Re:Apple tries to get Epic to admit there's porn on its store
by yladiz on Saturday May 08, 2021 @06:59PM
(#27091570)
> There are several interfaces that allow you to search through all of them.
So I have to download an app to search through store fronts, which I have to download, to download my app?
Re:Apple tries to get Epic to admit there's porn on its store
by alexvoda on Sunday May 09, 2021 @06:11PM
(#27100302)
And the same is true for traditional stores like groceries.
You can use a web browser to search (for exclusives and lower prices) through groceries web sites, which you have to go to or order from, to buy your desired groceries.
Competition is good.
Re:Apple tries to get Epic to admit there's porn on its store
by Drew_ on Saturday May 08, 2021 @11:08PM
(#27092876)
Yes the same process done on any PC.
Re:Apple tries to get Epic to admit there's porn on its store
by ben_w on Sunday May 09, 2021 @09:22AM
(#27095726)
So many layers of indirection does not seem like a good user experience.
Re:Apple tries to get Epic to admit there's porn on its store
by johnnyanmac on Thursday May 13, 2021 @06:34PM
(#27148349)
Not being able to subscribe to netflix from an Iphone sounds like a less convenient user experience.
The obvious answer that satifies everyone would be to a) allow alternate payment processors if the developers choose to forgoe the 30% or b) give the big companies than can roll these processors a lower cut to incenivize them to make one.
But if the answer was that obvious, this case would not have started.
This is all the same issue -- whether there should be other stores. If there are other stores then the other stores could filter apps differently and use other payment methods.
> Second 30% May have made sense once when this was a small business. It’s not anymore. Apple is inviting these lawsuits by simply not throwing big publishers a home with reduced rates.
> Third, the whole tax on digital purchases is completely arbitrary. There was a time when Apple was working out what to do with Amazon and that’s when this role came about. Not being able to purchase kindle books just highlights the artificial and arbitrary nature of all this.
Other stores could also charge lower fees and not charge any fee for digital purchases, and provide competitive pressure for Apple to do so. This is probably the largest reason they don't want to.
> Fourth, at the risk of offending HN folks who self-servingly believe everyone wants or needs side-loading apps, most people benefit from the filtering of apps. Side-loading and unrestricted third party payments would simply be another attack vector.
Nothing about third party stores prevents filtering. It only provides a choice of who does the filtering separate from your choice of hardware and operating system.
But naturally if anyone can operate a store then you can operate your own and do your own filtering. Maybe most people don't want to do that; that's fine. They don't have to. Anyone could still choose to leave it to Apple or Debian.
> Lastly, a bunch of different app stores is a terrible user experience. Just look at the friction of finding which streaming service has a particular movie or TV show.
The problem there was never finding which service has it. There are several interfaces that allow you to search through all of them. The problem there is that you have to pay for each subscription and nobody wants to pay a monthly fee to a thousand separate subscription services.
But there is no monthly fee for an app store app. It's not a subscription service.