4 ms·

> Plenty of very large “reputable” companies obfuscate their physical address and phone number, and don’t even offer an email address for contact. This is what

by Telaneo 3mo ago

> Plenty of very large “reputable” companies obfuscate their physical address and phone number, and don’t even offer an email address for contact. This is whataboutism. They should do that too. The fact they don't isn't an excuse for smaller devs or companies. > I’d also say that this shouldn’t be as necessary when an app platform is involved. Apple takes 15-30% of the revenue and acts as a full retailer. Why do App Store customers have any need to contact the underlying developers in this scenario? You should be able to contact the underlying manufacturer or whatever of any product you buy. Why should programs be different? > Walmart doesn’t make it easy/possible for me to contact the manufacturer of their t-shirts. They should. > There are even other digital software stores like GOG or Steam that really aren’t selling you software that has a guaranteed point of contact. More whataboutism. You should have a guaranteed point of contact for what you buy there too.

Grombobulous 3mo ago
How far down does this go? Should I be able to contact the individual person who picked the specific strawberries in my carton of strawberries? In the Walmart t-shirt example, should I have the contact info for not only the factory but the other suppliers who made the dyes, threads, cotton, the people who made the fuel for the harvester, the people who welded the tractor together? Sure, maybe your idealist answer is yes, and on a conceptual level I can agree with that. But from a practical standpoint as the end consumer there is a stopping point. My point is that Apple handles the money and the refunds, and they make all the software APIs. Completely closed platform. Why doesn’t the buck stop there? I feel like they pass along business responsibilities despite taking a large percentage of revenue. If they’re going to pass on all those responsibilities for me then their cut should be more like ~5% to just cover transaction and platform costs.
- Telaneo 3mo ago
  > How far down does this go? Should I be able to contact the individual person who picked the specific strawberries in my carton of strawberries? Down to the manufacturer of the whole product you're buying. In the case of your strawberries that would probably be the farmer. > In the Walmart t-shirt example, should I have the contact info for not only the factory but the other suppliers who made the dyes, threads, cotton, the people who made the fuel for the harvester, the people who welded the tractor together? No. > Sure, maybe your idealist answer is yes, but from a practical standpoint as the end consumer there is a stopping point. Of course there is. But you as the sole dev of an app are not at that point. > My point is that Apple handles the money and the refunds, and they make all the software APIs. Completely closed platform. Why doesn’t the buck stop there? My local electronics shop also handles the money and refunds when I buy a Dell. I can still get a refund directly from Dell if my machine breaks (not that I actually have a Dell). Yay reasonable laws. The platform being closed and all the APIs being controlled by Apple are different problems that should be solved separately (which the EU is working on!).
  - berkes 3mo ago
    > Down to the manufacturer of the whole product you're buying. In case of an app, what is the "product" you are buying? Because according to Apple, they add a lot of "value" by ensuring the software is safe, performant, etc etc. Am I not buying "a safe, checked app"? Or am I buying an app and then separately pay Apple for an added service of "checking the app for safety" etc etc. I'd very much presume the first. But if its separate, "an app" can be rather ambigous. For a one-time-purchase game, its clear. But many apps are really a service or even more that happen to have "an app" as one of the ways to interact with the service: Netflix, Uber, protonmail, Vinted (or ebay), etc etc: the app isn't the thing I buy. It's a wrapper around a service. Or even just one of the portals through which I can buy stuff. Point being: It's not simple, so your answers don't fit the analogy of "wallmart".
    - Telaneo 3mo ago
      > In case of an app, what is the "product" you are buying? The app. > Because according to Apple, they add a lot of "value" by ensuring the software is safe, performant, etc etc. Am I not buying "a safe, checked app"? Or am I buying an app and then separately pay Apple for an added service of "checking the app for safety" etc etc. I'd very much presume the first. If you want to, you can imagine the 30% cut being that separate service, but most analyses I've seen of this assume the first is the case, and I can't really see why it wouldn't be. > But many apps are really a service or even more that happen to have "an app" as one of the ways to interact with the service: Netflix, Uber, protonmail, Vinted (or ebay), etc etc: the app isn't the thing I buy. In those cases the app on the App Store is free, so there's nothing a consumer can really complain about, since they haven't bought anything. You can complain about the service rendered when you pay, but that purchase is handled completely separately from the app (non-)purchase. > Point being: It's not simple, so your answers don't fit the analogy of "wallmart". It does for apps bought as products. If you want an analogy for apps bought as services, then I'll use a different analogy, since they behave differently, and are treated differently in law.
      - Grombobulous 3mo ago
        I think a good analogy for this difference would be this: Walmart sells both fresh/frozen/packaged food (lots of food safety regulations) and t-shirts (few regulations by comparison). They also sell things like cell phone plans and subscription services that have entirely different sets of regulations. Exactly as you described, if I make a specific type of app, maybe the business address and responsible party should really be Apple. If I make a subscription service app, then it should be me.

