zlacker

imo the app store thing is very niche and only affects a small, vocal group that tends to sit on hacker news and pay attention to these things. Can almost guarantee that 95% of the iphone-having population does not know/care about the app store "issue." I do think the general decline in quality and uptick in bugs will bite them slowly, at least once there's an iphone competitor of note.

>>irl_ze+(OP)
It affects everyone, because the aggressive revenue cut prevents entire categories of apps and services from being published to the app store. An app store with a 5-10% cut would be an app store with a much richer choice of apps.

>>irl_ze+(OP)
Most folks don't realize they're paying (up to) an extra 30% to Apple on everything they purchase in the app store. On top of an already exorbitant device price.

I'm sure you'd see more outrage if you had the app price listed without the fee, and then showed the fee below it/at time of purchase. It's another hidden fee.

>>irl_ze+(OP)
I don’t even know what the “issue” is. I’m guessing it’s the 30% they take because it’s definitely not the quality and range of apps they offer.

>>irl_ze+(OP)
I haven't ever purchased a single thing in the App Store or in-app so I guess I don't care. But it does seem like a monopoly and something that should be forced to allow competition.

>>marcus+S
What are some examples of the categories of apps and services that aren't publishable on the App Store due to Apple's services revenue?

> An app store with a 5-10% cut would be an app store with a much richer choice of apps.

Why? And how are you defining "rich". Rich in quality? Quantity? Something else?

>>irl_ze+(OP)
> at least once there's an iphone competitor of note.

What does this even mean? Do you mean in the US or globally?

By units sold, by platform, globally:

Android ~885 Million ~71%

iOS (iPhone) ~247 Million ~20%

HarmonyOS & Others ~118 Million ~9%

>>ericma+A1
> What are some examples of the categories of apps and services that aren't publishable on the App Store due to Apple's services revenue?

For example, Apple refuses to allow Peertube app onto the App Store. Peertube is a free version of Youtube with peer-to-peer file transfer acceleration.

That's because you can use it to (bring out smelling salts!) watch porn. If you connect it to a private Peertube instance.

Another example, Apple is not allowing an eBook reader app (FBReader) with full OPDS support. Because you can use OPDS to buy books in third-party stores. I'm using OPDS to get books from my own Calibre Web library, btw.

These are just the ones I can list off the top of my head. No doubt there are others.

>>candid+T
They aren't because companies refuse to price discriminate. There are some exceptions, like Spotify where they called it out in a public space that the in app subscriptions were more than if you bought directly.

However, I have noticed that its very rare. In every other case I've looked into, from Omni apps to streaming apps like Netflix, I'm paying the same either way, and often with a more convienent way of managing the subscription.

Thereby, I think it goes undetected by most, because price comparing the app store to the non app store price will yield the same price most of the time. Though importantly, I have noticed, it is not always the same options. For example, regarding Netflix, I am paying the same price for my sub via Apple but new and returning customers can no longer pay for it this way, they must go to the website now. I also can't add additional members (effectively discounted second subs) either.

This has to do with the fact Apple did captiulate to allowing companies link to their own subscription pages and actually allow customers to be directed in that way with clearer and transparent language. However, I have noticed most apps with the exception of large streaming platforms have done away completely with in app subscriptions, and the prices are still the same whether its the web or via in app purchases on Apple's platform.

However, Google Play is no better in this regard. Even though they allow 3rd party payment processing as an alternative to using Google's payment processing, it has not lead to apps being cheaper on their platform, in the majority of cases. Which makes me wonder if the value is still there for a 1st party payment processor, or something else.

>>cybera+j3
I don’t think it’s that simple, they allow Reddit, which Is filled to the brim with porn, and other ver ”non Apple” things. They also allow plenty of comic book readers that open files from almost every possibly conceivable source. Not to mention a lot of video players that can play porn of course.

Is it inconsistent and frustrating, very much so, and certain apps get an unfair treatment for sure, but I don’t think it’s as simple as that ”if app can do x then it’s banned”.

>>techpr+W5
> I don’t think it’s that simple, they allow Reddit

What part of "monopolistic collusion behaivor" you do not understand? Apple likely has backroom deals with large players, while locking out smaller competitors.

After all, Grok app is still in the App Store.

> Is it inconsistent and frustrating, very much so, and certain apps get an unfair treatment for sure, but I don’t think it’s as simple as that ”if app can do x then it’s banned”.

I gave the names of actual apps, feel free to talk with their developers. Peertube got in only after removing the ability to add custom endpoints.

>>cybera+j3
I'm not familiar with either of those apps, but it sounds to me like both break their terms of service. We can agree or disagree about those terms, but that seems to me to be the case here, versus Apple banning those apps due to services revenue.

>>esseph+w2
A device manufacturer/company that makes people who have iphones seriously consider swapping to the new company's offering. It is such a small tail of people who have an iphone and seriously consider moving to Android, with maybe Samsung being the highest quality and most attractive with Pixel also being pretty cool. I don't know what HarmonyOS is and I am pretty tech savvy. I think any company can make an ultra low spec phone and ship Android on it and get people to buy it on the basis of cost alone, but those people aren't cross-shopping iphones, so they're not a notable comparison. Arguably, with the exception of maybe high end Samsung and Pixel phones, Android phones and others are basically a whole different product category.

>>ericma+7Q1
Well, yes. That's the point. Apple's ToS are anti-competitive crap.

>>cybera+0q2
I'm not sure if they are or aren't, but I don't think that is a good argument when the premise was that revenue was preventing categories of apps and services. For example, in both of these apps Apple would still be getting services revenue through in-app purchases and such. Maybe that's not enough and so they construct their terms of service accordingly, but that's still not proof one way or the other, which is why I asked the original question that I had asked.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not sure there is evidence to support your assertion either.

>>irl_ze+ZQ1
> I don't know what HarmonyOS is and I am pretty tech savvy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS

>>ericma+l73
E.g. a PeerTube client with configurable endpoints is impossible under the current AppStore policy. Although Netflix is fine.