Hacker News Reader

Comment by pedrorijo91 | Hacker News Reader

1. I believe that Uber would raise against such decision. I also believe that all the problems it could bring would make Apple back in that decision. They are not competitors, so they win anything for complicating life to Uber.

2. No one would switch to Android just because of that.

3. Yes, lots of negative publicity. That's why 1. would never be reached.

Finally, one thing not mentioned: people would find a way to install the app without the app store. Every good hacker in the world would try to do it firstly, because every iphone user would be asking to be able to install Uber. And Apple doesn't want all bright minds trying to find flaws in their system for sure (I wouldn't at least)

View on HN

2. No one would switch to Android just because of that.

Because of losing Uber? No.

Because they don't trust Apple not to remove other apps? Absolutely.

Consistency, stability and trust are quite important to maintaining a brand. Apple arbitrarily removing apps would definitely harm their brand image, especially as they're positioning themselves as a market leader in fighting for their customers privacy and trust at the moment.

didn't see that point. it's true, but I think consumers would take more than 1 app (even if it as big as Uber) to change. If the behaviour stars repeating of course people would.

But Apple would be required by users to give an explanation for those actions.

Still, all this post is kinda nonsense because it would never happen. It's more a karma bait lol

> 1. They are not competitors, but Apple's arbitrary removal of the app from its AppStore without giving a valid reason will certainly make a legal case against them (unless Apple specifically mentions they can do so in their store's T&C which I don't know much about).

>2. Yes, they would. In 2016, android is fully feature equivalent to Apple's iDevices, only reason you may not switch is that you are too lethargic and don't want to unlearn the iOS way of things.

>3. Whether they will do it or not will depend on the negative publicity vis-a-vis impact on profits/bottom lines. If your bottom-lines hit the floor as no one is using an app to place cab booking orders, the last thing you will worry about is negative publicity. Apple, on the other hand, will worry about this publicity since it has a lot to loose from it.

Is intentionally damaging someone without valid reason really sufficient to win a lawsuit? That seems pretty broad: I do that every time I browse the peanut butter section at the supermarket.

If the CEO of Apple told the CEO of Uber over a recorded phone call, "The Board, the Shareholders, and I all agree on cutting your app out of the store for no reason other than we hate your guts and it'll bring us joy to watch you suffer", it still seems like that shouldn't be enough to win a lawsuit. It's Apple's store: They get to choose the apps they want in their store. What next - are we going to have judges force bookstores to stock books because "your reasons for not stocking the book aren't good enough"?

Of course, Uber surely has explicit agreements with Apple, Google, and even their hosting provider. You don't build a multibillion dollar business on top of someone without even calling them to make sure it's okay.

Certainly, they will have to prove somehow that their app was ultimately removed owning to a competitor's pressure. If they can do that, then the monopolies act and everything will come into the picture. I'm not insinuating that any competitor is doing this to Uber, but that's pretty natural and apparent in this case. Naturally, the store is Apple's business and app publishing is a means of income. No sane business will refuse a business prospect on the grounds of "I don't like you". The only reasoning here is that a competitor is involved. But yeah, proving that in a court of law is a different thing altogether which Uber has to manage.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com