Comment by shiroiushi | Hacker News Reader

Comment by shiroiushi | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>My fear is that if I want to download Skype or Teams, I’ll need to first download the Microsoft Store app, and then sign in, and then download the app I want. And the store will be slow and shitty and packed with ads

I'm not sure I see the problem here. If some apps are only available through shitty ad-packed vendor-controlled stores, then hopefully that'll push people to simply avoid them. I mean, if I want to video-chat with someone and to use Skype/Teams I have to download the Microsoft store app and suffer with all that, or I just could use Facebook Messenger on the regular Google Play store (assuming they don't force their own store like MS) and it's easy, I'm going to tell my friend, "let's use FB Messenger instead; these MS apps are a pain in the ass." And if someone insists on using some shitty MS app that I can only get through the shitty ad-laden MS Store, I might re-evaluate how much I really want to chat with them. Smarter app vendors are going to try to avoid putting their users through that experience.

(Also, this is just an example; for all I know, Meta/FB in this possible future would be the stupid one pushing an ad-laden store while MS might be the smarter one making it easier for users to install their apps.)

Plus, I'd add that this is only an issue for apps with a high network effect.

For everything else I'd expect publisher's to just put their app in my favorite place, or risk me choosing something else.

For example im not going to install a new store just to get a note-taking app, unless that app was in some definitive way superior to all the others. (Which seems unlikely for a note taking app.)

Yes, exactly: new stores means much higher friction for consumers, so they're much more likely to choose an easier-to-install alternative unless there's something about that app that either requires them to use it (e.g. work) or its reputation is so much better.

So if it doesn’t affect apps with low stickiness, and the network effect will ensure that large publishers benefit from it, what’s the benefit for me as a user?

The issue is many stores use dark patterns and you may not catch on until too late. - Subscriptions impossible to cancel - Silent auto-renewal - Silent price changes - Hidden Fees - Sales of purchase history - Apps released under known brand that are off brand knock offs. - Apps bundled with added cruft (think those download.com installers that installed toolbars and whatnot). - Pirate versions of Teams through off brand store causing licensing audits

A lot of dumber app vendors will just drain the suckers dry and rebrand and if Microsoft pulled their apps from the App Store some unfortunate souls would click the first Google hit and get sucked into the scam.

If my workplace says I’m using teams, then I’m using teams. There’s no way to change that.

> And if someone insists on using some shitty MS app that I can only get through the shitty ad-laden MS Store, I might re-evaluate how much I really want to chat with them.

It’s comments like this that show a huge lack of understanding of how the majority of people feel. I don’t give a shit if my parents like WhatsApp, but I still want to talk to them. And it’s hard enough to get them to use technology, never mind navigating whatever is to come here.

Are you honestly telling me that you think Meta are going to not use this opportunity to skirt around the limits placed on their apps by the apple App Store? If you believe meta, or byte dance are going to have your best interests at heart, I have a bridge to sell you

Reply on news.ycombinator.com