Apple under fire for their Idiotic decision to charge 27% for 3rd party payments

[darknessblade]

On 2/14/2022 at 7:43 PM, RejZoR said:

There is no real alternative for Windows. Saying there is Linux is not the same. There is for iOS. It's not even remotely the same.

AAH yes Android is a "Alternative" for IOS

 

NO IT IS NOT.

 

-Can you install android on a IPHONE "without Jailbreaking it": NO: YOU CANNOT.

-Can you install Linux on any WINDOWS "compatible" PC, without changing any settings: YES YOU CAN.

 

There you go, your last argument destroyed.

 

[Kisai]

45 minutes ago, darknessblade said:

AAH yes Android is a "Alternative" for IOS

 

NO IT IS NOT.

 

-Can you install android on a IPHONE "without Jailbreaking it": NO: YOU CANNOT.

-Can you install Linux on any WINDOWS "compatible" PC, without changing any settings: YES YOU CAN.

 

There you go, your last argument destroyed.

 

False. You have to destroy the existing OS in both cases.

 

- You can't install ARM Linux on an ARM Windows device

- You can't install most Linux distros on a whitebox PC without a lot of mucking in the BIOS and then even more mucking with the OS for drivers and tunables.

 

The closest Linux ever got to being "easy to try" was at one point in time there was a distro could could boot off a CD (eg Knoppix) and assuming you knew how to make the PC boot a disc. That only works to try a small amount of things, and most of the time, if you installed Linux to a Windows PC, it obliterated the Windows partition, and if you ever had to update/reinstall windows, it would obliterate the dual boot configuration. 

 

You have to do quite a bit of PC voodoo to make a dual-boot PC, and it wasn't until like Windows 7 that it was even possible to have a Linux OS partition survive a windows reinstall, assuming you went through the effort of using the Windows boot manager and not Linux's

 

Linux can't get things right that Apple manages to get right. Because again, it's herding cats. Every OS believes it can do everything better, and ultimately does everything worse except for the core developers pet reason for forking it in the first place. We do not need hundreds of variations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions

 

At most, we only ever needed three. One for Embedded, one for Server and one for Desktop/Laptop. So far Server has pretty much de-facto been Redhat. Use something else at your own risk. Desktop, total crapshoot. When mobile (as in mobile phones), that should have been the desktop experience scaled down to a touch experience, instead we got Android which is a fork of the Linux kernel without any of the parts that make a Linux OS Linux. Which to it's benefit, at least solves the herding cats problem of OS forks (developers only have to target "Android",) but doesn't solve the problem of vendors putting it on garbage hardware and selling it at premium prices, thus developers still have to content with people complaining that their software or game doesn't work on their device because the manufacturer cut corners.

 

An iOS device does not have that problem at all. You develop an application or game for iOS, it works on ALL devices that the OS is still supported for. Same with MacOS, you develop for MacOS, it works on ALL Mac's that the targeted OS is still supported on. 

 

In many cases the problem with Linux is the community itself. You criticize Linux in any way, and the people come out of the woodwork to try and prove you wrong, and never do, they just end up proving the point that Linux as a Desktop is, and always will be a bad platform for the masses, because the Linux community is so hellbent on gatekeeping people who aren't nerds out of it by shooting down quality of life improvements that bring it closer to MacOS or Windows.

 

 

[RejZoR]

51 minutes ago, darknessblade said:

AAH yes Android is a "Alternative" for IOS

 

NO IT IS NOT.

 

-Can you install android on a IPHONE "without Jailbreaking it": NO: YOU CANNOT.

-Can you install Linux on any WINDOWS "compatible" PC, without changing any settings: YES YOU CAN.

 

There you go, your last argument destroyed.

 

Clearly shows you haven't ever installed a custom ROM on a phone. Guess who has. Me. Back in the day when it was an absolute fuckery to perform. Boy the shit I went through with my HTC Wildfire to install CyanogenMod on it. Same for Galaxy S2 which was even worse with its weird storage partitioning. I literally had to perform a witchcraft on both with super questionable "loader" apps and they both ended up beyond super janky. It got even worse when bootloaders from that era weren't compatible with ROM's of later time and I somehow couldn't install new TWRP on it because the TWRP for CyanogenMod was some custom shit incompatible with vanilla one. Then I've gone through more witchcraft to replace defunct CyanogenMod with LineageOS. More recently, unlocking bootloaders and installing TWRP got easier, but whole thing is still so god damn janky it's incredible. Couldn't get any banking stuff working on the phone because it had unlocked bootloader, despite not being rooted at all. Just running LineageOS. Which all I got was daily nightlies (yay) and a requirement to do more witchcraft fuckery with Magisk to make it half usable. I'm used to all this shit and I still had super hard time and you're here saying like it's something anyone can do on Sunday.

