[Wowfunhappy]

I'm not saying this isn't a problem, but it seems pretty minor compared to the fact that:

1) Apple's apps come preinstalled on every iPhone.

2) Apple's apps have permission to do things that 3rd party apps cannot.

If I search for "Web Browser" on the App Store... well, technically I'll get results from third parties, but every single one is just a UI skin around Apple's own browser. That strikes me as a much larger problem.

[frogpelt]

I see it differently.

Since Apple makes the hardware and the software I don't have a problem with them preinstalling their own products.

However, when a user is clearly searching for alternatives on the app store, it matters how far down you have to scroll to find a 3rd party app.

Spotify being the 23rd result for a "music" search is absurd.

[Wowfunhappy]

> However, when a user is clearly searching for alternatives on the app store, it matters how far down you have to scroll to find a 3rd party app.

If I delete Apple's Calendar, install a third party Calendar app (like Fantastical), and click a date link, I'll get a message asking me if I want to reinstall Apple's Calendar. I think it's pretty darn clear in that scenario what the user actually wants.

[umvi]

On the other hand, Apple products are (or were) frequently marketed towards the tech illiterate ("it just works") and so it's possible grandma accidentally deleted the calendar, tried to re-download via the App Store, downloaded the wrong one, etc.

[Wowfunhappy]

Even if they also installed a third party Calendar app?

That strikes me as a frivolous concern, but if it worries Apple, there's an easy solution—add a "defaults" menu in Settings, like every other OS. Set it up so the default can only be changed by the user, and remains associated with the first party app even on uninstall.

We're coming up on the 13th version of iOS, and Apple hasn't done this yet. I don't think it's because they haven't gotten around to it.

Actually, I suspect that advantaging their own apps is a key part of Apple's business strategy for the future. Consider their recent shift towards "services". If the iPhone didn't exist, it would be silly to expect Apple to outdo major incumbents like Spotify, Netflix, and Venmo, but Apple thinks it can leverage its status as iPhone platform holder against competitors.

[partialrecall]

>On the other hand, Apple products are (or were) frequently marketed towards the tech illiterate

This becomes a vicious self-justifying cycle that is profitable for Apple but harmful to those consumers, who are kept tech illiterate when they're denied the opportunity to step outside their comfort zone and learn something new.

[heavenlyblue]

Gmail on iOS will open Google Chrome if you have it installed. I don't know how they do it, but they definitely are doing it.

[nvrspyx]

They simply use the Chrome app URL scheme instead of the generic URL. Similar to how you go to an app’s website and it redirects you to the app itself. There’s an app called Opener [1] that uses this and you can do similar with the Shortcuts app.

Other apps can take advantage of this too. Apps like Reddit and Outlook have similar settings to do the same. They even offer options for other browsers like Firefox. But, developers would need to add each browser option themselves, instead of relying on a defaults system from Apple.

1: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/opener-open-links-in-apps/id98...

[penagwin]

I believe the app itself (Gmail) is requesting to use Chrome.

So each individual app would need to request Chrome, something I'm sure Google's apps can do, but [insert random app here] won't.

[criddell]

Do you know if you can shut that off? I'm sick of being asked if I want to open a link in some other application.

[benologist]

I see it differently. Way back when Microsoft shipped Internet Explorer with Windows it ruined companies. We see companies being arbitrarily ruined by Apple's actions every month. This platform abuse triggered massive antitrust actions in the US and EU that Microsoft lost quite spectacularly, costing them a fortune and forcing many changes to their software.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars

[snowwrestler]

Microsoft shipping IE in Windows did not ruin companies.

What ruined companies (and what MS was actually prosecuted for) was Microsoft telling PC manufacturers "we will only sell you Windows OS if you agree to NOT install any other browsers on your computers." Those agreements were how MS abused their OS monopoly to wrongfully exclude other browsers from the market. Up to that point, Netscape was selling their browser direct to Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. to be preloaded on machines they sold.

Microsoft was a supplier to PC companies and the market they distorted was the software supplier market. Apple themselves are the device manufacturer and have under 50% share in that market; it's not a comparable situation.

