Hacker News Reader

Comment by hnra | Hacker News Reader

I bought an iPhone despite the App Store, so I don't think that logic really holds.

We all sometimes buy products that are of partial value for us, but that doesn't break the logic for those who value an entire product. Problems arise only when we try to sit on two different chairs at the same time.

Right now I am experimenting with an android phone, and its hardware is not bad (very good) for its 0.3x price of an actual iphone with similar specs. It also allows all that "control over the device" that everyone wants here. But after an iphone I don't really feel that I'm finally free. It is a constant fight for privacy, for being adfree, for apps that do not abuse permissions and/or "cloudness", etc. I wait for a new iphone because I got nothing out of promises of a freedom that android users around told me with an excitement. It is basically the same brick, but with a jerky scroll and an ability to install ads and low-functional spyware after hours of searching and comparison.

I don’t know if what you’re saying holds generally. I don’t know if people buy it for the AppStore, but I strongly suspect that most people don’t buy it despite the App Store.

They might resent the app store more if they knew Apple gets 30%. Which is why nobody is supposed to tell.

The 30% cut was literally announced on stage by Steve Jobs when they introduced the App Store in 2008, and again when in-app purchases were introduced in (I think) 2009. It's been in public coverage for years. They talk about it regularly; remember, Apple's position has been to say, loudly and repeatedly, that this is just a terrific deal for everybody. The fees are not secret.

Also, remember that in practice, the vast majority of people downloading applications on Android are doing so through Google Play, which charges the same 30% fee for both apps and in-app purchases. If people resent Apple more than Google in this context, it's probably more to do with the companies' respective public images than concrete reality.

I suspect you're remembering recent news about Apple preventing Facebook from putting a notice in the Facebook iOS app about Apple taking 30% of the cut from event tickets purchased through the app. While that was arguably a bad move on Apple's part from a PR standpoint -- lately they've been seriously violating the First Rule of Holes[1] -- there's little indication it's a change in policy.

[1] When you're in one, stop digging.

I don't understand your point. You seem to know that Apple denied an application that was merely stating the "widely known" fact that Apple takes 30% cut; yet you brush that off as irrelevant and "little indication that it's a change in policy"... what policy? The policy of NOT letting users know that Apple takes a cut?

The niche tech audience knows that. Apple blocked apps that showed a "30% goes to Apple" or similar. So yes, they don't want ordinary people to know.

Definitely there are more lemons on Apple’s App Store these days, but it’s still the case that fragmentation in the kingdom of the fruits is so much lower that producing a decent app is just easier than on the Google stack.

Just add a billing item "30% Apple Fee" and you'll know their true feelings.

The app store: now with the usability of US sales taxes.

Not really, US local sales taxes are added after sale to the advertised price and can change from one side of a street to the other. App store fees are included in the price and the same everywhere.

...and the proposal was to split it out, so at that point it would no longer be "included in the price".

Me too more or less, I’ve got an iPhone because it mostly just works and I can expect to get 5 years of life out of it, which makes it more affordable than most android phones, flagship or not. (My last Android was a nexus 5x.)

You bought a phone whose major customer value is it’s walled garden, but you don’t want a walled garden? That doesn’t seem right.

It is like vaccination: "look, there is no smallpox or measles, why do we need a vaccination for?"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com