Ask HN: What would happen if Apple removed Uber from its App Store?
There is always a risk (no matter how small) of any app being deemed inappropriate by Apple and, hence removed from the App Store. I'm not particularly interested in why Apple would do that. If that were to happen, hypothetically, what would Uber, a $63 billion company, do without its primary way to generate revenue?
55 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 132 ms ] thread1. Uber would file a lawsuit for a huge amount of damages. (They have enough money to be able to afford lots of lawyers.)
2. A large percentage of Apple's customers who are also Uber customers would be hugely pissed off and switch to Android phones.
3. There would be huge amounts of negative publicity. There would be congressional inquiries into anti-competitive behavior, and demands for government regulation. Apple's board might even fire the CEO.
It's almost inconceivable that Apple would do something so harmful to its own self-interest.
- Having had a history of having the app on their store already
So they better have a very good reason for taking their app out of the store
1. Uber's app had previously been approved.
2. Apple, by their previous policies, therefore led Uber to believe that they could build a business around an iOS app. Relying on that information, Uber invested billions of dollars into their business.
3. Apple, by now banning Uber's app, has committed an act that damages Uber.
Also, it would be difficult for Apple to come up with criteria for an acceptable app that would disqualify Uber but not also millions of other apps, without having some new condition specifically aimed at Uber. This could be used as evidence that Apple intended to cause damage to Uber.
Not really. Apple already has draconian terms to submit apps. They've done things like ban pretty wallpaper weather apps before and released their own version of it. They even attacked Flux and then duplicated the feature.
It's perfectly legal since their terms basically say anything that competes with them is not allowed. So they could easily ban Uber and say you should be using their phone capability to call a cab.
- That argument would also apply to any other app that allowed you to order goods or services.
- Apple doesn't offer phone service - they only sell phones. And they're certainly not in the taxi business. So I don't see how they could construct a convincing argument that Uber competes with them.
What you're saying is reasonable, and I could see how a judge might agree with the arguments you've made. But it also seems like Apple could say, "We don't like the CEO of Uber's haircut", which is as valid as any other reason to terminate a non-contractual relationship. If Uber wanted protection for the billions they invested, they should have negotiated a proper agreement. Maybe I just don't understand how the law works.
I was under the impression that all purchases conducted within an iOS app had to go through Apple's in-app purchase framework. Uber let's me get a ride then bills me completely separately. Likewise, if I want to purchase movie tickets the Cineplex app shows me a web page (still inside the app) and lets me buy the tickets.
Yet the Kindle app is not allowed to let me buy Kindle books, nor can it even provide a link to Amazon to buy Kindle books.
Why are Cineplex and Uber able to circumvent Apple's in-app purchase policy but Amazon isn't?
Or has this policy changed?
If you're a fan of this argument format, I'd love to get your feedback about what you think of Sequiturs.
Anti-trust law requires having a monopoly(which Apple doesn't have) or acting together with other companies. So in this case it's probably legal.
EDIT: that's basically the opinion of Keith Rabois, who litigated several anti-trust laws.
https://www.quora.com/Why-was-Microsoft-punished-for-violati...
Lots of android in the market but sold to people who couldn't tell the difference with iOS and wouldn't even know how to buy an app.
I don't think the government could force them to keep an app on their server and continue to serve it to consumers running their software if they didn't want to.
If we use cars as an analogy, we require car manufacturers to allow service by other mechanics, but we don't require the same for phones (yet). Car manufacturers do not have monopolies.
At some point, asking, "Does Apple have a monopoly?" becomes the wrong question to ask.
True, but that required a new law, and sure a new law could also be deployed with regards to Apple.
To be honest though it's also anti competitive for big brands like uber to be able to bully their way to negative publicity while mom and pops are helpless if they are removed from an App Store or Google.
2. No one would switch to Android just because of that.
3. Yes, lots of negative publicity. That's why 1. would never be reached.
Finally, one thing not mentioned: people would find a way to install the app without the app store. Every good hacker in the world would try to do it firstly, because every iphone user would be asking to be able to install Uber. And Apple doesn't want all bright minds trying to find flaws in their system for sure (I wouldn't at least)
Because of losing Uber? No.
Because they don't trust Apple not to remove other apps? Absolutely.
Consistency, stability and trust are quite important to maintaining a brand. Apple arbitrarily removing apps would definitely harm their brand image, especially as they're positioning themselves as a market leader in fighting for their customers privacy and trust at the moment.
But Apple would be required by users to give an explanation for those actions.
Still, all this post is kinda nonsense because it would never happen. It's more a karma bait lol
>2. Yes, they would. In 2016, android is fully feature equivalent to Apple's iDevices, only reason you may not switch is that you are too lethargic and don't want to unlearn the iOS way of things.
>3. Whether they will do it or not will depend on the negative publicity vis-a-vis impact on profits/bottom lines. If your bottom-lines hit the floor as no one is using an app to place cab booking orders, the last thing you will worry about is negative publicity. Apple, on the other hand, will worry about this publicity since it has a lot to loose from it.
