Interesting how there's so many posts here attacking the companies behind the action (ad hominem style) by specifying actions that have nothing to do with the abuses Apple and AppStore do.
It seems that the post is highlighting how the subscription and refund options of these companies provide a far worse experience than the Apple App Store which is a legitimate concern for why providing a work around can lead to worse user experiences if these companies provide their app via a different chancel that doesn't enforce certain UX requirements.
For that reason the comment does seem helpful and relevant.
Not trying to take a side here, but Epic especially is not the company I want leading the charge here. I am vehemently opposed to their (and Tencent's) primary business model.
Edit: It isn't like there aren't policies that Apple has in place that should be pushed back against. But, Epic seems to have zero qualms about targeting children misleading and manipulative in game transactions, and I think that Epic having their way is far more nightmarish than Apple's equivalent, based on my current understanding of the two companies business models.
> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
I think Epic Games, at least, is an all-around horrific company, and in this case has intentionally exploited the App Store to start a specious lawsuit.
Showing how App Store is consumer centric - I think that's important to put in the context where Apple has to keep a tight grip or else these savage businesses would devour the customer's privacy in instant and exploit their psyche with tricks to milk as much money as they can.
Native apps have always been major privacy leaks with little oversight while Apple has spent most of the effort on Safari. The app store doesn't change that fact.
Allowing other stores doesn't mean you have to use them. You could still have your curated experience on the Apple store. Why do you want to impose your views on others?
That's dishonest. The situation is identical on Android. Yes. You can "technically" sideload apps, but there is so many hoops to go through that you really can't distribute your application this way.
There is friction with updates as well. But we don't have to argue since even a giant such as Epic didn't manage to do it with the fortnight franchise..
Why are you, tech-savvy users, forcing Apple to allow third-party app stores/installations, which would no doubt lead to malware like we see on Windows, Macs, and Android?
I and my software friends/colleagues might be capable of avoiding this malware (assuming you don’t consider Zoom and such to be malware), but my family and everyone else I know are not. I suspect 70+% of the user base could easily be tricked into installing malware that would spam them with sex notifications, hijack their search engine, etc.
How much do you want to bet that Epic and Spotify would pull their apps from the App Store or limit the features of their apps on the App Store in order to force people to their preferred platform?
This isn't even hypothetical. Spotify already refuses to add features to the Apple Watch.
No, the argument of the poster you are replying to is that these companies are competing and rooting for one or another doesn’t benefit anybody, developers or costumers.
Who is imposing views in this situation? You don't have to use Apple devices as your platform either. Most likely you use it because you benefit from it. Especially these companies that get huge profits from it. The platform was provided to them under certain conditions that they are free to reject at any moment and to walk away if they find that they will benefit more from that decision.
Yes, it does mean that you have to use them (if you already do). If you're a user of Spotify or Tinder and they pull out of the App Store, you now have to follow whatever arbitrary consumer-hostile decisions that will make them the most money since there's no one to tell them otherwise. I like that they have to follow the strict rules in the App Store because I know they want that sweet sweet App Store money and won't pull out unless there's a less strict option. It's like giving auto manufacturers a choice to either sell via dealerships that follow EPA laws or those that don't. Gee, I wonder which one they will go with given the choice?
Forcing you to use 3rd party store for few apps is somehow worst than forcing everyone to use the Apple store for all apps?
This discussion is moot. Apple only has to lower it's cut to cost + a reasonable markup instead of abusing it's position to charge 30%. Then everybody can be happy.
It's not going to be a few apps and they might not even be a few stores. It's going to be a bunch of stores with varying rules and conditions and bars for quality and selection of apps. I'm not interested in that because I don't trust other companies to do the right thing. If you're interested in that, you can use Android. No one is forcing you to use iOS.
Also, there is no reason to believe any percentage is too high or too low. 30% is what Apple has charged since day 1 when it had no position whatsoever. You will need to explain exactly at which point in time 30% became problematic.
I think it's getting obvious that the situation is untenable. If it's not the US courts, some other court will likely enact changes.
In the end it doesn't matter how Apple and Google got to this duopoly position of power, if it was fair or of they had to work hard. The fact that matters is where they are now.