 

You didn't destroy anything, well, other than yourself. Even installing Android of choice on phone that came with Android in the first place out of the box, is an absolute fuckery NO casual user will ever do. And if they do, chances are, those people will end up asking what to do now that they bricked their phone.

 

Can you install Android on any Android "approved" phone without unlocking bootloader that's easy and convenient and not the fuckery it still is now? NO: YOU CANNOT

 

Not to mention I don't understand people who Jailbreak iPhones. They literally pick up one of rare devices that works superbly out of the box and it's literally great the way it is because it's tightly controlled by the vendor of it and they go and fuck it up and make it more inconvenient to maintain and use. Android ROM's are not much different. Everyone throws them around as some sort of argument, but they are so inconvenient, so impractical, so clumsy and require user to invest so much time into them to even get them working they simply stop making any kind of sense.

 

Which is why I stayed with stock software that came with phone and I decided to use device that has longest software support. Which is an iPhone and beats all the Android phones in existence. ALL of them. Only other second viable option are Samsung phones because of same reason. Factory Android that has reasonably long software support for it to not matter. Flashing of ROM's is absolutely and totally overrated and always used as some sort of "gotcha" argument for Android's "openness" and you people always leave out facts about how stupid and inconvenient all of it is.And I find oddly peculiar similarities within Linux community... Guess what, I've been fiddling with Linux from days when Knoppix was a popular thing and I had Slax my pocket on a 8cm miniCD and I have whole lot of stories about that too. Also some very recent ones too. Very similar to the one about "magical" things about Android above...

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, darknessblade said:

AAH yes Android is a "Alternative" for IOS

 

NO IT IS NOT.

 

-Can you install android on a IPHONE "without Jailbreaking it": NO: YOU CANNOT.

-Can you install Linux on any WINDOWS "compatible" PC, without changing any settings: YES YOU CAN.

 

There you go, your last argument destroyed.

 

Calling Linux an alternative to windows is like calling mayo an alternative to ketchup. They are both condiments but clearly they are vastly different. Windows and Linux are both operating systems but they are clearly  vastly different and if you asked a windows user to try and get by with Linux you would find that alot of people would struggle to do so. You compare that to ios vs android and you can see that people can easily switch between the two with relative ease. Now the whole complaint that you can't get android on iphones doesn't really change that. 

[darknessblade]

  

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

False. You have to destroy the existing OS in both cases.

 

- You can't install ARM Linux on an ARM Windows device

- You can't install most Linux distros on a whitebox PC without a lot of mucking in the BIOS and then even more mucking with the OS for drivers and tunables.

 

The closest Linux ever got to being "easy to try" was at one point in time there was a distro could could boot off a CD (eg Knoppix) and assuming you knew how to make the PC boot a disc. That only works to try a small amount of things, and most of the time, if you installed Linux to a Windows PC, it obliterated the Windows partition, and if you ever had to update/reinstall windows, it would obliterate the dual boot configuration. 

 

You have to do quite a bit of PC voodoo to make a dual-boot PC, and it wasn't until like Windows 7 that it was even possible to have a Linux OS partition survive a windows reinstall, assuming you went through the effort of using the Windows boot manager and not Linux's

 

Linux can't get things right that Apple manages to get right. Because again, it's herding cats. Every OS believes it can do everything better, and ultimately does everything worse except for the core developers pet reason for forking it in the first place. We do not need hundreds of variations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions

 

At most, we only ever needed three. One for Embedded, one for Server and one for Desktop/Laptop. So far Server has pretty much de-facto been Redhat. Use something else at your own risk. Desktop, total crapshoot. When mobile (as in mobile phones), that should have been the desktop experience scaled down to a touch experience, instead we got Android which is a fork of the Linux kernel without any of the parts that make a Linux OS Linux. Which to it's benefit, at least solves the herding cats problem of OS forks (developers only have to target "Android",) but doesn't solve the problem of vendors putting it on garbage hardware and selling it at premium prices, thus developers still have to content with people complaining that their software or game doesn't work on their device because the manufacturer cut corners.

 

An iOS device does not have that problem at all. You develop an application or game for iOS, it works on ALL devices that the OS is still supported for. Same with MacOS, you develop for MacOS, it works on ALL Mac's that the targeted OS is still supported on. 

