Hacker News Reader

>Files is a system app like Windows Explorer. It’s not meant to “compete” with anything.

That defence helped Internet Explorer a lot. Nope. At the very least searching for 'dropbox' should return 'dropbox' and not be overriden by Apple.

>but for some reason its position in the App Store is a controversial topic? How many people even delete Files and search for it again?

This makes Apple's defence for manually placing Files at #1 even more nonsensical.

>iCloud Drive is a cloud storage competitor that Files works well with, but Files also supports Dropbox and Google Drive and many other storage competitors...

If all users installed DropBox, iCloud Drive would get $0. If they used Files, some percentage of users would pay for Apple's solution. That the financial benefit doesn't get 100 percent of users does not make it not a financial benefit.

>That defense helped Internet Explorer a lot.

The past tense implies that battle was already won. Afaik, Windows still uses anti-competetive practices to support Edge (not uninstallable, and 'are you sure you want to change your default browser? Check out the New Edge first!'). The same defense still applies if they want it. I don't think it's right to speak about it like it's a thing of the past.

Privatezilla [1] helps with many nuisances. Among others, you can block Edge installation with it.

[1] https://github.com/builtbybel/privatezilla

A filesystem and an internet browser are two very different things! Files = Windows explorer, the filesystem. Which is not internet explorer, the browser.

Dropbox and Files indeed aren’t really competitors. I often use Files to browser my Dropbox files!

I just uninstalled Dropbox and upgraded my iCloud storage.

I’ll admit it’s an experiment to see if it meets my needs, but for my use case(syncing between my desktop and laptop), they are absolutely direct competitors.

Yes, iCloud certainly does compete with Dropbox. But Files doesn’t. You didn’t use the Files app to upgrade your iCloud storage, you went to Settings or a web browser.

How do you use iCloud Drive to sync arbitrary files between iOS and macOS? Is there a dedicated iCloud Drive app that competes with the Dropbox app?

I don’t think there is. I think the only first party interface for syncing arbitrary files in iCloud Drive is the Files app.

Yeah: this whole argument that Files isn't competing with Dropbox because it has some other functionality Dropbox doesn't have is absurd. One may as well directly copy someone else's product and then add a clock to it and claim "my app doesn't compete with your app because my app also has a clock and I imagine some people are using it just for the clock". If iCloud Drive were integrated with some other even more complex app (as honestly, almost everything people want to do with the Files app they can do with Dropbox: they are direct competitors if you reverse the order of comparison) like Safari or iTunes, then that would make that entire app compete with Dropbox. If iPhoto adds a filter that competes with some standalone photo effects app--maybe Prisma--and then when people search for Prisma they are directed to install iPhoto instead, that isn't somehow "not a problem" because iPhoto has a million more features than Prisma: that would be Apple abusing their App Store monopoly to nudge people to maybe (as nothing is 100%, and it doesn't need to be to be "a problem") use their software instead of Prisma.

My fault, I wasn't clear.

My use case also includes being able to check certain file occasionally on mobile. That requires Files app.

Nit: there was a time when Windows Explorer an IE were integrated enough that you could open http URLs in Windows Explorer.

> If all users installed DropBox, iCloud Drive would get $0.

I pay for both and I doubt I’m the only one.

I don't think you read the article. Apple boosted their generic Files app above Dropbox for the query Dropbox. That is the controversy.

Upvote for you and downvote for OP.

I think there will be more tricks from Apple to handle search result of other apps.

Yeah but even before reading the article I figured this was an algorithmic mistake, and apparently it is:

"While Apple didn’t challenge the idea that Files was unfairly ranked over Dropbox, the company says the reality was a simple mistake: the Files app had a Dropbox integration, so Apple put “Dropbox” into the app’s metadata, and it was automatically ranked higher for “Dropbox” searches as a result."

The emails themselves say it was a "manual boost" rather than the PR explanation you provided.

I'm a little conflicted who to believe. But it sounds like there are specific keywords an app developer can specify for their apps that signals to the App Store search what to rank for (kind of like having keywords on your website tells Google what your page is about). From my understanding Apple manually put "Dropbox" as one of the keywords and that is what they removed. If other app developers can put in keywords like that (and not just Apple for their own apps) then it doesn't sound too bad... But if it was a separate system that is not accessible to other developers to manipulate then that is less cool.

Apple's explanation makes perfect sense. They didn't manually put "Dropbox" as one of the keyboards, but the integration of Dropbox with Files results in "Dropbox" being automatically added to the metadata of the Files app, and the metadata automatically gets indexed by the search system

That's not manual though, it sounded like somewhere along the way somebody manually added the word Dropbox to the app's keywords

The point is that the manual boost was for the Files app in general, not for the "Dropbox" search query specifically.

If(query=='dropbox') BoostInternallApp('files')

Not really sure how that can be a "mistake"

No, it was just BoostInteralApp('files').

Now, since both Dropbox and Files were results for the "dropbox" search term (because the Files app contained "dropbox" in its metadata if Dropbox was installed, and metadata got indexed by the search system), the latter ended up first due to getting boosted.

While this is an abuse of their monopoly powers, to me this is less bad than locking out 3rd party app stores. I never heard much complaining about that before Epic did their thing.

The whole point of gaining monopoly status is to be able to use and apply these kinds of manipulations. This doesn't make it right however.

