| ▲ | ohdeargodno 2 days ago | |
> Designing entire hardware Designing the hardware does not entitle you to extracting more money from anything. If you don't want to lose money on your hardware, don't sell it at a loss. (Which Apple isn't doing, nor are any of the Android device manufacturers.) I haven't seen Dyson try to extract 30% off of every hairdressing salon that uses their dryers. > software, and backend platforms Are made to attract users on the platform. With the intention of making money from it after. Cool. Quick question, do you pay for Chrome, or Firefox ? They invest hundreds of millions of dollars every year into it, how dare you not pay them 30% of every purchase you make online ? > investing billions of dollars into them every year is not nothing The billions have been invested initially. The ongoing costs of running the App Store / Play Store are not even close to a billion, especially not for Google that already owns all the network infrastructure necessary to run it. >If what these companies built took no work, try making your own platform to release games on and see how little work it truly needs. Sure, that's very simple: take any open publishing store on Android, and ask yourself why noone uses them for games delivery. I'll even add a hint: it's not because they don't offer diff based assets upgrades. | ||
| ▲ | strogonoff 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | |
Do you have proof that hardware is sold at a loss? Do you keep in mind that the software that comes with that hardware—the OS and all the batteries it comes with—comes free of charge, including years upon years of not just security patches and bugfixes but major updates with absolutely new functionality? The ongoing costs of maintaining and developing the platform and keeping the OS secure quite can not possibly be trivial. > With the intention of making money from it after. What else do you expect—the goodness of their heart alone? That would be the shortest lived business ever. Don’t get me wrong, it’s great to base a business off creating positive value for people; but it’ll create vanishingly little value unless you also make sure this business is profitable—that allows to create more positive value for people over time and incentivises the ongoing improvement. > Quick question, do you pay for Chrome, or Firefox ? They invest hundreds of millions of dollars every year into it, how dare you not pay them 30% of every purchase you make online ? No, but I hope both of us know how both of them are financed—by Google’s ad revenue, primarily. I would prefer the software I use in general, and operating system in particular, to not be financed primarily through ad revenue. | ||
| ▲ | charcircuit 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |
>Designing the hardware does not entitle you to extracting more money from anything. But they can work together with 3p to expand the capabilities of the device and incentivize it with revenue sharing agreements. >how dare you not pay them 30% of every purchase you make online ? It's somewhat strange but payments have been taken up by other vendors like stripe. If payments were built into the browser it would make commerce easier and would allow them to take a percentage. >and ask yourself why noone uses them for games delivery Because being able to distribute to a store billions of people already visit is valuable. | ||