yeah because we know that in life, all the BEST things are free... that is why a new Mac Pro, with all the bells and whistles is free and not $50K Right?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Approves Basecamp's Email App 'Hey' With Newly Added 14-Day Free Account Option [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Did you read the entire sentence you are responding to? Because if you did, you either (a) missed the joke or (b) think that an account that can only send the words “Hey now” is valuable?
Are you the lone voice on the board of directors at Apple or are you someone at home not on the board who thinks they know better than the board at Apple?
They constantly see his incredible results and keep paying him gazillions of dollars because he's the best CEO that Apple has had and runs the most profitable tech company in existence.
I don't get it. They added a free trial and now the app is suddenly acceptable to Apple, even though the developer guidelines mention no such thing? 
[automerge]1592840071[/automerge]
[automerge]1592840071[/automerge]
"Free" email isn't free. You pay with your privacy.
I don't get it. They added a free trial and now the app is suddenly acceptable to Apple, even though the developer guidelines mention no such thing?
They were very clear telling Hey that the problem was that on installation, the app had no functionality unless you had a paid account, and that was their problem with it. They explained that only certain categories of apps (“readers”) could do that.
So this resolves the issue.
Normally, that would be legal, but anti-trust essentially states that they’re unfairly controlling the market.
Why is this situation different? Because they aren’t giving developers a way to go with an alternate company.
Developers either pay 30% to Apple, or lose 30% of the market. There’s no way around it. No room for innovation.
In the case of Best Buy, you can negotiate a cut with other stores. You can also distribute direct to consumer yourself. There’s plenty of options. This forces Best Buy to compete on price and the size of their cut. Apple doesn’t have to do that.
The US Constitution. The Civil Rights Act. A bunch of local state laws. You can't just freely choose to discriminate against people in whatever way you choose and thus the rules you could employ in a store like the AppStore are limited.
But I do argue that there's no discrimination here because apple treats all customers the same.
Where is the legal precedents that say Apple is unfairly controlling the market and has been served with a cease and desist order?
Success of iPhone is much thanks to all the apps and services than you can download and install on it. It’s their platform, yes, but the platform and the apps written to it keeps people buying a new $800 iPhone after another.
So it’s their platform, legally, yes, but developers did built other part of the platform — the one users see.
I’m not a developer.
What, in the civil rights act or the constitution, or in any state law, prevents me from saying “I refuse to do business with anyone whose name is Bob?”
Like i said, there are some specific protected classes - you can’t discriminate based on race, national origin, gender, age, medical condition, gender identity, etc. (depending on your jurisdiction there can be a couple dozen classes, or only a handful). But otherwise there is nothing stopping a business owner from declining to do business with anyone they want to.
If that's the case that should be in the developer guidelines. How are developers supposed to know such things before they invest in making an app?
If you don't want to sell at BestBuy, you'll also lose a part of the market. Just like in the BestBuy example, you may negotiate a better price with the competitors (like Google that, as correctly stated, also takes a 30% cut). In addition, Android also has the ability to run side loaded Apps so you're free to sell your App on your website as an APK download, circumventing the PlayStore.
In the same manner, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo take a cut of the game sales for their game consoles but you're free to self-publish games for PCs that allow Sideloading.
It would be a monopoly if the only way to run an App was to go through the AppStore but we're not there yet. Right now, the AppStore is like a premium. Apple eve allows deploying your own applications through Xcode so there are no restrictions for open-source and home-brew apps.
I realise the US is not consumer friendly (rights wise) but I have a hard time believing that if I "Bob" went to Walmart and I was sober, properly attired, polite etc. and went to the cashier with a loaf of bread and he/she said I could not purchase this because he/she saw on my credit card (certainly not an Apple card as she he/she would have reason to refuse the transaction as Goldman Sachs is involved....he/does have a memory and morals) that my name was "Bob".
You are saying I would have no grounds for a legal complaint?
Yes, and of course since they built it, it should also be up to them to approve or reject what site can be loaded on your phone. For example, they probably don't like macrumors. They should be able to block that on Macs and iPhones.
Duopoly: Definition in Economics, Types, and Examples
In a duopoly, two companies own all or nearly all of the market for a given product or service. A duopoly is the most basic form of an oligopoly.
What Is a Duopoly?
A duopoly is a situation where two companies together own all, or nearly all, of the market for a given product or service. A duopoly is the most basic form of oligopoly, a market dominated by a small number of companies. A duopoly can have the same impact on the market as a monopoly if the two players collude on prices or output. Collusion results in consumers paying higher prices than they would in a truly competitive market, and it is illegal under U.S. antitrust law.
The problem is that ****s over the consumers, who now have to deal with dark patterns trying to cancel subscriptions.
I mean, don’t you remember how hard it was to cancel subscriptions before the App Store?
Have you ever actually read 3.1.3(a)? Because that has nothing to do with what you were replying to.
Yep, that’s what I’m saying. Though if you can find some law to the contrary let me know.
There’s a reason that many establishments post signs saying they can “deny service for any reason.” Because, absent a specific law to the contrary, they can.
Why shouldn't it be the developers responsibility? This is akin to buying software from a store. There is always some sort of markup by the store that allows them to profit from the sale. The Apple app store is no different. You may not like the markup charged by Apple but this is directly analogous to buying software from a store. The dev can easily pass along this cost by raising the price of the app to cover the Apple app store fee.
The issue isn't Apple rejecting the app. The issue is Apple using their app store market power to force bundling of their payment processing service. That's the anti-competitive aspect of this.
Apple is saying to some developers: If your business requires processing payments, even when those payments are processed outside of the app, you HAVE TO use our payment processing service or else we take your app down.
How Apple picks which developers they do this to is sort of arbitrary as far as I can tell, but they basically do it to whoever can't fight back. Uber can use an outside payment processor, but Hey can't. There is no logic that makes sense here, it's just Uber is big and Hey isn't.
But the offense is the forced bundling. This is just like when Microsoft said: if you sell a computer with Windows, you have to bundle Internet Explorer or else we won't let you sell a computer with Windows. Or when Qualcomm says: if you buy our baseband processor chipsets, you have to license our broad patent portfolio or else we won't sell you the baseband processor chipsets. It's using high industry power in one area to unfairly leverage out competition in a different industry. Apple is using their mobile distribution power to leverage out payment processing competition. That is illegal.
So I disagree. Apple should be able to police their app store however they want, but they should not be able to use their app store. It's two separate concepts.