 

In many cases the problem with Linux is the community itself. You criticize Linux in any way, and the people come out of the woodwork to try and prove you wrong, and never do, they just end up proving the point that Linux as a Desktop is, and always will be a bad platform for the masses, because the Linux community is so hellbent on gatekeeping people who aren't nerds out of it by shooting down quality of life improvements that bring it closer to MacOS or Windows.

 

 

Yet in all cases where i installed Linux. i did not have to change a single thing regarding settings.

But then again, i would already shrink the windows partition. or use a spare HDD. for said linux OS.

Which allows me to install it as a DUAL boot system with ease. and without any issues afterwards.

 

----

ALSO the reason there are soo many Linux distro's all originating from a Normal Linux Distro. is because Said OS does not have Feature XXX which you want. so they make that feature, call the linux distro different.

but then someone does not need feature XXX but wants feature YYY. so they create a distro as well.

 

Keep doing this for generations of features, and you get the 100+ Linux distro's we know today.

 

Just because there are over 100 versions does not mean it is a terrible OS.

----
As for IOS apple is also all to keen on Killing off features, just to make sure they are still in control

https://clearbridgemobile.com/apple-dropping-32-bit-app-support-will-impact-app/

So your point that if you have created a IOS app, it will be forever supported is also false

-----

 

You also speak of the Linux community gatekeeping. Please list some examples of this.

Where "DIE HARD Linux fans" do not want quality of life features.

  

39 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Clearly shows you haven't ever installed a custom ROM on a phone. Guess who has. Me. Back in the day when it was an absolute fuckery to perform. Boy the shit I went through with my HTC Wildfire to install CyanogenMod on it. Same for Galaxy S2 which was even worse with its weird storage partitioning. I literally had to perform a witchcraft on both with super questionable "loader" apps and they both ended up beyond super janky. It got even worse when bootloaders from that era weren't compatible with ROM's of later time and I somehow couldn't install new TWRP on it because the TWRP for CyanogenMod was some custom shit incompatible with vanilla one. Then I've gone through more witchcraft to replace defunct CyanogenMod with LineageOS. More recently, unlocking bootloaders and installing TWRP got easier, but whole thing is still so god damn janky it's incredible. Couldn't get any banking stuff working on the phone because it had unlocked bootloader, despite not being rooted at all. Just running LineageOS. Which all I got was daily nightlies (yay) and a requirement to do more witchcraft fuckery with Magisk to make it half usable. I'm used to all this shit and I still had super hard time and you're here saying like it's something anyone can do on Sunday.

 

You didn't destroy anything, well, other than yourself. Even installing Android of choice on phone that came with Android in the first place out of the box, is an absolute fuckery NO casual user will ever do. And if they do, chances are, those people will end up asking what to do now that they bricked their phone.

 

Can you install Android on any Android "approved" phone without unlocking bootloader that's easy and convenient and not the fuckery it still is now? NO: YOU CANNOT

 

Not to mention I don't understand people who Jailbreak iPhones. They literally pick up one of rare devices that works superbly out of the box and it's literally great the way it is because it's tightly controlled by the vendor of it and they go and fuck it up and make it more inconvenient to maintain and use. Android ROM's are not much different. Everyone throws them around as some sort of argument, but they are so inconvenient, so impractical, so clumsy and require user to invest so much time into them to even get them working they simply stop making any kind of sense.

 

Which is why I stayed with stock software that came with phone and I decided to use device that has longest software support. Which is an iPhone and beats all the Android phones in existence. ALL of them. Only other second viable option are Samsung phones because of same reason. Factory Android that has reasonably long software support for it to not matter. Flashing of ROM's is absolutely and totally overrated and always used as some sort of "gotcha" argument for Android's "openness" and you people always leave out facts about how stupid and inconvenient all of it is.And I find oddly peculiar similarities within Linux community... Guess what, I've been fiddling with Linux from days when Knoppix was a popular thing and I had Slax my pocket on a 8cm miniCD and I have whole lot of stories about that too. Also some very recent ones too. Very similar to the one about "magical" things about Android above...

 

AND yet again you are contradicting yourself by saying NO to jailbreaking YES to rooting.

 

So you do not want people to Jailbreak their Iphone, telling them to just get ANDROID.

but you are fine with Android people rooting their phone, to "install" a different OS/android fork. or use features you can only use with ROOT access

 

You do know android is OPEN-SOURCE, so its easier for the community to make and build Custom roms, that are just as good If not better than the original android build that is on phones.

 

ALSO you cannot compare the old way of rooting/installing a custom Android rom, to the current ways.

why do you think 99% of all custom rom sites say: "USE AT OWN RISK"

The reason most phones Have terrible Custom rom support is often due the fact, that it is a unpopular phone. thus the community has very little reason to support or build a custom rom for said Phone.  