Epic is one of a few large enough to make the necessary waves to have an impact. But behind Epic are thousands of unhappy app developers. Most of which are otherwise ignored. Also, complain too loudly and Apple has plenty of indirect ways to harm you. This is also an outcome of monopoly.

Indirect? They can shut down an app for any reason with no recourse if they wanted.

I care that searching for "Dropbox" doesn't give you "Dropbox" in the first page of results, because of some knob Apple is able to turn any time they want.

When a “page” of search results consists of 1 ad and 1 result, it’s really not very meaningful to talk about “pages”.

"Below the fold" doesn't have meaning? Is that not what he was effectively saying?

“Below the fold“ implies that the result wasn’t on screen. The second search result is always on screen, even if you have a tiny iPhone from six years ago. When you search for “dropbox“ and the second result is the Dropbox app adorned with the Dropbox logo, is anyone ever going to even notice the first result?

The exact quote was "In fact, Dropbox wasn't even visible on the first page".

If you dig down the email chain PDF you get to email from the head of Epic bitching about how a search for “Fortnite” comes up with ads for competitors first. He then goes on to use the ad for Files that showed up at the top of a search for “Dropbox” as another example.

Half the time when I search for any app on the iOS store I get an ad for a knockoff at the top of the search, barely noted as an ad, this is a big problem. Though you get the same shit when you search for anything on Google too. Except a lot of those are ads bought by the very thing you’re searching for, because they have decided giving Google protection money to keep anyone else out of that spot is worth it.

> barely noted as an ad

I don’t know what version you use but in iOS 14 the ad is clearly mentioned and the ad element have a distinct light blue background and all the other elements have w white color !

Oh, I guess that’s improved then. Yay! I’ve basically quit updating anything lately, iOS and MacOS do everything I need and new versions just break shit and push developers towards replacing what used to work with slow, underfeatured Electron crap.

Still a goddamn pain in the ass. No I don’t want Obvious Ripoff or Close Competitor, I want Actual Thing That I Typed In.

Care about the principle not the individual case.

If I search for something and its found, I expect it to be the first result. Not an ad for its competitor. I hate the manipulation of rankings that interfere in this way.

Huh? But that’s the whole business model of search ads. If you manipulate the organic results then shame on your whole family but sticking ads at the top is to me pretty benign as long as they’re clearly labeled — and on the App Store and Google Search they are.

If I search for something and it exists, I expect to see it. If necessary put the ad after the result I expect to see. Even with them labelled as ads. That is a better approach.

The "its just how it is" kind of narrative isn’t great either. I'd never want to hear that from anyone implying they are innovators or creative types. Especially when the "how it is" aspect is something created as a matter of deliberate choice and not some natural law.

This is not the only case.

For example it was reported that Fortnite wasn't the first result when searching for "Fortnite".

So Apple has no problem giving users poor results in favor of ads. I guess it's only annoying when Google does it right?

Showing File above Dropbox for a "Dropbox" search only adds insult to injury here.

edit: the amount of hand waving Apple gets around these parts is irrational. 2 instant downvotes for stating facts.

It's particularly weird to target Apple in such a nebulous case when Selling ads that show up higher in the search results than the product you searched for is literally Google's business model in their only really profitable segment.

A market place and a search engine with ads are a little different. Apple is the market and also the vendor of the competing product in this case. They used their control of the market to benefit themselves. This type of vertical integration that is used to squash and out compete smaller competitors definitely smells like what anti trust laws were originally put in place to fight. Big tech lawyers should be terrified. The general sentiment of the public is beginning to shift against them and I'm not sure them spending millions more on lobbying will be able to prevent the legislation that will come.

Also, just because Google does shifty things doesn't make it ok for Apple to do shifty things too.

> A market place and a search engine with ads are a little different.

There is a difference here.

Google has a very definite profit motive in selling ads on searches for a given companies product name that ranks higher in their monopoly search engine.

I can't see how ranking Files higher than Dropbox has any such profit motive. It's a free system utility that isn't even ad supported.

They are steering users away from non Apple apps. If a user installs Dropbox, it seems more likely that they wouldn't want to install and pay for icloud storage. If Apple wasn't benefiting from surfacing their app in front of a non Apple app, why would someone at Apple go through the trouble of setting it up that way?

They are steering users to install a system utility that integrates with Dropbox (and every other major cloud service).

Apple does not make any profit off of that system utility.

Google, on the other hand, makes the vast majority of their profit from selling ads that do indeed steer users away from the product they searched for.

I'm making an assumption here since it's been a while since I've looked at SEO, but I'd assume that page rank in this case matters. Any friction at all leads to fewer conversions, which means fewer sales for Dropbox. If a less knowledgeable user downloads the Apple app instead of Dropbox in this case, there will be some portion that don't end up installing Dropbox and they may instead find their way to icloud when recommended to install it after installing files. There is no way to tell the actual impact, but I don't see how it could possibly have caused no impact. They control the market, they have a responsibility to maintain a non-amazon like image. Hopefully it was a mistake.

Files is the iOS equivalent of Windows Explorer in Windows. They both allow you to view and transfer files within the filesystem.

Dropbox provides it's functionality by integrating into Files on iOS and Windows Explorer in Windows.

Installing Files does absolutely nothing to disadvantage a Dropbox install, so your entire premise is false.

If they are harming you with it, you should sue them then? It isn't Epic's job--nor is it even their right--to sue everyone who does something bad to anyone: they sued someone who did something bad to them.