Apple’s biggest problem is only getting bigger
macworld.com
macworld.com
Discontinuing FlickType Keyboard for iPhone - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28200288 - Aug 2021 (163 comments)
See also:
After Apple rejections, FlickType gives up on popular iPhone keyboard for blind - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28212219 - Aug 2021 (83 comments)
And previously:
iOS developer who drew attention to App Store scams is now suing Apple - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26504158 - March 2021 (45 comments)
Apple’s App Store is hosting multi-million dollar scams - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26069660 - Feb 2021 (8 comments)
One country (US/EU) will eventually pass legislation, that I hope is sweep enough that we will never see a situation like this again. Apple has no right to build the iPhone then seal it against the user itself. This should never have been allowed, ever.
Isn't the margin 15% for (what I assume is) a vast majority of sales?
The only big companies left are micropayment game companies and that is mostly because casual games are a perfect fit for mobile and it’s worth the 30% to be where the users are.
* dominate the supply chain, making it impossible for other companies to compete
* write their own laws or otherwise influence legislation to keep themselves in their dominant position
PS if you are thinking of subscriptions, those are 30% for the first year, 15% afterwards. That's due to the high percentage of subscriber churn, so most subscriptions pay 30% and don't get to the 15% level.
Let’s recall what you wrote: “It’s a huge fat 30% margin”. Now that is certainly bullshit, isn’t it?
Except, I never wrote that. You're 100% lying... I didn't write those words anywhere in the world.
What I wrote was 15% except for the top end which is 30%. And you did write that two word comment, "It's 15%". Stop with the BS comments.
The person I originally replied to wrote those words. You just stepped in at some point to argue on their behalf.
You corrected nothing.
For example, I expect most users are like my mom and will never legitimately side load anything unless malware tricks her into it.
That being said, Apple should allow it like debug mode or whatever. I just don’t think it’s a big deal because it won’t be used much. And if Epic thinks many users will side load so they can avoid 30%, that’s unlikely.
Then make it not at all obvious how to do it. Grandma will never figure it out, and the 1% of us who WANT the feature can have it.
My mom is one of those millions who answer the phone and let scamsters walk her through setting up logmein and taking over her Windows box.
The only way I helped her was by switching her to Apple where this isn’t possible. Went from me cleaning her cheapo windows laptop up every six months to three years on an iPad with no cleanup.
Instead, everybody has to ask Apple to please pretty please let some software run on devices that they own.
Yes, you can get an enterprise license but Apple can take it away from you at any moment.
Apple also makes it very difficult for small businesses to get one in the first place.
Yes you do. It's $299/year and you have to be a company of a certain size and you need a D & B number.
It's the same deal that everybody gets. As a consumer if I wanted to pay Apple $100 per year, I could put my own apps on my phone too... but Apple can revoke my license to do that at any time for any reason.
The org mode stuff is to deploy apps to staff, not to bypass App Store.
I'm pretty sure all the big videogame consoles do.
If anything, it is more obvious to the user just what they're missing out on by selecting one console over another; for example, Breath of the Wild is basically there to sell the Nintendo Switch. If you don't buy the Switch, you will never get Breath of the Wild. What's a metaphorical Breath of the Wild that's available on Android but not on iOS? Isn't it often the reverse, where iOS gets a hot app, and Android users wonder when or if they will ever get the same?
Also, how do we get a situation where users can choose Apple as the intermediary where they wish, versus a scenario where we say "Isn't this your fault that you voluntarily accepted all of Walmart's demands?"
I’m glad iPhone gives me that option.
They play judge, jury and executioner, while hiding their internal discussions, goals and actions in secrecy.
A democratic and free state would be wise not allow a competing for profit government. It shouldn't share the right to regulate a market with other entities anymore than they should share the monopoly of violence.
I understand you are likely living in a country with a subpar government, but your mentality is short sighted and inconsistent.
If you like regulated markets so much why don't like you want the democratically elected government to regulate a market?
And if you like free markets so much why are you using an iPhone? And why don't you want the government to protect that free market from anti competitive undermining?
Companies shouldn't be allowed to regulate a market as they see fit, anymore than that a property owner can administer Sharia law.
Nobody is an island. All our actions affect others. The fact that your personal wellbeing or displeasure is the first thing that comes to your mind speaks to the quality of your character.
I also don’t care if I can or cannot side load programs. It’s a non issue for almost all users. It has to be made possible for researchers though (opaque CSAM detection that no one can investigate etc).
