Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is short-sighted.

The App Store is good because it is closed and curated. That's a main driver of the product experience. Removing the App Store irrecoverably damages the iPhone - a curated, non-malware infested, high quality phone with a consistent experience.

I have yet to see any argument how the App Store harms consumers. It helps developers make more money (Play Store revenue is half that of the App store's apps), it helps consumers stay protected from malware infested applications and is easy to use.

Where, exactly, is the harm? Now Epic with their gambling games will be able to rip off kids even more in their own store? Fantastic.



Lol the framing is ridiculous - Apple had nothing against ripping off gambling kids as long as they were getting their 30% cut so please cut the fanboy crap.

Apple is using it's market position and it's leading to inefficient pricing. I guarantee you if Apple was forced to allow other payment methods on their store that their % cut would go down because the convenience they offer is not worth 30%.

And App Store can be as curated as they want if they provide the hooks to allow third party stores and app deployments.

I generally agree that you have the device choice - but considering the size of this market and Apple market position this is a right place for regulators to step in and fix the market inefficiency - just like the Windows/IE thing. And while they are at it they should probably look at digital store policies in general to prevent this kind of thing, Google isn't much better than Apple and they keep bundling stuff with the phone as well.


Not an apple fanboy, please argue on merit, else I won't continue.

Apple isn't ripping off anyone. They're taking their cut of sales based off the value of providing access to a high paying market that has a non-negligible cost. The point is - Epic is not doing this "for the market." They're doing it because they want more money for themselves - which is fair, but they are using a service which provides them revenue. That should not be free. For that matter, they have a monopoly over their store as well - should they have to allow third party "VBucks" stores? It's absurd.

> Apple is using it's market position.....

It clearly is worth that, in fact, probably much more - others on this thread that support your POV have said the App Store generates twice the revenue of Android. It's not just the convenience - it simply makes devs more money. Cutting the app store will tank developer value instantly. Developers will lose big time in this event. There will be many on here that will begin to complain as their salary dips. Also apple already cut the fee for smaller apps. So what's the real problem? I have yet to see any tangible evidence of consumer harm.

> And App Store can be as curated.....

That opens the door for malware and a poor customer experience. I can see my mom now being tricked into downloading a privacy invading app. my dad's android is a nightmare. It destroys the product.

> I generally agree that you have the device choice....

There isn't market inefficiency. It's hard to argue monopoly of a company that has 20% of the market. The IE/Windows debate is far different. Both DOMINATED the market. This simply isn't true in this case.

The fact is every time this comes up on HN people just hate Apple, but never look at the actual merit of the arguments. It isn't a monopoly (less than 20% global marketshare), its fees aren't exorbitant based on the value it provides developers, and end consumers get a clean, relatively safe experience. No one is losing, except megacorps like Epic who want to make a little more money.


Um, the harm is 30% more expensive apps. If devs can't avoid the cut, its only going to get passed down to the user.


Except in the real world when we see games offered in multiple places (e.g. Steam and the Epic Game Store) they are usually the same price.

In other words, any savings from the developer cut is simply kept by the developer, not passed onto the consumer.


> Except in the real world when we see games offered in multiple places (e.g. Steam and the Epic Game Store) they are usually the same price.

Is that really true? Legitimate Steam keys are sold by stores other than Valve's Steam store, such as Humble Bundle, Green Man Gaming and Fanatical.

I shop at multiple stores that sell Steam keys, and I would say that I only buy less than 1/3rd of my games from Steam directly, due to heavy discounts via bundling and other sales at various online game stores. I find that the alternate "Steam" stores have sales more often than the official Steam store does.


As someone mentioned in another comment, this is the result of yet another monopolistic practice, this time by Steam who requires your game to be priced the same in all stores else it will be removed from Steam.

https://www.pcgamer.com/lawsuit-claims-valve-is-abusing-its-...


how is it 30% more expensive apps when the play store, ps4 store, xbox store all take the same amount?


Because all of them take a 30% cut (*some exceptions to certain apps apply)

https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut...

What I mean is, if Apple's cut was lesser / we had different app stores, prices could potentially be up to 30% lesser.


They'd be cutting themselves out of other stores if they did that. Stores like Steam require that your game is sold at the same price across all stores otherwise it will be removed from Steam.


That is also a bad monopolistic practice we should be against. Apple isn't the only culprit.


Ahh so harm now is spending any money. I was harmed by my grocery store for charging me 1.50 for milk!

30% is more than fair. People spend more money on the App Store than competitors. Developers want access to that. it shouldn't be free.


This is dumb. I never said "any" money, you're just trying to justify your own opinion.

Yes people spend more on the App Store and if the dev wants to use it to market their app they should go ahead and pay that 30%.

However if the devs dont want to access that, and/or consumers want to pay lesser, they should have the option to download from elsewhere.


Even assuming the only reason App Store revenue is that high is because of the store itself, we shouldn't treat the policies as one indivisible work set in stone.

You can have a properly curated store with 10% fees, for example. And you can block malware without blocking alternative web browsers or game streaming apps.


The policies are more than fair.

People on HN get mad when others make money, but they never get mad when they want to make money too.

> You can have a properly curated store with 10% fees, for example. And you can block malware without blocking alternative web browsers or game streaming apps.

It becomes much more difficult and time consuming, and why 10%? The service is unbelievable - it provides great access to a platform and its high spending users. That is worth more than 10%.


> The policies are more than fair.

More than fair? Okay then, tell me what percent is fair.

> People on HN get mad when others make money, but they never get mad when they want to make money too.

The problem is not that they make money, it's that they are engineering a lack of competition in order to keep their prices arbitrarily high.

> It becomes much more difficult and time consuming, and why 10%? The service is unbelievable - it provides great access to a platform and its high spending users. That is worth more than 10%.

Charging a significant percentage for "providing access to users" is rent-seeking. That's not a good thing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: