Hacker News Reader

Comment by fwiwm2c | Hacker News Reader

I hope you realize what this means is that ads as a monetization model for apps is getting decimated. These apps will now have to explore alternate monetization models such as either making themselves paid or subscriptions. And guess what, Apple takes a 30% cut of it. If you are thinking Apple is a benevolent savior of privacy, you are absolutely wrong. All they are doing here is to hurt advertising so that more apps move to other models which lets Apple extract more value.

Get ready, as a user, to pay for these apps which were once free.

View on HN

>All they are doing here is to hurt advertising so that more apps move to other models which lets Apple extract more value.

Sounds like a great business incentive to be pro-privacy to me. You can count on profit motive.

Don’t be silly this doesn’t take away advertising-supported apps whatsoever. They’re just taking away the ability to target users based on activity outside of the app, perhaps reducing the effectiveness of the targeting.

Plenty of industries survived for centuries without these kinds of ads.

Facebook is literally saying that their Audience Network product will see 50% reduction in revenue. That means apps will see less revenue from using AN. This is likely a pattern across apps.

That reduction is based entirely on their prediction of how many users will not give consent to be tracked.

FB is going to use less accurate forms of tracking, so they simply won't be able to charge as much. I'm not going to feel bad for a company that has to work harder to circumvent the users wishes.

I would rather pay for software with money than with privacy. Which is the precise option Apple is offering by allowing users to opt out of sending private data to Facebook and other advertisers. If you like giving your private data to advertisers, by all means, opt in.

(1) yes, this decimation is what I want, unironically. I want to pay up front and then trust the app isn't doing shady sh*t, rather than not pay and hope that whatever shady stuff they're doing doesn't bite me too hard. The reason every app does shady stuff is because you can't compete as a legit app when Shady Shaun over there is "giving" it away. I want the ecosystem to be paid.

(2) Apple's margin (from their distribution channel) is not unreasonable, imo, given that most apps would simply not be successful without the trust and technology Apple provides.

(3) Apple is obvi not benevolent; they're a _self-interested_ supporter of privacy. [Company] does [thing I like] so I pay [price] is how companies work, why I back Apple here, and ultimately why I'm willing to pay $60 or whatever for a charging cord.

Fine - you might be ok to pay it. But think about 100s of millions of users who aren't ok to pay for it. Now they don't have much choice since Apple took it away.

I guess I view Apple as a luxury ecosystem: I pay extra and get locked into a secondary ecosystem, and in return, they make lots of marginal improvements all over the place (privacy, camera, etc.) that make my life ever-so-slightly easier.

It's more than just $-for-product; 100s of millions of other users have Samsung, Google, etc. to buy from.

Very, very few of those users had a choice in the first place. Few apps have both ad-supported and premium versions in the first place (especially not the big ones - you literally can't pay for a Facebook subscription), and extremely few users were even aware of the trade-off that existed. Some premium apps (e.g. YouTube Red) engage in data harvesting anyway.

Apple did not take a choice away - they just changed the only option.

Additionally, this literally pushes more data into the hands of FB. Our FB advertising rep is already asking us to share more data with them to mitigate the impact of this change.

People have become accustomed to ad measurement. Performance marketing is a thing for a reason. How will ad performance be measured now? FB is already rolling out a tool to do that, but only if you share more data with them (lifetime value estimates, etc).

Sounds like Apple needs to crack down harder.

Doesn’t this change simply require for the apps to ask for permissions to use this data? I’d gladly pay for an app vs. giving away all my info. I would assume there are people on the other side of the fence as well.

As someone who routinely asks myself how the fuck random useful utility apps and websites will pay for their costs. Good! More damn stuff needs to cost money so we have a damn choice.

I’m sick of being the product when I have the damn money to buy services and products but everyone from startups to solo devs seem hell bent on pursuing advertising driven revenue models. If this drives some more developers to build more sustainable products and services then as far as I’m concerned Apple did a good thing.

I’m not going to comment on the validity of Apple’s 30% cut because I don’t think they deserve 30% however that doesn’t change the fact that I think this is a good thing.

“Free” as in “you pay with your data”?

It's not free if you're paying with data. I have no problems paying for apps that I use daily in exchange for not having my data sold off to the highest bidder.

What you’re describing is the dream scenario, creepy ad tech being replaced by things like micro transactions and new innovations along those lines. Maybe this can make it happen? I for one would gladly pay the minuscule amounts of money facebook makes from me seeing their annoying ads.

> Get ready, as a user, to pay for these apps which were once free.

A user will prioritize apps by value and pay for those that provide most value. Developer of valuable app will get paid. Is this a bad thing?

If it was user choice - this is fair. But a platform is making this decision for the users and in the process trying to extract value.

iOS 14 prompts for consent.[1]

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/22/apple-ios-14-ad-tracking/

"User choice" is still a thing?

The change Apple is making will finally let users make the decision. Currently FB decides on behalf of users.

This seems like a straightforward example of something you should be applauding.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com