[benologist]

The similarity is ruining companies via abuse of their platform position, which doesn't depend on market share or monopoly or replicating Microsoft's particular malfeasance.

[esmi]

Actually, in the US, Microsoft lost, won the appeal, then settled.

Notice this key quote from below, "However, the DOJ did not require Microsoft to change any of its code nor prevent Microsoft from tying other software with Windows in the future."

Not really a loss I would say.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

[panpanna]

> Spotify being the 23rd result for a "music" search is absurd

I have hard time believing this was not intentional.

Edit: on Android Spotify is at place 2-4. iTunes is nowhere to be seen but that could be explained with the horrible reviews it has received (some are even legit).

[mitchty]

I have a hard time believing it was. iTunes search is wicked bad and has been since day 1. After they started allowing tags for apps it got worse, which is an impressive achievement.

[yoz-y]

Judging from the sheer number of "ASO" companies that contacted me the week I put out an app on the store, I believe that the main problem is mainly really bad spam control.

[saagarjha]

Yeah, companies frequently put their competitors' names in their keywords. Not going to name any names, but it's particularly bad in the ride sharing industry.

[lern_too_spel]

How can you put iMovie above Spotify in a search results for "music" without putting your thumb on the ranker?

[Fnoord]

Play Store search is also (still) notoriously bad. Even if it is a 1:1 hit, it does not show that as first entry. And it is full with malware.

[tombrossman]

The advantage to using Google Play is that apps containing ads are clearly labelled as such. Apple won't tell you this in advance. (This was my biggest surprise, recently switching from Android after the CopperheadOS meltdown)

[Fnoord]

Honestly I care less about ads and more about trackers.

Google Play says nada about trackers. Exodus project (and therefore F-Droid) does.

If you come from CopperheadOS I can recommend /e/ or LineageOS + microG (/e/ also contains microG). microG does not implement GAds. You will still need to block trackers though.

[panpanna]

Note how this doesn't affect apples own apps?

[fitzroy]

For me, Spotify is the 4th app when searching for "music", but it's the first app that doesn't contain the word "music" as the first or second word in the name.

It goes: 1. Apple Music 2. Music 3. Music> 4. Spotify New music and podcasts

[bluedino]

If I search Google for 'music', Spotify dooesn't come up on the first page either.

  YouTube - Music Channel
  music.youtube.com
  play.google.com/music 
  play.google.com/store/music
  Music - Wikipedia
  MusicChoice.com
  Youtube Music on the App Store
  Mtv.com

[kalleboo]

I don't even get Spotify on the second page of results - but I do get articles from The Verge and TechCrunch about Spotify. Spotify itself shows up on the third page.

For me Google even has a "Related search: Music platforms" box that contains YouTube, Google Play, SoundCloud, iTunes and TIDAL (no Spotify)

[makomk]

According to the article, Apple quietly changed the ranking of Spotify after they complained to European antitrust regulators about it.

[noer]

>Spotify being the 23rd result for a "music" search is absurd.

That search term is so broad it's difficult to figure out exactly what the users intent is for that. Do they want to listen to music? Do they want to create or record music?

FWIW, I just searched for "music" and saw: An ad, a story ("run with music"), apple music, two music players I've never heard of and finally Spotify in position 6.

[mthoms]

>That search term is so broad it's difficult to figure out exactly what the users intent is for that

I disagree. It's broad in the sense that that the user could be searching for any number of things. It's not broad in the sense that the user is likely looking for a music listening app.

Think of the real world equivalent. In common conversation when someone says "I like music", do you presume that they enjoy listening to, or making, music?

I'd say the intent is pretty clear for the majority of users.

[xenihn]

>That search term is so broad it's difficult to figure out exactly what the users intent is for that.

Search optimization. Determine what most users ultimately end up selecting for specific queries, build up your data set over time, then weigh priorities and determine result order based on that.

[the_other]

... which might explain why Spotify ranks lower than the expectation here. Perhaps more people search for "spotify" when they want Spotify.