 

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

Calling Linux an alternative to windows is like calling mayo an alternative to ketchup. They are both condiments but clearly they are vastly different. Windows and Linux are both operating systems but they are clearly  vastly different and if you asked a windows user to try and get by with Linux you would find that alot of people would struggle to do so. You compare that to ios vs android and you can see that people can easily switch between the two with relative ease. Now the whole complaint that you can't get android on iphones doesn't really change that. 

And that is my exact point.

Each OS is different, and should be treated as such.

And i am not comparing IOS and ANDROID, i just point out that they are different. 

 

The only reason i used the android on Iphone argument is because Rejzor, said if you hate windows just USE XXXX

---

And if Microsoft where to be Monopolistic, nobody would even care of them getting forced to revert/change said decision, for doing so.

 

But apple OH no NOT apple..... They are not monopolistic AT ALL......, they only own 23-24% of the global market share

https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-share-of-apple-iphone/

Yet they own 42% in the Netherlands

https://gs.statcounter.com/vendor-market-share/mobile/netherlands

Which is as i said multiple times before, the very Country where apple is getting fined and forced to implement these changes.

----------

It still baffles me why people support this !!ANTI CONSUMER Behavior!! Apple is doing.

 

Since if ANTI trust regulators say its Anti-consumer, it is ANTI CONSUMER Behavior.

 

[TheSage79]

TLDR;

1) Apples 30% commission is for more than just Payment processing. 

2) You can argue 30% is too high, but that is where market forces have set it. If you think it should be different then you need to have a solid argument for what it should be. 

3) None of this actually matters to consumers because in the current system there has never been more choice or consumer focused competition in recent memory. 

4) It is an argument between developers and Apple over who gets what percentage of revenue and who has control. As long as consumers are not affected, then who cares. 

 

A couple of thing to consider here...

 

1) Apple has stated on several occasions that the 30% commission is not just for payment processing, but it is also for the development of, maintenance of, and access to, the entire value of the iOS eco-system. Apple invests a ton of money into the iOS ecosystem, and they absolute DO deserve to profit off of it. Which brings up point 2...

 

2) People argue that the 30% commission is too high and not subject to market forces - but that just doesn't make sense. First let's tackle 30% commission. If you argue that the 30% commission is too high then that implies you believe there is some other commission figure that the commission "should" be. The problem with that is that is there has never been a consistent figure of what that commissions rate "should" be. I have seen everywhere from 5% to 20% with no real reasons given why any specific rate should be chosen. Normally, such rates are not arbitrarily chosen but driven by market forces - which brings me the second half to this point. Apple charges a 30% commissions because thats where the market tells them too. The closest analog to the iOS eco-system, a system where a sole company makes the HW and SW platform for a product, and allows third parties to participate in that platform, is a Game console. The XBOX platform charges a 30% commission the and Playstation charges 30%. commission (I could not find any info on Nintendo, but I have seen anywhere from 10% - 30%). If you include other S/W distribution platforms like Steam, you see the 30% figure show up over and over again. This is where the market equilibrium settled. Developers may not like that, but thats where the market stands. Which brings up my next point... 

 

3) Do NOT fool yourself into thinking any of the complaints about iOS are consumer focused - they absolutely are not. This is about developer profits verses Apples profits - and nothing more. If you are a consumer, you are absolutely spoiled for choice when it comes to S/W on the iOS ecosystem. In fact, it can be argued that in the history of S/W, we have never had more choice. Don't believe me? Just go the the App Store and do a quick search for Weather apps. How many did you come up with? 20? 30? 100's? Heck, outside of S/W, just do a quick Google search for phone cases and see how many choices you get. Competition over consumers has never been more fierce and we as consumers are benefitting greatly because of it. We, as consumers, have never had it so good! Which brings up my final point...

 

4) Developers know that App revenue on iOS is consistently larger than App revenue on Android even though iOS only accounts for at best 25% market share world wide (most figures have them at 15%). This shows iOS, despite its 30% commission (and all of its restrictions), brings more value to developers than Android with its more open platform. Developers don't develope for iOS because of market share, they develop for iOS because that is where the money is - and they want more of it. Do you honestly think Epic, with its shady history, sued Apple for the people? Heck NO!. They want more money and nothing else. The have investors to pay and profits to make! If it makes business sense to sue, then they will sue. Do you think those App developers in the Netherlands filed a complaint for the people? Nope. Developers want more money and more control to do things like data collection (Its no coincidence that Facebook got a whole lot more critical of Apple's App Store once Apple started to crack down on privacy). They don't care about consumers... they care about their own profits. Don't fool yourself here. 

