▲ | bloomca 4 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Is it allowed to charge more in storefronts which take these cuts? Why nobody does that? What about Steam? Can a publisher sell a game for ~$45 in their store and $60 in Steam, or is it against some TOC? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | pkaye 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
For Steam, I believe the price parity requirement for Steam only applies to Steam Keys. Publishers can sell at a lower prices on other store front as long as it doesn't involve Steam infrastructure. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | zdragnar 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pretty much none of the stores allow that. If my memory is right, Apple and Steam don't, though Google might be a bit more permissive in their store. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | oefrha 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Is it allowed to charge more in storefronts which take these cuts? Why nobody does that? What? There are plenty of apps charging more when you buy currency/subscription on iOS compared to when you buy from their website, or in some cases Android app. Patreon is an example that made the loudest noise recently, but it’s been a widespread practice for years. That said Apple doesn’t (didn’t?) allow you to tell users that a cheaper option exists elsewhere. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | echelon 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Games are silly and inessential. And there are a dozen markets to choose from. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Steam, GOG, Epic, Ubisoft, Humble, Itch, direct download, retro games, ... Phones are essential. You can't get a job without one. It's impossible to stay connected or navigate without one. You can't even order food in a restaurant these days without your smartphone. Yet two companies control and tax the entirety of mobile computing. Scratch that. Mobile computing *IS* computing for most people. It's the only computer or internet portal they know. And two companies own it all. The passport to the modern world is owned and taxed by two trillion dollar companies. 2000's-era DOJ-litigated antitrust abuser Microsoft dreams that they had this much of a monopoly. The Halloween papers sounded evil. Mobile computing monopolization is evil. Here's what needs to be done: 1. Web installs. Both companies need to allow web native installs without scare walls or buried settings flags that need to be enabled. First class apps from the web, with no scaring users about it. We have all the technology to make this work safely: permissions, app scanning, signature blacklisting, etc. 2. Defaults. Both companies need to be prevented from pushing their apps as defaults. No more default browsers, default wallets, default app stores, default photo galleries, default search engine, etc. 3. Taxation and control. Apps cannot be taxed on any transactions. Users must not be forced to "sign in" with the monopoly provider's identity system. Apps must not be forced to use the monopoly payment rails. Apps must not be forced to be human reviewed or update to the latest UI changes / SDK on a whim. Mobile apps and platforms must work like desktop software. We need this freedom and flexibility for consumers, and we need competition to oxygenate the tech sector and reward innovation. Capitalism shouldn't be easy - it should be hard to keep your spot at the top. Resting on the laurels of easily defended moats for twenty years while reaping some of the most outsized benefits in the industry has created lethargy and held us back. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|