[thebigspacefuck]

When I was new to iOS, I wasn't always looking for alternatives. Sometimes finding out an app was already on my phone related to what I was searching for was genuinely helpful. I didn't realize that "Books" could play Audiobooks, for example. It didn't end up being the best app for me, but it was useful to see Books as a search result so I knew that it could do something I was looking for another app to do.

[wodenokoto]

It's 4th for me, after something called "Playtune" that has a logo that's a ripoff of Youtube, and is placed in the "Photo and Video" category instead of the "Music" category.

That still feels like Apple is penalising Spotify ...

[LaMarseillaise]

I performed this search and Spotify is the 4th result, following Apple Music and two nearly exact matches (and not counting the ad). Also, the name is too long.

[Delphiki]

YMMV, I searched "music" and Spotify is the 4th result.

[Betelgeuse90]

Spotify is 7th place for me. Apple Music is first. Maybe the country you're in makes a difference.

[frogpelt]

Spotify 23rd was a reference to the article in the NY Times.

It's 5th for me today, not including the Pandora ad at the top.

Quote from the infographic in the article:

"Before Apple Music arrived in the App Store, Spotify was for years the first result in searches for “music.” Shortly after Apple Music was added to the store in June 2016, it took the top spot. By then, Spotify had fallen to fourth place. In Feb. 2018, Apple apps suddenly appeared in the top six results for “music.” By the end of 2018, there were eight, some of which were unrelated to music. At this point, Spotify was the 23rd result. Spotify complained to European regulators in March that Apple was abusing its role as the gatekeeper of the App Store. By April, all but two of Apple’s apps disappeared from the top results for “music.”"

[riantogo]

I feel you should be okay with that. It is just an extension of what you have accepted: Apple makes the hardware, software… and owns/controls the App Store.

[jbverschoor]

I think spotify used it's 100characters for keywords mainly for typos.

If I search for "Music" on google (incognito, google.com), spotify is nr 16 (page 2).

[saagarjha]

FYI, on my phone these are the results for "Music", in order:

* Search ad for Spotify.

* App Store story for "Run With Music".

* Apple Music.

* Some app called "Music".

* Some app called "Music>".

* Spotify.

* YouTube Music.

* SoundCloud.

[ferdbold]

Spotify was the 2nd result under Apple Music when I searched myself, though I have both installed so it probably came down to that

[rstupek]

Spotify was 4th for me searching for "music" and I do not have it installed

[bluntfang]

>Apple's apps come preinstalled on every iPhone.

Not only that, but the autocreated links to addresses in the messaging app will not work with other map apps. In fact, if you've uninstalled the apple maps app, the address links in messenger are completely useless.

* unless i'm mistaken, but I'm a fairly adept technical user and haven't found a way to make address links work.

[Wowfunhappy]

You're not mistaken. I'd classify that under "3rd party apps have permission to do things other apps cannot." Yet another example would be how Apple Pay comes up automatically near payment terminals. Or how most of the default actions in the Share Sheet—all of which are for Apple Apps—cannot be turned off.

[hellomyguys]

Did you read the article? If you search for Podcast not only is Apple’s podcast app is first, but so it is follows by their compass app, find my friends, their tips app, their tv app, their watch app, their files app, their iTunes app, Apple Books, their reminders app, their news app, their contacts app, then their voice memos app before any 3rd party podcasts app appears.

Meta comment regarding HN community... looking at the comments here it seems like most people didn’t read the article, and just assumed what is being reported.

[grzm]

Regarding the HN community, the guidelines are pretty specific on the topic of your comment:

> Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[gamblor956]

In this case his comment is appropriate, because the comments here on HN clearly indicate that the commenters had not read the article.

[Wowfunhappy]

If a strong conviction that others haven't read the article could supersede the guideline, the guideline would be quite useless. Anyone who comments "Did you even read the article?" presumably believes that the parent has not read the article.

(Just for what it's worth, I did read the article in full before commenting, and I don't think the paraphrased portion changes what I wrote.)

[wil421]

I had an Android a few years ago and #2 was a big issue. AT&T installed all types of apps including an automatic WiFi connecting app. I had to flash a google image to get rid of it. I’d be driving down the road and my maps or other apps would lose connections. Turns out I was being forced to connect to AT&T stores and Starbucks at red lights (anywhere attwifi was detected).

