 1y ago
      Proton also offers subscriptions through the Play Store. If the issue is the 30% cut hurting non-ad-funded businesses, shouldn’t this be against all these companies charging 30%, not just Apple? Or not have subscriptions in the Play Store, if Google doesn’t have the same requirements against linking out to other payment options? The outrage against Apple in this regard has never felt consistently applied based.
      - rpdillon 1y ago
        You didn't address anything I wrote. The issue is not the 30%, it's the lack of choice. Apple locks businesses into having to support Apple Pay to access the user base of Apple users. Google doesn't do this: apps can be distributed via F-Droid or just downloaded from the net. Steam doesn't do this: you can just run apps you bought years ago, or bought from GOG, even on devices built by Valve. I'll say the same thing, another way: Apple is the only smartphone manufacturer that forces you to install apps through their services only.
bitpush 1y ago
So you're saying Apple's artificial stronghold is the only reason why apps are using it. Isnt that super-duper bad look on them? It is one thing to say "listen, people are using our product even though there's another choice" but it is another to say "if we give them a choice, nobody will use us"