 

This is not to say Apple doesn't have shady practices of its own. It absolutely does - in spades (right to repair). But when it comes to the iOS eco-system, consumers are benefiting greatly from the current status quo. Why would we as consumers want to disturb that?  

[darknessblade]

2 minutes ago, TheSage79 said:

TLDR;

1) Apples 30% commission is for more than just Payment processing. 

2) You can argue 30% is too high, but that is where market forces have set it. If you think it should be different then you have a solid argument for what it should be. 

3) None of this actually matters to consumers because in the current system there has never been more choice or consumer focused competition in recent memory. 

4) It is an argument between developers and Apple over who gets what percentage of revenue and who has control. As long as consumers are not affected, then who cares. 

 

 

This is not to say Apple doesn't have shady practices of its own. It absolutely does - in spades (right to repair). But when it comes to the iOS eco-system, consumers are benefiting greatly from the current status quo. Why would we as consumers want to disturb that?  

It aren't consumers who are fining and forcing apple to change it but a ANTI-TRUST-REGULATOR

[TheSage79]

9 minutes ago, darknessblade said:

It aren't consumers who are fining and forcing apple to change it but a ANTI-TRUST-REGULATOR

Correct, which is why we should be concerned. Anti-trust exists because trusts hurt consumers. If consumers are benefitting from a business practice and not being hurt by it, then anti-trust regulators should have no reason to step in. If anti-trust regulators are stepping in when consumers are benefitting and not being hurt, then it follows that they are not stepping in for the benefit of the consumers. If anti-trust regulators are not stepping in for the benefit of consumers, then they are stepping in for the benefit of businesses instead. If anti-trust regulators are stepping in for the benefit of certain businesses, then it is likely consumers will be hurt for the benefit of businesses. 

[darknessblade]

14 minutes ago, TheSage79 said:

Correct, which is why we should be concerned. Anti-trust exists because trusts hurt consumers. If consumers are benefitting from a business practice and not being hurt by it, then anti-trust regulators should have no reason to step in. If anti-trust regulators are stepping in when consumers are benefitting and not being hurt, then it follows that they are not stepping in for the benefit of the consumers. If anti-trust regulators are not stepping in for the benefit of consumers, then they are stepping in for the benefit of businesses instead. If anti-trust regulators are stepping in for the benefit of certain businesses, then it is likely consumers will be hurt for the benefit of businesses. 

And that is exactly the case, and what is happening here.

Consumers are being hurt/detriment by apple, Please read the original articles again, as the Context of why apple was fined got mostly lost, due Certain groups of people bringing up tons of BS of why apple should be allowed to screw over customers.

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, darknessblade said:

  

Yet in all cases where i installed Linux. i did not have to change a single thing regarding settings.

But then again, i would already shrink the windows partition. or use a spare HDD. for said linux OS.

Which allows me to install it as a DUAL boot system with ease. and without any issues afterwards.

 

----

ALSO the reason there are soo many Linux distro's all originating from a Normal Linux Distro. is because Said OS does not have Feature XXX which you want. so they make that feature, call the linux distro different.

but then someone does not need feature XXX but wants feature YYY. so they create a distro as well.

 

Keep doing this for generations of features, and you get the 100+ Linux distro's we know today.

 

Just because there are over 100 versions does not mean it is a terrible OS.

----
As for IOS apple is also all to keen on Killing off features, just to make sure they are still in control

https://clearbridgemobile.com/apple-dropping-32-bit-app-support-will-impact-app/

So your point that if you have created a IOS app, it will be forever supported is also false

-----

 

You also speak of the Linux community gatekeeping. Please list some examples of this.

Where "DIE HARD Linux fans" do not want quality of life features.

  

 

AND yet again you are contradicting yourself by saying NO to jailbreaking YES to rooting.

 

So you do not want people to Jailbreak their Iphone, telling them to just get ANDROID.

but you are fine with Android people rooting their phone, to "install" a different OS/android fork. or use features you can only use with ROOT access

 

You do know android is OPEN-SOURCE, so its easier for the community to make and build Custom roms, that are just as good If not better than the original android build that is on phones.

 

ALSO you cannot compare the old way of rooting/installing a custom Android rom, to the current ways.

why do you think 99% of all custom rom sites say: "USE AT OWN RISK"

The reason most phones Have terrible Custom rom support is often due the fact, that it is a unpopular phone. thus the community has very little reason to support or build a custom rom for said Phone.  