Not to mention all the Samsung bloatware.

[Wowfunhappy]

Two points:

1. Granting more permissions to third party apps won't cause the iPhone to ship with Samsung bloatware.

2. I'm not necessarily advocating for 3rd party app privileges to be significantly expanded. However, Apple's own apps should mostly play by the same rules. If they can't, that's a sign the rules are too restrictive.

[kitsunesoba]

New app permissions must be added judiciously, as it’s been proven time and time again that developers can and will abuse them in whatever ways they can, including training and desensitizing users if necessary.

Apple tends to open capabilities up once they’re confident they’ve been able to make them reasonably airtight against abuse. That seems like a very sensible policy to me, even if it means that certain features come at a glacial pace.

[Wowfunhappy]

Okay, but then Apple shouldn't use them in their own apps either.

[kitsunesoba]

But then Apple is not only putting themselves at a disadvantage against other platforms for long stretches of time (“iOS can do that with Apple stuff” is better than “iOS can’t do that”), but also giving up their ability to dogfood new APIs and test them in a much larger capacity than even a public beta would allow.

In order to remain competitive, they’d be forced to release half-baked/under-tested APIs, which is never good. That’s exactly how the Android developer story got as bad as it did at its lowest points.

[coldtea]

>Apple's apps come preinstalled on every iPhone.

Whose apps should have come preinstalled on iPhones? Samsungs? No apps, let the user install everything from scratch?

The whole value proposition from Apple is that you get something that "Just works".

It might have issues and bugs, like everything has, but the idea behind "just works" => is more or less ready, no fiddling required for the regular Joe.

[panpanna]

> Whose apps should have come preinstalled on iPhones?

At Redmond, we believe everyones apps should come pre-installed. Bought a PC for serious work? well f--- you and please enjoy some candy crush!

[iamzozo]

I never forget the IE war, when everybody complain about the preinstalled browser. And that time they called "monopolistic practices". At apple, they even don't know what these words mean... /s

[coldtea]

>I never forget the IE war, when everybody complain about the preinstalled browser. And that time they called "monopolistic practices"

That's because at that time Microsoft had a monopoly.

>At apple, they even don't know what these words mean... /s

That's because Apple never had a monopoly. Their market share was always on the low 10% (desktop), or the mid-40s (mobile).

[iamzozo]

So preinstalled software is ok, till your market share is below 50 percent?

[la_barba]

Apparently if you market share increases you are no longer allowed to make "just works" products.

[Wowfunhappy]

I can understand new iPhones coming with a Camera, Web Browser, etc preinstalled. However, the Apple Watch app (for instance) really doesn't need to be there.

Permissions are the bigger issue, though.

[nismoskyz]

Agree with this wholeheartedly. What's considered "basic functionality" should be present on the phone.

Pixel 3 lacks a basic pre-installed app which iOS includes: Voice Notes/Recorder. Scouring the Play store for a simple functionality like this seems silly, and it made me appreciate that Apple's pre-installed kit includes this staple feature.

Scrolling a dozen entries to find an alternate Podcast app, however. That's a joke.

While the pre-installed option is a convenience, it should be much easier to find an alternative, when desired.

[alienreborn]

You don't see a problem with that first scenario where search results for 'podcasts' is filled with completely unrelated apps from Apple?

[Wowfunhappy]

I do see a problem.

However, if I were Spotify, I wouldn't be too concerned about this particular problem. Apple Music and Apple Podcasts come preinstalled on every iPhone, so Spotify effectively lost the discoverability battle before the user even got to the App Store.

By contrast, I'd be quite concerned that Apple is outright preventing me from making my app as good as their first party offerings. Spotify will not ever be able to open Podcast links shared from Safari, or fully integrate into Siri.

[grezql]

for half a year ago when i searched for "Spotify" in the norwegian appstore the first result was some kind of rip-off app with tons of complaints by users thinking it was the official app. Spotify the real app was number 2.

Apple is abusing its market position, it has been obvious for me long before this article and the lawsuits. But coming from a country not a member of EU or strong enough on its own, its hard to do anything about it.