[thegrimmest]

But isn't this fine? In fact isn't it exactly what we want? If consumers were sufficiently upset at the increased cost of apps on the Apple Store, wouldn't they change platforms?

If they're not changing platforms, then the value they get from using Apple's products must be higher than the cost of dealing with higher app prices, mustn't it?

Furthermore, if there was enough of a demand for a more open platform, wouldn't it be able to attract investors to build it?

[jayd16]

This argument boils down to "user hostility can't exist because being a user is a choice." I don't buy it.

Apple is using its market advantage and lock-in as leverage against the user.

[thegrimmest]

> user hostility can't exist because being a user is a choice

User hostility can exist exactly at the level that the market (the users) will bear it. If the prices for things were 10x, then users would clearly notice and leave. If the prices are 1.3x where x is almost always < $10, the users simply don't give enough of a shite to do anything about it, which is why it's not users that are upset here.

[ClumsyPilot]

Hostility to kids can exist exactly at the level that the kids will bear it. If they get beaten 10 times a day, they would clearly run away from home. If they get beaten 0.3 times a day they simply don't give enough of a shite to do anything about it.

[thegrimmest]

Yes, but we are not all children, and should be treated as such.

[ClumsyPilot]

This was meant as a reductuo ad absurdum, not in defence of beating kids.

[thegrimmest]

Well it exactly illustrates the point I'm trying to make, that policing the interactions of free adults (Apple, app developers, consumers) is fundamentally akin to treating them like children, and at odds with the ideas of personal liberty. As long as the interactions are peaceful, it's better to let them sort themselves out.

[joshuamorton]

But there isn't (end) user hostility here, there's developer hostility. It's using this as leverage against the developer, and developers aren't willing to call Apple's bluff...presumably because users are more excited by Apple than by the particular app.

[spsful]

It causes developers to raise prices, which hurts the user. The user does not know why the prices went up, or that they can purchase outside of Apple for a significantly cheaper price.

It's also not right to say that this is fine since users still use Apple. Remember when Apple said they would introduce CSAM scanning into iOS? Was their entire userbase going to ditch them and move to Android? Definitely not. But they still retracted the move after constant negative press coverage and outrage from consumers. Some of us still want to use these platforms but are upset at Apple precisely because they can change.

[joshuamorton]

> The user does not know why the prices went up

Why not? The app can totally tell them! When I eat at restaurants, I see a receipt with tax + tip + SF mandate itemized out. Nothing stops a developer from itemizing out those costs in communication with users though.

[commoner]

Apple prevents developers from disclosing in the app that Apple collects a percentage of in-app purchase amounts as a fee:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/08/facebook-says-ap...

Apple's excuse for this restriction is that Apple considers the disclosure "irrelevant information". Any user who wants to be fully informed about their purchase would disagree.

[jayd16]

The money comes from end users. Developers don't pay into the system.

[ahiknsr]

> If consumers were sufficiently upset at the increased cost of apps on the Apple Store, wouldn't they change platforms?

Consumers are not aware of this problem. Apple doesn't allow apps to inform users about the 30% tax.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/28/21405140/apple-rejects-fa...

"Apple blocked Facebook from informing users that Apple would collect 30 percent of in-app purchases made through a planned new feature, Facebook tells Reuters. Apple said the update violated an App Store rule that doesn’t let developers show “irrelevant” information to users."

[adam_arthur]

If you're not happy with your utility bill, you can move to a different neighborhood too. Why should we regulate utilities?

[rapnie]

And as app developer make Apple's cut very clear, "Install our app for just $9.99 + $3.00 Apple Tax". Make the last part a nice red-colored blinking badge. Might also add a "Because you love Apple" emblem.

[herbst]

Apple as a platform is not growing in most western countries, steadily declining in some. So yeah, customers made their choice already

[summerlight]

Only if there's any meaningful alternative... Your only option is Android + Play Store which has policy and pricing very similar to the App Store. And you need to throw away your precious $1500 iPhone and all the investment put into the App Store.

[netizen-936824]

Also hasn't this been happening for years?

Apple overcharges for literally everything, why would people in the ecosystem even notice when it happens?