 

And that is my exact point.

Each OS is different, and should be treated as such.

And i am not comparing IOS and ANDROID, i just point out that they are different. 

 

The only reason i used the android on Iphone argument is because Rejzor, said if you hate windows just USE XXXX

---

And if Microsoft where to be Monopolistic, nobody would even care of them getting forced to revert/change said decision, for doing so.

 

But apple OH no NOT apple..... They are not monopolistic AT ALL......, they only own 23-24% of the global market share

https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-share-of-apple-iphone/

Yet they own 42% in the Netherlands

https://gs.statcounter.com/vendor-market-share/mobile/netherlands

Which is as i said multiple times before, the very Country where apple is getting fined and forced to implement these changes.

----------

It still baffles me why people support this !!ANTI CONSUMER Behavior!! Apple is doing.

 

Since if ANTI trust regulators say its Anti-consumer, it is ANTI CONSUMER Behavior.

 

I'm not contradicting myself anywhere. I'm literally telling you all this faux freedom is 300 tons of bullshit presented as honey sprinkled with fucking gold. Both jailbreaking and rooting are stupid, useless and annoying and solve nothing because Apple has proven billion times their "walled garden" simply works better and people literally go with it for that very reason. And same basically goes for Android phones too where whatever comes with the device makes sense and everything else just doesn't. BUT MUH ANTICONSUMER BEHAVIOR is all you're screeching the entire time.

 

No one forces you to buy anything Apple. Hundreds of millions of people haven't ever used anything Apple and probably never will. Either they don't like it, not want it or not agree with them in some way. And that's perfectly fine. What is dumb and weird is forcing yourself on it and then bitching that you don't like it. That's not anti-consumer, that's just stupidity. On user's end. For example, I don't like Volkswagen. It's why I wouldn't buy one. Not force myself to buy one, then bitch its engine isn't like Honda's and demand one. And then I'd do an equivalent of flashing a ROM and I'd swap the engine with Honda one in a Golf and go through all the legal trouble and homologations and then still complain it's still not like Honda and scream how VW is dumb and anti consumer for not making their cars with Honda engines because you like those. Just buy a fucking Honda.

[mr moose]

19 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Same could be said for people being pissy even when there are alternative means that cost you nothing to use. But muh whining over Apple.

Another bottom of the barrel argument.  Not even accurate at that,  as has been pointed out so many times it's not even a discussion anymore. 

[Sauron]

22 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Because typing "netflix" in Google is hard... If people can dig some god forsaken promo codes from fucking shadiest webpages one can imagine, making excuses "people don't know" in age when everyone fucking searches entire internet over to get lower prices is the lamest excuse I've ever heard.

I'm intrigued, why do you think Apple prevents this if you believe it makes no difference?

[darknessblade]

12 hours ago, RejZoR said:

BUT MUH ANTICONSUMER BEHAVIOR is all you're screeching the entire time.

 

And yet you are screaming that Apple should be allowed to do this kind of behavior.

 

 

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I'm intrigued, why do you think Apple prevents this if you believe it makes no difference?

Don't expect a logical answer,  so far we have pointed out:

 

1. Developers don't have an alternative to reaching IOS consumers.  The response was "consumers have a choice".

 

2. That not letting developers source their own in app payments system while charging 30% for a 2% transaction is monopolistic abuse,  the response was that consumers knew it worked that way when they bought the phone.

 

3. Developers can't avoid the terms and conditions enforced by apple, the response was "consumers have an alternative".

 

4. 30% for an in app purchase is way too much, the response was "apple have to pay for ruining the store"

 

There has literally not been a single rational argument in support of apples behavior, there have been plenty of tangents and red herrings, plenty of snide insults in mocking and derisory language, but no actual reasonable contribution to the argument.   

 

 

[Sauron]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Don't expect a logical answer,  so far we have pointed out:

 

1. Developers don't have an alternative to reaching IOS consumers.  The response was "consumers have a choice".

 

2. That not letting developers source their own in app payments system while charging 30% for a 2% transaction is monopolistic abuse,  the response was that consumers knew it worked that way when they bought the phone.

 

3. Developers can't avoid the terms and conditions enforced by apple, the response was "consumers have an alternative".

 

4. 30% for an in app purchase is way too much, the response was "apple have to pay for ruining the store"

 

There has literally not been a single rational argument in support of apples behavior, there have been plenty of tangents and red herrings, plenty of snide insults in mocking and derisory language, but no actual reasonable contribution to the argument.  

