Spotify Calls Apple's App Store Restrictions 'An Abusive Power Grab'

[Mojohanna32]

If anyone cared to look up the definition of "monopoly" they'd see right there that the App Store is one. And by the way- monopolies are illegal

therein lies the issue. Your interpretation is definitely your perspective. The fact that people have a choice of phones, have a choice of apps and the fact that most others are thriving on the app store, tends to favor a different interpretation of "monopoly". If there are work arounds, its hardly a monopoly. You have options.
How is this different from a brick and mortar store determining what it does and does not sell in their store, payment policies, which forms of payment it accepts (let's look at Walmart not accepting Apple Pay, should Walmart be dragged into an anti-trust suit).
I think these are dangerous, precedent setting decisions being looked at here that can have far reaching, unintended consequences to one experiences these app stores in the future.

 

[michaelsviews]

Apple's platform , Apple's rules, suck it up and deal with it or move along. SpotifyEpic hmmmmm

 

[1258186]

Congress has all the evidence they need to enact new laws breaking up big tech and the AppStore monopoly. They should just get on and do it.

 

[obamtl]

Lots of the pro-Apple comments here sound like turkeys voting for Christmas.

 

[kelemor88]

And Google.

Funny how we always seem to forget that.

With Spotify having twice as many customers as Apple Music... and Android powering 85% of the world's smartphones... I would guess Spotify is dealing with Google far more than Apple.

What is Spotify's opinion on Google taking a 30% cut?

Because IOS owners are more likely to actually spend money on apps.

 

[jlc1978]

If anyone cared to look up the definition of "monopoly" they'd see right there that the App Store is one. And by the way- monopolies are illegal

Actually, no. Apple's app store is not a monopoly, having significant market share does not a monopoly make, nor does market power necessarily. Arguing Apple is a monopoly simply because they are the only way to get iOS/iPAd apps misstates the concept of monopoly.

 

[Ethosik]

Apple Music is priced at $9.99, a price point that Spotify is unable to match due to the 30 percent cut that Apple takes, as it does not leave enough margin for Spotify to make money.

This is ungodly ridiculous. Do you think Target's own branded products needs to pay the same thing as a product I want to sell? Since when does a company with a competing product get to tell how another company how to price their competing product?

 

[Ethosik]

So we're just going to pull numbers out our asses of what Apple "should" be charging? Why not 3%? Why not 1%? Why not free?

And that sort of thinking means Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo Switch have a monopoly on digital apps on their products too!

 

[Ethosik]

No they couldn't. There are antitrust and anti-monopoly laws in the united states. Apple might (and should) lose it's control over the app store as it is (see United States vs. Microsoft Corp). They certainly aren't going to push their luck by banning competing music platforms altogether.

Sure they can. They can turn it in to a Jitterbug. What would be the rational thinking that would force the government to NOT allow Apple to make a product they want to make?

 

[Ethosik]

What? Why? No logic there. Is macOS the same as Android?
Open Platform != Malware. Don't repeat nonsense.

macOS does have malware problems. In fact malware increased 1,000% in 2020. Look it up. MANY sites and reported this.

 

[Ethosik]

Except that's not how the real world works.
MS nearly got broken up over a free web browser.

No....read what Microsoft was doing. They approached Netscape to try to get them to STOP developing their browser. They made internet APIs incredibly difficult ON PURPOSE. They had internal memos stating they were concerned that their browser would not make it if others were allowed so they APPROACHED OEMs to not include Netscape Navigator. Also part of the dispute was how they treated Sun Java by making it more difficult to port Java code OUT of Windows ON PURPOSE.

They performed anti-competitive moves that almost cost them to be broken up. Apple is doing none of this.

 

[jamcgahey]

Exactly. This is Netflix's solution:

View attachment 1761872

And it doesn't appear to have hurt Netflix... since they're still the largest video subscription streaming service in the world.

So Spotify... who happens to be the largest music subscription streaming service... could do something similar.

Or... they can go to court... and attack the very same platform that they want to be on.

