Apple accused of breaking UK competition law by overcharging for apps | Hacker News Reader

Apple accused of breaking UK competition law by overcharging for apps

theguardian.com

The core question here is whether we consider the app store on mobile OS' to be part of the OS, or a separate product. Apple believes the App Store and iOS to be one inseparable unit; you cannot have one without the other. They are the same product. Google on the other hand, does not. They want to spread their proprietary services throughout everything, but you can make a usable version of Android without Google Play. It's degraded, but it works.

If they are distinct products, then it sure looks like Apple using market dominance to push competitors out of the app store space. If they are the same product, then it seems reasonable for Apple to charge whatever fee they like for distribution to their products.

I tend to think they are distinct products. Competitors are able to treat them as distinct products, so there isn't a technical reason they must be unified. There is some consumer benefit in reduced cybercrime from a curated app store, but there is also consumer harm in the loss of choice (i.e. using an app store that allows torrent clients or porn).

> Competitors are able to treat them as distinct products, so there isn't a technical reason they must be unified.

This is faulty reasoning. There are technical reasons, and competitors choose a different set of trade-offs.

> there is also consumer harm in the loss of choice

There is no such harm, since as you have pointed out, competitors are available for consumer who want those things.

But what if I want a torrent client AND a way to watch my iTunes purchases on my phone? Heck not even iTunes purchases, movies I have on iTunes from digital codes from Blu-ray bundles.

(And before someone mentions Movies Anywhere, that's US only)

What if I want an electric toothbrush AND a way to play my iTunes purchases?

>There is no such harm

There is harm to developers or companies where Apple is holding access to a large market.

Apple’s role is beneficial to the market. Their curation enables consumer trust.

Lol. False trust at best. There's still scams to be had on the App Store.

A few scams slip through, but millions are stopped. You may not care, but a lot of people have been saved from a lot of problems.

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/05/app-store-stopped-ove...

Several of the apps mentioned in this article are still up and active on the app store...

Apple PR is well Apple PR. They're gonna spin things in their favor.

www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2021/4/21/22385859/apple-app-store-scams-fraud-review-enforcement-top-grossing-kosta-eleftheriou

There are only 2 Million App on App Store. That 1 million Apps rejected seems another one of those Apple number which is missing context. As they have been doing in the past 5 - 6 years.

It’s easier to a attempt a scam than create a real app. So there is no reason to doubt this number. The App Store is protecting people.

Except we have plenty of evidence of Scams, and plenty of evidence of Apple blocking the perfectly valid apps. And more that App Store isn't only about protecting people but also act as competitive advantage. All of the above were exposed in the current EPIC vs Apple Trial ( Although those evidence are not of particular used in the EPIC trial itself )

You might think all of that are ok in US, these practices dont sit well in Euro Centric Minds.

> Except we have plenty of evidence of Scams,

Not really - we have a few press pieces. Nothing like the millions of scams that are stopped.

> and plenty of evidence of Apple blocking the perfectly valid apps.

Not really. We have a few prominent examples which are generally resolved by the developer adhering to the guidelines.

> And more that App Store isn't only about protecting people but also act as competitive advantage.

The App Store is a competitive advantage because consumers want a safe, trustworthy, and curated place to buy software.

Apple added: “The commission charged by the App Store is very much in the mainstream of those charged by all other digital marketplaces. In fact, 84% of apps on the App Store are free and developers pay Apple nothing. And for the vast majority of developers who do pay Apple a commission because they are selling a digital good or service, they are eligible for a commission rate of 15%.”

84% seems extremely high and I'm curious what sort of apps that number includes. Are they mostly free branded apps for ordering coffee etc, in-app purchases that were not included, or just unsuccessful indie apps that never earned a cent?

My colleagues and I have so many mixed feelings and long discussions on the App Store. It provides a high level of safety and convenience, yet is very clear that Apple wants to own the entire customer experience and charge developers at every turn and leave them holding the infrastructure bill.

I thought developers had to at a minimum pay $99/year to be able to sign apps for the App Store. Is this no longer the case?

That's still the case.

> high level of safety and convenience

I don't see how a 30% cut raises safety and convenience. Are you saying that the proceeds go toward app reviews? This doesn't equate to the wildly varying app review experience stories I've read.

"84% of apps on the App Store are free" - I bet this also includes free apps with in-app purchases, which is most free apps these days.

yesterday's BBC article

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27112757

Can we first deal with the locked down hardware they are allowed to sell.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com