I guess when you buy an iphone you're signing away your soul and can't complain because you could have bought an android phone instead

 

What would the counterargument be if android also had these restrictions? "Oh, then Apple isn't in the wrong, Google does it too" lmao

[mr moose]

32 minutes ago, Sauron said:

 

 

What would the counterargument be if android also had these restrictions? "Oh, then Apple isn't in the wrong, Google does it too" lmao

Yep, they already tried using that argument by pointing to consoles.  Sony does it so it must be OK.  NOPE, all this proves is consoles are shit for game developers just like apple is for app developers.

 

 

 

[RejZoR]

45 minutes ago, darknessblade said:

And yet you are screaming that Apple should be allowed to do this kind of behavior.

 

 

Yeah, at you people because you demand dumb things.

[TheSage79]

14 hours ago, darknessblade said:

And that is exactly the case, and what is happening here.

Consumers are being hurt/detriment by apple, Please read the original articles again, as the Context of why apple was fined got mostly lost, due Certain groups of people bringing up tons of BS of why apple should be allowed to screw over customers.

That's just it... I have yet to see anyone explain exactly how the consumers are being hurt by this. Developers? maybe. But consumers? not that I can see. Allowing a company to process its own payments doesn't increase consumer facing competition at all. If it doesn't increase consumer facing competition, It doesn't bring any sort of downward pricing pressure. If consumer facing competition doesn't increase then there is no increased pressure for the developers to improve their apps further. Where exactly is the benefit for the consumer in all of this? I can certainly see how it would benefit developers vs Apple - but I don't care about either of them if there is no benefit for me the consumer. This is why I am concerned about the anti-trust regulator stepping in. If consumers are not being hurt, then the only reason the regulator in the Netherlands is stepping in is to benefit one company over another. It doesn't help consumer at all and usually ends up hurting us. 

[RejZoR]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

I'm intrigued, why do you think Apple prevents this if you believe it makes no difference?

Thing is, they aren't. You can freely go to Netflix homepage, register there, go to Apple's App Store, download Netflix app, login to it using Netflix homepage credentials and boom, you're paying Netflix directly. It's not rocket science. And like I said before, people go to absurd lengths to save few bucks, yet they somehow don't know how to do Netflix subscription directly? Who are you kidding here?

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, TheSage79 said:

That's just it... I have yet to see anyone explain exactly how the consumers are being hurt by this. Developers? maybe. But consumers? not that I can see.

You have two VoD services, one run by company A, one run by company B. 

If somebody buys a subscription from company B, company A is getting 19% of the money. Now explain to me, how this is a healthy environment for competition? Company A can either overcharge for their service or they can offer better pricing than the competition. And even if the costumers choose the competition, company A still gets a huge cut. They cannot lose and they don't have to compete. 

And this is hurting costumers. 

 

And if the market share is large enough (which it will be with double digits (> 10%)) it will not only affect costumers on this particular platform, but all other costumers as well. Because you can be sure the losses or reduced margin of one platform will be covered by other platforms. 

 

It's simple price inflation. That's why it is called "Apple tax" (we should call it AVAT). It not something out of the pocket of developers, it's something everybody has to pay on top. And the worst part about it: you get nothing in return. Absolutely null! 

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

Thing is, they aren't. You can freely go to Netflix homepage, register there, go to Apple's App Store, download Netflix app, login to it using Netflix homepage credentials and boom, you're paying Netflix directly. It's not rocket science.

Why are they preventing it within apps if it doesn't matter? It's a simple question, you should be able to answer it if you're convinced of what you're saying.

[RejZoR]

5 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Why are they preventing it within apps if it doesn't matter? It's a simple question, you should be able to answer it if you're convinced of what you're saying.

Is Steam actively encouraging and literally offering BUY FROM DVELOPER DIRECTLY buttons on their service? No. Can you still buy key freely from developer and activate it on Steam? Yes.

 

How the F is this any different?

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

Is Steam actively encouraging and literally offering BUY FROM DVELOPER DIRECTLY buttons on their service? No.

Wow, imagine actually answering a question directly rather than pointing at other services. Steam does not prevent this in any way, you can have as many links to your own websites in your game as you want. Are you going to answer on why Apple feels the need to prevent it if you think it makes no difference or are you just too proud to admit you're wrong?

[darknessblade]

32 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Thing is, they aren't. You can freely go to Netflix homepage, register there, go to Apple's App Store, download Netflix app, login to it using Netflix homepage credentials and boom, you're paying Netflix directly. It's not rocket science. And like I said before, people go to absurd lengths to save few bucks, yet they somehow don't know how to do Netflix subscription directly? Who are you kidding here?

