Despegar

18 ms·

181.
A More Specific Letter on Justice and Open Debate(theobjective.substack.com)
4 points by Despegar 6y ago|0 comments
182.
The Willful Blindness of Reactionary Liberalism(newrepublic.com)
5 points by Despegar 6y ago|0 comments
183.
As Neo-Nazis Seed Military Ranks, Germany Confronts ‘An Enemy Within’(nytimes.com)
8 points by Despegar 6y ago|0 comments
184.
by Despegar 6y ago
Apple is incentivizing ad networks to use SKAdNetwork [1], an API that lets you do attribution while preserving privacy. Guaranteeing that necessarily means they have to intermediate the relationship between users, apps and ad networks. The
185.
by Despegar 6y ago
>Apple was quite clever in their approach: instead of killing the IDFA, which could be construed as anti-competitive, particularly given Apple’s expanding app install ad business (which is expanding beyond App Store search ads), Apple is
186.
by Despegar 6y ago
They can use the stamps.
187.
by Despegar 6y ago
The Federal Reserve should buy a bunch of stamps from the USPS if Congress won't bail it out.
188.
by Despegar 6y ago
I can see them doing that for big volume buys for education. I don't see why they wouldn't just pass on the entire Intel margin to them, getting students using Apple products young has value.
189.
by Despegar 6y ago
Nothing David Cicilline said amounts to anything more than talk. He frequently refers to them as a monopolist in that podcast, but that means a very specific thing in antitrust law. DoJ or FTC would have to prove in court that Apple has &qu
190.
by Despegar 6y ago
I mean lets be honest. Developers actually like the iPhone as a development platform. They like how much money they make from it. They like the products themselves. They just don't want to pay the Apple commission or be restricted in a
191.
by Despegar 6y ago
>You also seem like someone who is for some reason predisposed to be an apologist for Apple's monopolistic business practices. You certainly don't represent what would likely be the average/majority sentiment of Apple&#x27
192.
by Despegar 6y ago
>The simple fact is that Apple is injecting itself as an intermediary in the payment process and extracting a comically oversized commission for no meaningful added value. Frankly anyone who says this with a straight face is being absurd
193.
by Despegar 6y ago
Read the full statement that Apple gave to Hey and the media [1]. If Hey made their email client a standard works with any email account then it'd be fine without in-app purchases. The specific Hey service could be purchased outside th
194.
by Despegar 6y ago
How do you "get a pass if you're big enough"? If you're trying to use Netflix or Spotify as an example of big companies getting a pass then it'd have to only apply to them. But it doesn't. Smaller subscription
195.
by Despegar 6y ago
They have a specific section in the rules for "Reader" apps like Netflix and Spotify. It's not unclear, it's been there since 2018.
196.
by Despegar 6y ago
Your analogy was good until the part about warranty, which isn't relevant to Apple.
197.
by Despegar 6y ago
"Conflict of interest" isn't illegal. Apple has been competing with app developers on their platform from the first days of the App Store. If Spotify is somehow trying to suggest that Apple should be barred from doing so, tha
198.
by Despegar 6y ago
If the antitrust laws were designed to prevent that (they weren't) then there's been a massive failure in enforcement because nothing has changed since Apple launched the App Store in 2008. In reality laws don't require platf
199.
by Despegar 6y ago
"Monopoly power" and "dominance" mean the same thing. One is used in the US, the other in the EU. You're going to have a tough time getting a court to agree that Apple is dominant in smartphones in the EU.
200.
by Despegar 6y ago
>That's correct. But the law does require them to run the stores in a way that does not violate antitrust laws. Apple is violating antitrust laws by forcing companies to use Apple Pay as a condition of using the App Store (i.e., lev
201.
by Despegar 6y ago
Those things are all true, but fundamentally their share isn't about any specific API or "service" they provide on the platform. That they do all those things makes it an attractive place to sell your product. But the basic r
202.
by Despegar 6y ago
It was for ProtonMail though. Inconsistency among app reviewers are going to be a reality forever because they're human. They just need to have processes for appealing it to someone higher up so mistakes can be corrected (which they do
203.
by Despegar 6y ago
>I am also fine with Apple collecting a modest fee for providing that service. That fee should probably be somewhere in the 2-3% range. Apple's cut isn't for payment processing, even if developers insist that's all they do
204.
by Despegar 6y ago
That's not the case. You can sign up for Office 365 through IAP. https://twitter.com/sandofsky/status/1273010912484446209
205.
by Despegar 6y ago
This isn't that complicated. Apple is free to operate a closed system, just like the video game consoles. I don't understand how the comparison to government makes any sense. This is a private business and you want to sell on thei
206.
by Despegar 6y ago
>In the scenarios where a user is paying for something that is delivered or executed by the app developer’s infrastructure, digital or not, Apple is a payment gateway, not a publisher. They can either match Stripe or go to Paddle’s rate
207.
by Despegar 6y ago
The fixation on what Apple's costs are in operating the App Store is weird. It reminds me of the people that look at the estimates of the bill of materials for an iPhone and who use that to say Apple's charging too much. That&#x27
208.
by Despegar 6y ago
>Your phone is a general purpose computer. This might be a useful distinction but it isn't for the law. There's no particular requirement that "general purpose computers" behave in a certain way.
209.
by Despegar 6y ago
>But aren't they a dominant power already. Android can have 80% market share but the revenue reality is 2:1 in the favour of iOS. A regulator/prosecutor will certainly try to argue they're dominant! But market power is mea
210.
by Despegar 6y ago
There's no requirement in law that all technology businesses need to hew to any particular philosophy or ideology of computing; no one has to be "open". This has always chafed a lot of tech people because Apple is successful

More ›