by Telaneo 3mo ago

Grombobulous 3mo ago

How far down does this go? Should I be able to contact the individual person who picked the specific strawberries in my carton of strawberries? In the Walmart t-shirt example, should I have the contact info for not only the factory but the other suppliers who made the dyes, threads, cotton, the people who made the fuel for the harvester, the people who welded the tractor together? Sure, maybe your idealist answer is yes, and on a conceptual level I can agree with that. But from a practical standpoint as the end consumer there is a stopping point. My point is that Apple handles the money and the refunds, and they make all the software APIs. Completely closed platform. Why doesn’t the buck stop there? I feel like they pass along business responsibilities despite taking a large percentage of revenue. If they’re going to pass on all those responsibilities for me then their cut should be more like ~5% to just cover transaction and platform costs.

Telaneo 3mo ago
> How far down does this go? Should I be able to contact the individual person who picked the specific strawberries in my carton of strawberries? Down to the manufacturer of the whole product you're buying. In the case of your strawberries that would probably be the farmer. > In the Walmart t-shirt example, should I have the contact info for not only the factory but the other suppliers who made the dyes, threads, cotton, the people who made the fuel for the harvester, the people who welded the tractor together? No. > Sure, maybe your idealist answer is yes, but from a practical standpoint as the end consumer there is a stopping point. Of course there is. But you as the sole dev of an app are not at that point. > My point is that Apple handles the money and the refunds, and they make all the software APIs. Completely closed platform. Why doesn’t the buck stop there? My local electronics shop also handles the money and refunds when I buy a Dell. I can still get a refund directly from Dell if my machine breaks (not that I actually have a Dell). Yay reasonable laws. The platform being closed and all the APIs being controlled by Apple are different problems that should be solved separately (which the EU is working on!).
- berkes 3mo ago
  > Down to the manufacturer of the whole product you're buying. In case of an app, what is the "product" you are buying? Because according to Apple, they add a lot of "value" by ensuring the software is safe, performant, etc etc. Am I not buying "a safe, checked app"? Or am I buying an app and then separately pay Apple for an added service of "checking the app for safety" etc etc. I'd very much presume the first. But if its separate, "an app" can be rather ambigous. For a one-time-purchase game, its clear. But many apps are really a service or even more that happen to have "an app" as one of the ways to interact with the service: Netflix, Uber, protonmail, Vinted (or ebay), etc etc: the app isn't the thing I buy. It's a wrapper around a service. Or even just one of the portals through which I can buy stuff. Point being: It's not simple, so your answers don't fit the analogy of "wallmart".
  - Telaneo 3mo ago
    > In case of an app, what is the "product" you are buying? The app. > Because according to Apple, they add a lot of "value" by ensuring the software is safe, performant, etc etc. Am I not buying "a safe, checked app"? Or am I buying an app and then separately pay Apple for an added service of "checking the app for safety" etc etc. I'd very much presume the first. If you want to, you can imagine the 30% cut being that separate service, but most analyses I've seen of this assume the first is the case, and I can't really see why it wouldn't be. > But many apps are really a service or even more that happen to have "an app" as one of the ways to interact with the service: Netflix, Uber, protonmail, Vinted (or ebay), etc etc: the app isn't the thing I buy. In those cases the app on the App Store is free, so there's nothing a consumer can really complain about, since they haven't bought anything. You can complain about the service rendered when you pay, but that purchase is handled completely separately from the app (non-)purchase. > Point being: It's not simple, so your answers don't fit the analogy of "wallmart". It does for apps bought as products. If you want an analogy for apps bought as services, then I'll use a different analogy, since they behave differently, and are treated differently in law.
    - Grombobulous 3mo ago
      I think a good analogy for this difference would be this: Walmart sells both fresh/frozen/packaged food (lots of food safety regulations) and t-shirts (few regulations by comparison). They also sell things like cell phone plans and subscription services that have entirely different sets of regulations. Exactly as you described, if I make a specific type of app, maybe the business address and responsible party should really be Apple. If I make a subscription service app, then it should be me.