Amazing claim! You have proof from each one of them that they did it willingly?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Antitrust Committee Chairman Calls App Store Fees 'Highway Robbery'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Amazing claim! You have proof from each one of them that they did it willingly?
No they can't -- you can't load an app on an iPhone, except through the app store.
And as a user directly affected by Apple's policies, let me remind you, I didn't get a free iPhone so Apple could make up the losses from the hardware with cuts from app revenues -- I paid quite dearly for it, and I don't see why I should be forced to pay extra for my apps so Apple can take a further cut (make no mistake, if Apple is taking a 30% cut, you're paying 43% more than you needed to for the app). Like I can do on the Mac, I should have the option to go to a developer's web site and download an app from there, without Apple taking any cuts from it.
Huge difference.
Taxes are applied by governments that are chosen by us. So indirectly, we are choosing the taxes. And we do choose it, because if you remove them, then we don't have collective money to spend on an army, police, roads, bridges, sewage, water, schools, universities, hospitals, and so on. Whether or not you as an individual would prefer to privatise all those things instead is another thing, but the majority have chosen taxes, even if most people complain about them, because they have decided that alternative is worse than taxes.
Whereas Apple isn't directly accountable to we the people. The only voters are the share holders, who's main aim is to maximise profits. The only remaining accountability is our government (who represents we the people) that they also have to work under in order to do business here, and thus, for our protection, the government (aka we the people), have implement things such as consumer protection laws, anti-monopolisation laws, and so on.
So no, I highly doubt that the chairman of the Antitrust Committee finds taxes ridiculous.
Exactly... the 90s. There's been an interesting new development since then, not sure you've heard of it... it's called The Internet. With it, you no longer need physical software boxes on a physical store.
I think the biggest issue with Apple's 30% cut is that they are repositioning themselves as a services company. Every time they put out a new service/app, they keep 100% of their revenue, while also keeping 30% of a competing service's/app's revenue. That is anti-competitive behavior. This wasn't a problem when they were a hardware company, but their current policy doesn't work with their current positioning.
Not really, without hardware, there is no entry to the services. What services would one use without any apple hardware?
Uh, you can use email, music streaming, and a host of other things without Apple hardware.
That's a bygone era. The scale of the internet makes the marginal duplication and distribution cost of software practically nothing. Taking 30%, especially for ongoing subscription services, is rent seeking.
And none of those have anything to do with the app store, which is the discussion at hand. But it's not up to you or me to decide if apple is engaged in anti-competitive behavior. At least in the US it's up to the courts and/or other legal entities.
First of all, you and I _are_ entitled to have and express our opinions. Second, I'm not deciding things; I'm explaining why Apple has caught the attention of courts and/or other legal entities in the US, the EU, and other places, and it does have everything to do with the App Store and how Apple takes a cut of their competitors' revenue for the same services they provide while keeping all of their revenue. We will see how the courts rule on this, but this is exactly what the whole conversation is about.
Edit: Granted, the "Hey" app is in the spotlight right now, and their argument can probably be argued against more easily than some other developers', but the antitrust probes are definitely not the result of the Hey hullaballoo. Things have been going on well before.
Apple does not own the hardware. We do. You claiming that Apple has the right to charge this fee because of my hardware.
Yes, we are entitled to our opinions.
You said Apple is transitioning to a services company and therefore their behavior is anti-competitive. I postulated that without hardware there is little incentive to use Apple services, except maybe apple music. So my opinion, is they are still a company that depends on hardware.
The governments just like to pick on the big guys and these guys think they are heroes when they cut the big guys down to size....like Judge Harold Green.
And my point was what in the end if anything, happens to Apple is out of our control.
You guys totally missed the point of my post. I was expressing nostalgic amusement, not making a case that 30% is where it should stay forever. Settle down tiger.
You got it wrong. You own the hardware, but you don't own the app store (and the software within the app store). You don't own apple music. You don't own ios. Apple is not charging you to use the app store. You can download any free app and pay $0. What fee is apple charging you? You can get a 3 month trial for Apple Music. What fee is apple charging you?
Do you actually think they did it under duress or something? The 30% cut has been there since day one in 2008. Anyone getting into the iOS app business knows up front that they’re going to be paid 70% of the revenue. It’s the same cut if you’re publishing apps on the Google Pay store.
It would be nice of these companies to take a smaller cut, sure. Should the federal government force them to? I honestly don’t know.
I own the hardware and should have a right to install any app I want on it. My ability to install apps shouldn't hinge on whether Apple has successfully shaken down developers for a 30% cut.
[automerge]1592534093[/automerge]
The main difference being, from my understanding, Google allows you to "sideload" apps for free (hate that term, you're just loading apps on your hardware which you paid for).
Apple just runs an extortion racket with no alternative. It's high time people called that into question. Personally, I intend to put my money where my mouth is and after 12+ years on iPhone, move to Android for my next phone.
I'd say you left out a part of what I said. The anti-competitiveness comes in when Apple gets a cut of the revenue of a competing service. They either get a larger margin than the competitor in this case, or force the competitor to charge more than they do. In either case, their apps/services get an unfair advantage on their platform.
I'm not a fan of government picking on companies just because they can, but I see what the antitrust probes are getting at. Admittedly, I am not an expert in this area, so I can only say so much with certainty.
Apple says otherwise for every reason mentioned in these few threads and we'll see where this goes, if anywhere.
How much is the US income tax? Can the citizens claim that as highway robbery too? 
[automerge]1592538357[/automerge]
Oh this is the time I wish Jobs was still around. He would be livid and we would enjoy some popcorn moments. Right now, it's just a bunch of nice letters and comments with the lawyers working behind.
[automerge]1592538357[/automerge]
Oh this is the time I wish Jobs was still around. He would be livid and we would enjoy some popcorn moments. Right now, it's just a bunch of nice letters and comments with the lawyers working behind.
When Apple introduced the App Store and 30%, we devs all cheered. No advertising, no self-hosting, self-payment systems, individua deals with credit card processing services, updating mechanisms. Additional burdens every time we had to pay for bandwidth for downlosds when Apple would come out with new processors and we’d ship recompiled binaries.
it helped small devs a lot more than large ones.
[automerge]1592540849[/automerge]
[automerge]1592540942[/automerge]
not the same thing. Are you a dev?
it helped small devs a lot more than large ones.
[automerge]1592540849[/automerge]
[automerge]1592540942[/automerge]
not the same thing. Are you a dev?
This all would be peachy if all apps and subscriptions were free. They are not. And Apple charges 43% tax on everything I buy in the App Store. That's not good for consumers. It's not good for the tech progress either. I fully expect that the government is going to rectify the issue soon.
43%? Is that GST/VAT?
Government is not really well known for "rectifying" issues related to technology.
How is this any different than Target selling an exclusive item in their store and marking it up 30%. Users are in the target ecosystem and need to pay the target price to buy it. Customers can’t buy it anywhere else as it’s exclusive, but knew that before they went into target. This is retail
No, it's a special tax. Some call it "Apple tax". As far as government is concerned, just imagine how well wireless technologies would work without government regulating spectrum usage (hint: they would not). Also, Apple exists today because government helped it to avoid being swallowed by Microsoft.43%? Is that GST/VAT?
Government is not really well known for "rectifying" issues related to technology.