Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gregkerzhner 1675 days ago
MacOS is a great example - you can buy and download software from the Apple sanctioned App Store or you can get it from other sources on their websites. The fact that I can do that on an 11 inch MacBook Air but can’t on an iPad Pro (which with a keyboard looks like almost the same device) seems pretty silly to me.
1 comments

I see no incentive for Apple to become motivated to do this on their own.

Google, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft all wish their app stores could be as lucrative as Apple’s, and most of these are trying to do exactly what Apple is doing.

What other product exists that is able to take such a large revenue cut from 3rd party product enhancers? Is this possible outside of software? Don’t see why Apple would give that up unless they were forced to.

That's kind of the point, right? What forces or incentives are there for Apple to change its practices or lower its prices?
The end user is not the consumer segment that cares about this. As evidenced by many comments in this thread, most Apple users value the curated app store and its payment features. App developers just enabled Apple to get away with it.

The market segment that would have to resist would be the app developers themselves, but no individual app is attractive enough to do that. Even Microsoft attempted to keep Office products off iOS for quite some time. The cat is out of the bag at this point. Ironically, it seems as long as Google/Android still commands a significant market share, it's unlikely to be viewed by the courts as a monopoly. That just means Google will try harder to become like Apple, but they're going to have an even harder time back-tracking the path they've gone down.

The thing about Apple is not only have they prevented in-app payment processing, they have also prevented side-loading. This combination makes the App store so powerful. Probably some of the reason why they don't support PWAs well etc...

From the Epic decision it sounds like the courts may be inclined to allow 3rd party in-app payment processing as long as Apple still gets a cut. It's debatable which would be "worse" for end-users -- allowing them to side-load or allowing 3rd party in-app payment processing. It's probably less debatable about which one Apple prefers.

From the developer side of things, if 3rd party in-app payments are allowed and Apple still gets a cut what was gained? If Apple is forced to allow side-loading, you better believe they're going to make enabling that feature seem as scary and obscure as possible to the end-user.