I believe the problem would be converting current subscribers over the new user base would certainly help but most of their subs are residual from the past that passively pay through their iPhone that they signed up for the service for X amount of years ago.

Maybe there is a way to get current subscribers to do this that would not violate App Store policy? But I doubt it. Especially given that it would probably take a similar form to the Epic offer. "Resub through our website and only pay $8.99/year for the first year" or something like that. App Store would shut that down QUICK

 

[raindogg]

What is Spotify talking about? I signed up for Spotify on my Mac for $10 a month, do they really charge more if you sign up on your phone?

 

[raindogg]

If anyone cared to look up the definition of "monopoly" they'd see right there that the App Store is one. And by the way- monopolies are illegal

Did you ever try and change your internet provider or cable company?

 

[Ethosik]

What's the endgame here?

After all these anti-trust Senate hearings... what will be the result? Will the Government force Apple/Google to change the rules they made for their companies? Because it's not "fair" to some other companies who want to use their platforms to make money for themselves?

And with all that's going on in the world... is this what we should be spending our time on?

I guess? This is where government gets TOO involved. They are not doing anything illegal. Microsoft was on the edge of being severely anti-competitive due to their approaching OEMs and intentionally making things difficult. But Apple is doing none of this. Are we fine stating a government is allowed to tell business how they can operate? I has this exact feeling when FBI wanted to force Apple to open iOS.

 

[I7guy]

Did you ever try and change your internet provider or cable company?

Sure. I could dish internet instead of my current provider. I would have to pay more, have less bandwidth, deal with spotty connections. But dang, there ain't no cable monopoly in my area.

 

[Ethosik]

Directly competing services, like music streaming, absolutely want & need to be price competitive. You're too caught up in defending Apple to be capable of seeing the problem.

Then Netflix should approach the government about Disney Plus costing as low as it does while Netflix is still increasing their costs.

 

[Ethosik]

I’ll go with you on this ride for a moment.

While it may not be as fast as a native app, the current Xbox Cloud Gaming web app that released yesterday is quite good. I’m actually impressed with what they accomplished after Apple decided that game streaming wasn’t allowed on the App Store.

Edit: But why is it that Apple has decided to prevent game streaming as a native app? Perhaps because it competes with Apple Arcade?

Game streaming would be allowed. All Apple wanted is that each app (which could JUST be a wrapper for validating your Microsoft account and STILL stream) be in the App Store.

 

[fncd]

They’ve already stated that they will allow it as long as each title is submitted to Apple individually for review.…just like traditional apps. You can’t cry “not fair” and “arbitrary“ on one hand and then ask for special treatment on the other.

Did I miss the part where Netflix has to submit each movie or tv show for review? Both are streaming services. Zero difference.

 

[fncd]

Game streaming would be allowed. All Apple wanted is that each app (which could JUST be a wrapper for validating your Microsoft account and STILL stream) be in the App Store.

Yep. Let’s get Netflix, Hulu, Prime, etc to do that too then eh?

 

[Abazigal]

Edit: But why is it that Apple has decided to prevent game streaming as a native app? Perhaps because it competes with Apple Arcade?

My guess is that Apple doesn't want these game streaming services to effectively become miniature app stores in themselves. Imagine if Microsoft could effectively funnel users into getting their games directly from them instead of via the App Store. They would pay a monthly subscription fee to Microsoft (which Apple presumably gets no cut of, because it would be done directly via their website). In exchange, they would get all their games from said app, which means there would be even less of an incentive to buy apps from the iOS App Store. This may lead developers to favour Microsoft over iOS, because they will always go where the money is.

In short, Apple likely sees it as a threat to their App Store model.

It's the same story with Spotify (which Apple countered with Apple Music). It's a somewhat different story with Netflix because video streaming services are not mutually exclusive the way music streaming is. Being subscribed to Netflix doesn't mean people won't subscribe to Disney+ or TV+ or HBO, because each has their own original content.

