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 Discussed 'Punitive Measures' Against Netflix for Dropping In-App Purchases
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The point was that people will always find ways to be dumb, at some point you have to stop babying them. Yes, cops exist, but if I wanted to I could leave my car running in my garage and kill myself without ever hitting the road. I could cut my hand off playing with a knife in the kitchen. But if we trust people not to do those things, I think we can also try them do the most basic of critical thinking before jumping through hoops and warnings to install software.
My point is that people are generally dumb, but we shouldn't limit ourselves to what the dumbest of the dumb can handle.
No one was forced to use the AppStore. It’s very easy NOT to use the AppStore, all you have to do is not make an App for iOS. Simple.
Either making an iPhone App according to Apples terms is worth it for you as a dev/company, or it’s not. No one has an inherent right to make iPhone apps (except Apple I suppose).
It would increase my choice as an iOS user of where I can buy my apps and would potentially force Apple to make the App Store compete on merit rather than skating by because there's no other option. So yes, it would increase choice, because anything other than literally a single source for apps is more choice.
And it would take away MY choice to go with the platform that has a single distribution point which is a plus in my book. You may not like it, and that’s totally fine. You may wish it were different, and that’s totally fine. If you don’t like what Apple offers you have four options:
1. Buy something else which better meets your needs (Android in this case
2. Try and CONVINCE Apple to change its product
3. Build your own product (or help someone else do so) that meets your needs
4. Buy nothing and live without it
What you should NOT be able to do is FORCE someone else to make something for you just because you want it. No matter how convenient or desirable that would be, you don’t have an inherent right to it.
And our point is a company should have the right to make a product that has limitations to prevent people’s stupidity/lack of ability/etc. from causing them problems. Or even just for people who don’t want to deal with the hassle of more complex systems. It’s why automatic transmission cars exist. It’s why microwaves exist. It’s why Jitterbug (and similar) phones exist.
Apple has bet on (quite successfully) the notion that they can make a product which is less customizable/tweakable than the alternative and people will see that as a bonus. Some people want more control, fine, the iPhone isn’t for them. And Apple shouldn’t be forced to make it that way for them, especially since there are alternatives that do offer that.
More choice does not equate to better, which is the premise of some who believe more choice is the toad to mediocrity.
You wouldn't be forced to use it, so you could stick your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist and nothing would happen. It's a change that would impact your life in literally no way.
On the topic of what a company should or shouldn't be FORCED to do, that's up to the law. I'm flattered that you seem to think I'm the one making this decision, but I promise you it's a much larger movement.
As for my options, you seem to have missed one:
5. Continue buying Apple devices because I like them, and wait for the inevitable regulation.
Less choice does not equate to better, which is the premise of some who believe less choice is the toad to mediocrity.
See, we can all make vague, unsubstantiated claims.
In my opinion, in this case it does. You, of course, are free to have another opinion.
Not true. Government have broken up large companies before. Look up Pac Bell. They were AT&T and they broke them up because they got too powerful. If the government deem Apple to be too large for the US, they can simply break them up. That is why all the big tech are self watching themselves right now because the government have a study going on at the moment. They are seeing if these huge tech companies need to be broken up so they'll be more competition and to help better serve the consumers.
You think Apple wanted to drop their 30% rate? Nah.. they know if they push too hard the government will come down w/ a hammer. Look at MLB and their steroid program. You think they wanted to implement that? The govt got tired and stepped in.
Pretty soon Apple gonna want a 30% cut of all your online purchases if made via safari… wtf
Do you hear yourself? Basic high school class teaches this. More choices, more competition = better for consumers.
Look how many phone companies added features which pushes Apple to add them as well. Everyone loves the third telephoto lens. You wouldn't have that unless we had more choices.
But Apple has already been giving people more control across the board. Remember when you couldn’t set a wallpaper on your phone? Or when you were stuck with the garbage default Mail app? Look how much a little choice has already improved the iOS experience. were you opposed to those changes as well?
No. Apple makes better products.
Why do you want your devices to be crippled? Why are you actively supporting consumer-hostile behavior? Do you have Stockholm syndrome?
It's my device. I should be able to go to whatever freaking website I want, and download whatever freaking app I want, and install it on my device. Full stop.
You’re missing the fact that unlike you, most people don’t read beyond the headlines, as evidenced by the first few posts. That, and headlines are meant to bait people into clicking the article; facts and honest journalism be damned.
Apple offers an integrated ecosystem made possible by their control over hardware and software, which offers a superior experience that consumers are willing to pay a premium for. In this process, this often means prioritising the end user experience user experience even if it means sacrificing user choice.
Would you say that Apple is successful because of their practices, or in spite of them?
It should also be pretty clear that general business tenets taught in school rarely ever hold up in the real world, and they pretty much fall apart when you are trying to analyse Apple.
Apple has been defying conventional wisdom and disrupting the core tenets of business since day one (the first being that people are willing to pay for good design), and I am surprised that so many people continue to explain Apple’s success away, rather than attempt to better understand and explain it.
My conclusion is that for Apple users, it’s not choice that they want, but simplicity. On paper, more choice sounds good, until you realise that for a significant segment of people, more choices isn’t giving them more of what they want, but instead saddling them with more problems that they need to deal with.
Simplicity is the key selling point that Apple offers, not complexity.
The choice to not have a choice is also a choice in itself.
Imagine if you will though... that you were forced to take drugs or insurance or have to bank at a specific company. You weren't allowed to choose which. Because the one company had such a dominant position, you could only choose one.
Defense contractors also have to bid on contracts, government isn't forced to use a specific one.
If you think employers do not think about it at all, you're probably a very optimistic person. All businesses are always thinking of cutting cost to maximise profit. It is always cost vs benefit in business.
That shouldn't be an arbitrary choice of Apple though, and it happens to be illegal. You can still provide safeguards from competing services, that if they are to be used within the Apple ecosystem, they have to meet certain standards.
Apple could easily make it all go away by charging processing fees like credit card companies do... taking nearly a third of the revenue just to process the payment is simply ridiculous and inexcusable. Or give the option to not use it at all.
I'm an Apple user... and I want choice.
Tell me how having a third party payment processor can't be simple and easy to use?
That money goes towards paying for the costs incurred in running the App Store, which in turn helps ensure a vibrant and thriving marketplace which is beneficial to me, the end user.
It’s a whole different topic, but I guess the point is that it’s all one huge, interconnected ecosystem. It’s hard to say “change this” or “change that” without any ramifications.
I feel the reason IAP is around is because someone(s) did a focus group test on if it makes sense to have people do purchases inside of the app vs a second screen. Those particular focus groups preferred IAP, and so some weigh those data points more heavily. Whether that applies to all users, I am skeptical.
But agreed. As a consumer/end-user, I also do prefer more choice than less. It’s clear that some prefer the IAP route because it’s all tied together.