 

Here you go

https://www.managementstudyguide.com/lawsuit-between-spotify-and-apple-corporation.htm

 

https://news.sky.com/story/us-court-rules-apple-must-ease-in-app-purchase-rules-after-epic-games-lawsuit-12404235

 

https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/08/28/lawsuit-claims-google-offered-netflix-favorable-terms-over-play-store-fees

 

https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/5/22421734/apple-epic-netflix-in-app-purchase-removal-emails

 

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/apple-epic-games-lawsuit-netflix-spotify-stock-price-judge-favors-2021-9

 

https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-says-japan-fair-trade-commission-closes-app-store-investigation-2021-09-02/

 

https://choice.npr.org/index.html?origin=https://www.npr.org/2021/09/10/1023834758/apple-app-store-epic-games-fortnite-verdict

 

You are aware that App makers are not allowed to link to outside sources for payment.

Why did you think Apple Kicked fortnite off the appstore?

Because they linked to their own website, and build in a 3rd party payment method. that CIRCUMVENTS apples payment system.

 

Also if you think that 30% is still fair. Read the following articles:

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/236883/20181229/you-can-no-longer-pay-for-netflix-on-ios-using-in-app-subscriptions.htm

 

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/28/18159373/netflix-in-app-subscriptions-iphone-ipad-ios-apple

 

https://www.pcmag.com/news/netflix-doesnt-pay-apples-ios-tax-anymore

 

https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/31/netflix-stops-paying-the-apple-tax-on-its-853m-in-annual-ios-revenue/

 

The only reason you must go to Neflix their homepage to pay for the service is because they dropped ALL IN APP PAYMENTS, thus circumventing the apple tax.

As they do not allow ANY In app purchases AT ALL ANYMORE.

[Brooksie359]

19 hours ago, darknessblade said:

  

Yet in all cases where i installed Linux. i did not have to change a single thing regarding settings.

But then again, i would already shrink the windows partition. or use a spare HDD. for said linux OS.

Which allows me to install it as a DUAL boot system with ease. and without any issues afterwards.

 

----

ALSO the reason there are soo many Linux distro's all originating from a Normal Linux Distro. is because Said OS does not have Feature XXX which you want. so they make that feature, call the linux distro different.

but then someone does not need feature XXX but wants feature YYY. so they create a distro as well.

 

Keep doing this for generations of features, and you get the 100+ Linux distro's we know today.

 

Just because there are over 100 versions does not mean it is a terrible OS.

----
As for IOS apple is also all to keen on Killing off features, just to make sure they are still in control

https://clearbridgemobile.com/apple-dropping-32-bit-app-support-will-impact-app/

So your point that if you have created a IOS app, it will be forever supported is also false

-----

 

You also speak of the Linux community gatekeeping. Please list some examples of this.

Where "DIE HARD Linux fans" do not want quality of life features.

  

 

AND yet again you are contradicting yourself by saying NO to jailbreaking YES to rooting.

 

So you do not want people to Jailbreak their Iphone, telling them to just get ANDROID.

but you are fine with Android people rooting their phone, to "install" a different OS/android fork. or use features you can only use with ROOT access

 

You do know android is OPEN-SOURCE, so its easier for the community to make and build Custom roms, that are just as good If not better than the original android build that is on phones.

 

ALSO you cannot compare the old way of rooting/installing a custom Android rom, to the current ways.

why do you think 99% of all custom rom sites say: "USE AT OWN RISK"

The reason most phones Have terrible Custom rom support is often due the fact, that it is a unpopular phone. thus the community has very little reason to support or build a custom rom for said Phone.  

 

And that is my exact point.

Each OS is different, and should be treated as such.

And i am not comparing IOS and ANDROID, i just point out that they are different. 

 

The only reason i used the android on Iphone argument is because Rejzor, said if you hate windows just USE XXXX

---

And if Microsoft where to be Monopolistic, nobody would even care of them getting forced to revert/change said decision, for doing so.

 

But apple OH no NOT apple..... They are not monopolistic AT ALL......, they only own 23-24% of the global market share

https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-share-of-apple-iphone/

Yet they own 42% in the Netherlands

https://gs.statcounter.com/vendor-market-share/mobile/netherlands

Which is as i said multiple times before, the very Country where apple is getting fined and forced to implement these changes.

----------

It still baffles me why people support this !!ANTI CONSUMER Behavior!! Apple is doing.

 

Since if ANTI trust regulators say its Anti-consumer, it is ANTI CONSUMER Behavior.

 

Having less than 50% market share doesn't make one a monopoly lol. At that point Android is more of a monopoly based purely on market share.