The problem is if they want to charge for in app things I buy from the developer, or draw a line between “content” and “features” etc.
When Apple review an app and process payments for it that costs money. But when I buy another game level from a developer that wants to charge me directly - there is no review and no processing done by Apple.
1. Developer makes an app that Apple is interested in.
2. Apple tries to acquire said app.
3. Talks fail.
4. App updates suddenly face irrational "rejection" during app review process and are no longer allowed on the App Store unless developers "jump through a myriad of fiery hoops juggled by either incompetent, malicious, or overworked reviewers enabled by rules the company wrote itself that continually get interpreted in various weird ways".
5. Simultaneously, Apple allows scammy copy-cat apps to confuse users and drain revenue away from legitimate app.
They’ve proven time and time again that they know what their customers want and their customers reward them with loyalty and benefit of the doubt. This doesn’t mean Apple gets it right every time, but on balance they deliver.
Articles like this are pointless because they don’t understand why people buy Apple. The article imposes arbitrary values as being the “right” ones and misunderstands what Apple’s customers actually value.
Let me give you an example. I love walled gardens and tightly curated experiences. In fact, I’m willing to pay a premium for them. I don’t care about developers and I don’t care about “freedom”. I simply want a high quality, tightly curated experience. I prefer tight control over the ecosystem by a single party that I trust and have a long standing relationship with (e.g Apple).
That's great. It doesn't mean that we, who don't like walled gardens and love our computing freedom, are willing to kow-tow to Apple's every whims and fancy and sacrifice our rights. And if you believe that our criticisms and protests don't have any effect then you should be content with that fact and ignore us instead of the pointless exercise of telling us that we are ignorant and need to shut up - it's obvious that we value different things.
It doesn't make either of us right or wrong - it just means we have different expectations, and I am sure you don't have any objections to people thinking different from you, right?
Apple has a multi-decade history of following their values. The tradeoffs of these values are well documented throughout history - obviously there are pros and cons.
What I don’t get is why people want every company to bend to some arbitrary set of values. You then end up with the same product experience everywhere.
I for one like the fact that Android and iOS take very different approaches to a mobile platform.
It's not an "arbitrary set of values" - it's called consumer rights.
And just like your right to free speech, right to vote, right to be treated as an equal and not be discriminated because of some part of your identity etc., consumer rights have been hard-won rights too.
Apple can customise their products as much as they want, but not at the expense of our rights. They can, and should, operate within that limit, as otherwise these rights becomes meaningless and leads to abuse.
Should I be able to install MacOS on my Xbox?
Should Audis be forced to design engines in a way that makes oil changes user-servicable?
I don’t buy this overly broad “consumer rights” argument. You can frame anything you want as a right this way.
The practical reality is that you have a choice in the marketplace. No one is being strong armed into anything and there are alternatives that can give you what you want.
In a well functioning market it would be a different story but we really need to stop pretending that mobile OSes are a healthy market with lots of competition. There are 2 players worth mentioning and that kind of market needs additional safeguards
There is a duopoly. You can choose either some opennes or not being spied on by Google.
True, you can go with a standard phone, but you are continously going to run into smaller and bigger bits of friction in a world that expects you to have a smartphone.
With Covid, some of those frictions were becoming pretty big. In the future, they may become impossible to surmount.
Being on the iOS platform isn't going to bestow this advantage on some shady discount app store that opens up.
And the while the Apple app store is pretty good, they aren't perfect. Opening the platform to a little more competition will force them to bring their A-game -- less arbitrary removals, faster reviews. Apple is a huge company with deep insight into their own operating system, they should be confident in their ability to out-compete any other stores on their platform. Refusing to allow others to compete on their platform just allows them to grow complacent, which will ultimately result in catastrophic failure someday down the line.
Isn't that why it's not big problem?
I get the gist, it's a thing, but I don't get what the article is trying to show me... but admittedly I found that article hard to read / grok, I felt like I walked into the middle of a conversation when I read it.
Where’s the best spot to post something like that to get traction?
- Kosta
I'm sure it's not the first time this has been used but it's the first time I've seen it.
(in case it gets changed, it's: "Apple’s biggest problem is only getting bigger")
There’s a billion alternatives to Facetime. There’s a billion cross-platform messengers. Etc
Comcast is not at all a comparable situation.
Or are we accusing Apple of something anticompetitive?