Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by frogpelt 2477 days ago
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.

14 comments

> 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.

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.
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.

>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.

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.
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...

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.

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.
Every time you update the app it'll start asking again. It's the worst part about using Google's iPhone apps IMO.
I don't personally know - but it would have to be a setting within the Gmail app itself AFAIK.
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

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.

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.
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....

> 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).

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

I agree with you about the trackers, but I just assume ads=tracking. I cannot see any app marketplace saying their apps contain tracking in the main description (it's always buried in the fine print).

My understanding is that GrapheneOS[0] is the successor to CopperheadOS, and I think that's what I'll try next. There isn't an Exodus Privacy or F-Droid for iOS and these are sorely missed.

[0]https://grapheneos.org/

Holy crap, how have I never heard of microG? Thank you!
Does the iOS App Store mention if an app uses trackers?
Note how this doesn't affect apples own apps?
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

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
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)

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

>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.

>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.

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

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.
YMMV, I searched "music" and Spotify is the 4th result.
Spotify is 7th place for me. Apple Music is first. Maybe the country you're in makes a difference.
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.”"

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.
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).

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.

Spotify was the 2nd result under Apple Music when I searched myself, though I have both installed so it probably came down to that
Spotify was 4th for me searching for "music" and I do not have it installed