Sigh... I’ll ignore the subtle dig and respond to this straight. I don’t want my daily driver phone that I rely on to do my real hacking to be a science experiment. I want it to be a tool that always works, and I want it to be somebody else’s job to ensure that. No one is perfect at this, not even Apple, but they are the best at it in 2020 and the App Store lock down is part of that. If Android didn’t exist, I might feel that a different balance would be optimal, but it does, and it’s thriving. I’ve developed for the App Store and while it’s a pain in the ass, I actually appreciate that There are standards that must be met and I can’t be undercut by a competitor who is willing to take shortcuts.
I just find it shortsighted; you're getting immediate convenience at the expense of longer term innovation and freedom. As I keep saying, if Microsoft had the power in 1990 that people want Apple to have today, the web wouldn't exist because Mosaic and Netscape would have been banned.
I’d prefer it if Microsoft, Google, Samsung, and other device makers released products that were on par with Apple’s. We are in this situation because Apple release better products than the competition. As a costumer, I want better products.
People here are consumers too. To give my anecdata:
I used to subscribe to the NYT and made the mistake of not subscribing using Apple's subscriptions mechanism. When I wanted to cancel for a while, I had to go through a whole spiel with their sales rep to get them to honor my cancellation. With other subscription services on Apple (like many the TV streaming subscriptions) cancelling is a couple of standard clicks and you're done. No questions asked. I've cancelled and re-subscribed to thing like HBO multiple times because of it, but I will never be resubscribing to the NYT again.
I don't want 90 different ways to cancel 90 different subscriptions from 90 different stores for 90 different apps on my phone, so yeah I do appreciate having one place to do it, and I wish it were harder for developers to skirt the App Store infrastructure to push their own consumer-hostile options.
As a signifier of technological anti-establishment thinking I think that label is pretty meaningless at this point.
Most of the "Hackers" of my generation grew up to either vacuum up user data without their consent, micro-target advertising (including political propaganda), or fund those that do the above two things.
But I am a customer too. For example, a couple months ago an, ad got my mom to install an app without her consent. She said she could not escape the page until she clicked okay, and she wasn’t aware the app had installed at all. I noticed because I started receiving charges for a subscription to the app services. A simple chat with Apple support granted me a reimbursement.
As a customer, Apple treats me well. I understand where tons of developers are coming from, but as a customer I haven’t had a better experience.
If you're asking "is it possible for multiple people to be so annoyed by the business practises of tech giants that they complain about it online even when not directly related to the topic at hand"... yeah, yeah it is. No need to look for a conspiracy here.
I spent months dealing with myheritages uncancelable auto-renewal. Others make you cancel 30 days in advance, but not more than 90 days in advance, with a phone call that runs you through dumb menus
At some point you have a life, kids, wife, etc and playing these games is not worth it. Apple markets to those of us who even though tech savvey don't want to play the game some of these big scammer / microtransaction folks want to play.
Is it the job of the DOJ to help scammers make money? Or can anti-trust be about some type of consumer protection?
Apple has carved out a small but lucrative area which is basically pretty consumer attentive. I think google assistant is way better, but I just like having a hassle free experience with apple too much to switch for what might be a better spec'ed product. I get my phone for 3 years, get applecare+ on it, and away I go. I've actually used AppleCare once, I was in and out in something like 15 minutes with a new phone. I've had apple remind me to cancel app subscriptions when I delete an app if I won't be re-installing! You get a notice before renewals on subscriptions, the terms are always clear and in dollars, consistent interface to cancel and get terms (ie, no FREE 1 month (and then fine print - $50/month after)).
The irony is that these are the sleezeballs - the EXACT folks that make doing subscriptions online so annoying and illustrate what apple is trying to create with their platform - TRUST.
They make games for Xbox - I'm sure microsoft wants a cut. Playstation I'm sure does the same.
This has everything to do with the apple eco-system from the consumer standpoint. I realize the issue here is that folks like tinder can't run whatever scam they want on the apple platform. Why is this a crime again?
Don't like it? There are tons of other phones out there, apple doesn't have close to a monopoly in smartphone sales.
Is this targeted?