It's not about reducing competition for Apple Arcade, but more about ensuring that the iOS App Store remains home to the best apps, so that people will continue to go to the App Store (and by definition, continue using iOS devices). People used to joke that the only use for internet explorer was to download chrome. Can you imagine a future where people visit the iOS App Store only to download these game streaming apps and then proceed to do all their gaming via these apps?

 

[fncd]

My guess is that Apple doesn't want these game streaming services to effectively become miniature app stores in themselves. Imagine if Microsoft could effectively funnel users into getting their games directly from them instead of via the App Store. They would pay a monthly subscription fee to Microsoft (which Apple presumably gets no cut of, because it would be done directly via their website). In exchange, they would get all their games from said app, which means there would be even less of an incentive to buy apps from the iOS App Store. This may lead developers to favour Microsoft over iOS, because they will always go where the money is.....

The problem with this argument is that Microsoft doesn't sell anything on XCloud. Period. You cannot login to xCloud and buy a new game. Everything that is there is already part of your monthly Xbox Game Pass (ultimate if you choose) subscription. Just like you cannot buy a new movie / tv show from Netflix.

....It's not about reducing competition for Apple Arcade, but more about ensuring that the iOS App Store remains home to the best apps, so that people will continue to go to the App Store (and by definition, continue using iOS devices). People used to joke that the only use for internet explorer was to download chrome. Can you imagine a future where people visit the iOS App Store only to download these game streaming apps and then proceed to do all their gaming via these apps?

Why does Apple give a damn where people get the games they are playing? If I wanted to subscribe to Apple Arcade, I would - but because I don't want to subscribe to their model, other developers need to jump through hoops to get content to users? When will the same thing happen to Netflix, Amazon, Hulu then now that there's Apple TV+?

"The best apps" Which includes scam heart rate apps and gambling dens disguised as children's games? We've all seen countless times that the app review process is total bs at best.

Look, I use and own many Apple products, but there is zero chance I'm going to defend them when their policies are utterly ridiculous and self-serving. I'm a customer, not a shill for them. But apparently, the lines for that have now been blurred.

 

[tripmusic]

Says the company that essentially rapes independent musicians trying to make a buck.

 

[fncd]

Says the company that essentially rapes independent musicians trying to make a buck.

Talk about a bad take. I have a friend that was raped, and I can assure you that in no way at all did she equate it to a music company paying an artist less than another company.

 

[Abazigal]

The problem with this argument is that Microsoft doesn't sell anything on XCloud.

Yet.

Disney+ started out a a streaming service, but has since moved on to transactional video on demand with titles like Mulan and Raya.

Because it’s not difficult to see these services potentially becoming App Store replacements one day, it’s understandable that Apple be more cautious with them in the short term. Especially considering how App Store vitality and viability is important to both Apple and its users (more on that below).

To me at least, it makes more sense for Apple to be more cautious upfront (and then loosen up later on once things like revenue share agreements have been ironed out). Rather than let them flood the App Store like no tomorrow, and then trying to manage them afterwards.

You don’t become a trillion dollar company by being laissez-faire about this sort of stuff.

Why does Apple give a damn where people get the games they are playing? If I wanted to subscribe to Apple Arcade, I would - but because I don't want to subscribe to their model, other developers need to jump through hoops to get content to users? When will the same thing happen to Netflix, Amazon, Hulu then now that there's Apple TV+?

As I said above, it’s more about ensuring the continued vitality and viability of the App Store, and less about staving off competition for Apple Arcade.

I maintain that the App Store has been a good thing for the majority of developers, especially those who don’t have brand recognition with consumers. Notice how it’s all the big-name companies like Spotify and Epic who are going after the App Store? They know that if they don’t act now, it’s pretty much over and the iOS App Store will become the law of the land.

It is really in Apple, and its users’ best interests that the App Store not be positioned as a loss-leader (viability), hence the current paradigm where the 30% cut from the larger developers goes towards covering the costs incurred by the majority of smaller developers who earn Apple next to no money.

At the same time, you don’t want customers being pushed out of the iOS App Store (vitality) because then that means fewer people spending money on apps in the App Store.

Being cautious isn’t illegal.