If the CEO of Apple told the CEO of Uber over a recorded phone call, "The Board, the Shareholders, and I all agree on cutting your app out of the store for no reason other than we hate your guts and it'll bring us joy to watch you suffer", it still seems like that shouldn't be enough to win a lawsuit. It's Apple's store: They get to choose the apps they want in their store. What next - are we going to have judges force bookstores to stock books because "your reasons for not stocking the book aren't good enough"?
Of course, Uber surely has explicit agreements with Apple, Google, and even their hosting provider. You don't build a multibillion dollar business on top of someone without even calling them to make sure it's okay.
Uber's valuation is dependent on growth and market dominance. Losing convenient access to a big piece of the market would a deep wound.
idk create a decentrilized service?
If you think that would be bad imagine if AWS stopped service all together.
Or the human race dying out from BIRD FLU
I assume that would be a stop-gap while Uber tries to come into compliance with whatever AppStore rule is keeping them out.
I think it's impossible that there would be reason they could not comply, but to answer your question, I think they would mobilize their users by having them contact Apple support en-masse until Apple relented.
A little while ago, Yelp began spamming me with a "Yelp Weekly NYC" APNS message every Friday. I also believe Lyft has been doing this with promotions. Under these rules, both of those apps should be immediately removed from the App Store, and I'd support that.
[1]: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#pus...
2. It would however lead to a very important debate that has not happened yet - who "owns" the platforms of iOS and android and who can play gatekeeper? Because Apple has not yet abused its position, the problem has not arisen.
But there will be plenty of political and economic incentive to force Apple and Android / goggle play to open their gatekeeper roles to "some other bodies", possibly with public service remits.
Ultimately access to the platforms will always be a privilege, but the platforms are rapidly becoming a public good and as such will one day be regulated differently - just as the electricity industry did.
One day soon the Apple Car App will be directly competing with Uber - I would not like to be Uber then if I had not spent the intervening years quietly lobbying for a "open platform" reform.
2) Uber would sue Apple for damages and try to get back into the app store & using its monopoly to influence other businesses.
3) Uber would encourage users to use Android and possibly raise awareness of Android and begin supporting its development in OSS circles. It would also support OSS projects that improve the app experience of web apps.
4) Uber would also start offering incentives to its api developers to make their own Uber apps for the app store as an alternative. So none of that referrals crap, proper cash incentives. Maybe even invest in a couple of startups creating these apps.
5) Undoubtedly Uber will use its PR team to write negative articles about iOS and use it as an opportunity to 'fight back' and gain customers. It will ask users to also write to Apple or ask them to boycott Apple products.
Politics: pulling strings, getting people Angry and channeling that Anger , pressuring Apple. might have all kinds of side effects on politics, the stock market, people that use phones as a critical tool(work, etc).
Technical solutions: In paralel , they could also shift to a model of virtual bus-stations ,maybe they will put large public touch screens(like in china) , maybe they will create a very thin iphone case with embedded electronics and an eink screen , sell cheaply, just for UBER and some other stuff. Or they will build an automated voice/sms activated ordering system.
End result : Unless other distributions channels works for them, the rest will take too much time, and UBER will probably lose.
I believe users requesting (and getting) rides is Uber's primary revenue generator, so not having the App Store access would be inconvenient but not catastrophic.
1- Uber has a web app that works on all platforms that can run a modern browser (pretty much all in fact). Right after the app is taken down, they would publicly push all iPhone users to use the web app.
2- People would buy other devices where it run natively (Android, smartwatches, etc.).
3- I bet Uber is already working on a plan B to mitigate that. Like building their own device, integrating with car manufacturers, etc. They could be even working on creating an alternative mobile OS. Having Uber natively integrated in a mobile OS could be a huge opportunity to grow with other features and become the next generation iPhone. It would also be a differentiator to the iPhone.
The mapping API they use could also be taken down or blocked. Same risks there and that's why they are working on their own mapping technology. They tried to buy HERE maps but it failed.
Integrating with car manufacturers only helps drivers. But drivers can just quickly buy a cheap Android phone to run the partner app.
Not very useful for the end user. Unless they have a car with Uber installed, and are drunk so get an Uber driver to pick them up at their car.
Following week, we would hear that Uber acquires Lyft. It will probably give option to Apple to either provide Uber app installed by default on all Apple devices, just like YoutTube and GMaps used to. If not, it will pull every single taxi booking app from Apple's platforms.
One may think there would be an expensive lawsuit. But I think with already too many legal strikes against them, Uber will muscle their way out of it. I know I would if, hypothetically, am put in that situation.
I've been connected in the past in labor disputes where unlikely/impossible things suddenly become the new normal. Given Apple and Google's interests and upstream market position vs. Uber, I don't think this scenario is that difficult to envision.