supadav03

lkrupp said:

supadav03 said:

It’s straight ugly. No other way around it. Would it keep me from buying the next iPhone, no, but I am not a fan of that look at all. 

Does it matter that you wouldn’t buy it? Uh, nope, not one tiny bit.

Abalos65 said:

supadav03 said:

Abalos65 said:

supadav03 said:

I don’t know. I kind of think of it like a grocery store. If I want to sell my goods at a grocery store I have to pay. I have to pay slotting fees, pay-to-stay fees and display fees, etc. All the while the grocery store can sell their own brand of goods for less, right alongside mine, without paying the same fees. While they don’t pay the same fees as me, they have other cost associated with running the store that I don’t incure. Pretty reasonable business model that’s used all over. Idk...doesn’t seem unfair to me. 

The drawback of analogies is that they do not always fit perfectly. How would the fact that iPhone users can only access the App Store fit into your analogy? Or Spotify not being allowed to mention the fact that they have set up their own 'store' on their own website?

Yeah, not perfect parallels so it really doesn’t address your first question. As for Spotify not being allowed to mention their own store: Can I, as Entenmann’s, be mad at Publix if they don’t let me advertise in their store that my donuts can be bought at the Entenmann’s store for less? No. I’m paying for access to their customer base who may not know my product exist if not for being on their store shelf. So to try and direct those customers away from their store to mine so I can make more profit seems more unfair than them telling me I can’t advertise like that in their stores. 


Side comment to address iPhone users only accessing App Store - Playstation users can only access PSN. Is it right that if I own a Playstation I’m forced to use PSN for digital content? Why can’t I access Xbox Live Market Place or Nintendo eShop? Because if you choose the product (iPhone, Playstation) you do so knowing that you are also buying into their ecosystem and if you don’t like that, that you buy an Xbox or Switch. 

I do not find the analogy of two supermarkets fitting here. How is the website of Spotify where you can only sign up for Spotify remotely similar to the entire App store? The mentioning here will also not happen in the App store, but in the app of Spotify itself, again making the analogy not really fit.

I personally am not a gamer. Are the season passes of different games not possible to buy without a significant cut from Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo? Is it not possible for game developers to mention their own website to buy these passes? Otherwise the situation is not similar

Abalos65 said:

tehabe said:

Abalos65 said:

urahara said:

Abalos65 said:

supadav03 said:

I don’t know. I kind of think of it like a grocery store. If I want to sell my goods at a grocery store I have to pay. I have to pay slotting fees, pay-to-stay fees and display fees, etc. All the while the grocery store can sell their own brand of goods for less, right alongside mine, without paying the same fees. While they don’t pay the same fees as me, they have other cost associated with running the store that I don’t incure. Pretty reasonable business model that’s used all over. Idk...doesn’t seem unfair to me. 

The drawback of analogies is that they do not always fit perfectly. How would the fact that iPhone users can only access the App Store fit into your analogy? Or Spotify not being allowed to mention the fact that they have set up their own 'store' on their own website?

Which stores can Android users access to download the apps?

Play Store, Amazon app store, Samsung app store, F-Droid and any application can be downloaded via a browser (see ApkMirror for example or Fortnite), which also means many online app stores

In theory there are many but in most cases it is only one, the Play Store isn't available on Amazon devices, the Samsung one is not available on Pixel devices. And side loading doesn't work by default. The practical consequence is, that the store for applications is essentially a monopoly you have to use, if you want to sell/offer your application to the consumer of that device. The grocery example therefor wrong.

There was simply asked if there are other app stores on Android. I agree that for most people there is only one store they go to. Not allowing Spotify to mention their own website for sign up is my main issue with Apple stance here, not the App store or the 30% cut. The grocery example isn't my idea, I also have problems with simple analogies to these discussions.