4 ms·
I don't see how you can argue with the courts that the bandwidth cost to serve a 100mb zip file is $4. That's beyond egregious
by malfist 11mo ago
I don't see how you can argue with the courts that the bandwidth cost to serve a 100mb zip file is $4. That's beyond egregious
- hirsin 11mo agoThey're not even serving the file. That cost is born by the external provider. The four dollars is for providing the platform that the user used to navigate to the link and download the zip file. That's a fun bit of argument from the owners of Chrome.
- dagmx 11mo agoI’m not sure what you’re referring to here. Google are the file distributor for content from their store. These rules aren’t for linking out from the store to a third party site, but rather for installing an app from the store and then linking out to a third party payment.
- hirsin 11mo agoYep, I misunderstood that key point here but can't edit anymore.
- Rohansi 11mo ago> The four dollars is for providing the platform that the user used to navigate to the link and download the zip file. And does not include showing up first in search results for your app's name. That's a separate fee you'll need to pay.
- charcircuit 11mo agoChoosing a price based off the cost is just one pricing strategy. Another is to do it based off the value it offers a customer along with the price competitors are charging.
- malfist 11mo agoSure, and that's fine for most businesses. But not for a monopoly/duopoly