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
Without the App Store how would these developers ever sell their apps in the first place? Apple has provided a venue for a flood of new developers to generate money that just would not have been possible in the past. Yes 30% is a lot but 70% is still better than 0%. What developers are paying for is to be part of an ecosystem of customers that would normally be impossible to find. It also offers an easy payment system for customers in an age where people should be less trusting of an online payment to some random person with an individuals level of web security.
The reality is before the App Store most of these developers were not making and selling apps or if they did they had sales trickle in by pure luck or google searches. Apple also creates the hardware to run these apps and the software to run them and build the apps.
I'm an app developer and honestly it is not hard to read what Apple allows and make sure an app does not violate any of those rules. A lot of developers are either lazy or hope Apple will not notice. Well they do notice and they call out developers for ignoring the rules.
If smaller developers can't make it due to a 30% loss then they were likely not going to make much of a profit anyway. That 30% is not going to make or break a developer. An app either sucks and is lucky to pull in a few hundred bucks or it is a hit and pulls in $1,000,000+ In both cases that 30% isn't going to make a huge impact on the success of that developer. A developer earning $70 on a crappy clone app isn't going to be successful because they made $100 on a crappy clone app. In both cases the app sucks. A smaller developer getting lucky and making an app that doesn't suck may only make $700,000 instead of $1,000,000 but that's still $700,000 more than they were going to make by just having a website and hoping people find it to pay for and download their app.
This isn't even about a small vs large developer. Its about crap apps vs great apps. Some massive Fortune 500 companies build crap apps that make no money at all. Some basement dwelling one person app developers have made millions.
The reality is before the App Store most of these developers were not making and selling apps or if they did they had sales trickle in by pure luck or google searches. Apple also creates the hardware to run these apps and the software to run them and build the apps.
I'm an app developer and honestly it is not hard to read what Apple allows and make sure an app does not violate any of those rules. A lot of developers are either lazy or hope Apple will not notice. Well they do notice and they call out developers for ignoring the rules.
If smaller developers can't make it due to a 30% loss then they were likely not going to make much of a profit anyway. That 30% is not going to make or break a developer. An app either sucks and is lucky to pull in a few hundred bucks or it is a hit and pulls in $1,000,000+ In both cases that 30% isn't going to make a huge impact on the success of that developer. A developer earning $70 on a crappy clone app isn't going to be successful because they made $100 on a crappy clone app. In both cases the app sucks. A smaller developer getting lucky and making an app that doesn't suck may only make $700,000 instead of $1,000,000 but that's still $700,000 more than they were going to make by just having a website and hoping people find it to pay for and download their app.
This isn't even about a small vs large developer. Its about crap apps vs great apps. Some massive Fortune 500 companies build crap apps that make no money at all. Some basement dwelling one person app developers have made millions.
Special tax? Sorry, I guess I'm not following. I have not heard this added special tax of 43% for in app purchases anywhere before. Can you elaborate? Serious question, not trolling or anything.
You realize there are other ebook stores than Amazon? I often buy my ebooks at local online stores (originating in my country) and can sideload them to Kindle. Can you do that with iOS devices?
I've seen a ton of your posts throughout the thread. Why do you think somebody would even need AWS? Apps have been distributed through webservers (websites) for ages on a Mac. Why not do that for iOS? If you're small developer you can host your app on your webserver. If you go big you can get AWS. It's all in your hands. The point is to not get Apple involved at all. Just like Mac enables you to run apps that are not even signed.
Want to know why Apple doesn't want that? Just take a look at Mac App Store. Having choice of hosting your own app and keeping 30%, 99% of developers go that way. MAS is ghost town and same would happen on iOS.
Hmm, not wanting to be off topic, but have you tried running you own server to host an app? You made it like doing your own webserver is pretty simple.
The reliability, backups, access speed from anywhere in the world, server maintenance, and all cost (including hardware, electricity, etc) associated with that, are not chump change nor as simple as flipping your hand. A developer has already had to deal with coding, marketing, and even customer service. The reason what Apple offered are welcomed by many developers previously is because it does take off a lot of cost and headache from them.
Heck, managing AWS yourself can already be time consuming unless you're an AWS certified yourself. A lone developer would probably prefer Apple doing that part.
If the IOS app store was like the macOS app store, there would be no argument. macOS users are not forced to install apps through the macOS app store. Apps can be downloaded and installed from the developer's website as well. Some apps are not available from the app store and some are available both from the app store as well from the developer directly.
IOS users are forced to go through the Apple app store and that is the root cause of the problem.
Apple can charge whatever they want to charge to host the apps on their app store provided the user has a choice to use the app store or not.
Imagine a private tollway operator blocks all freeways and forces you to use their tollway, at their "fair" price.
IOS users are forced to go through the Apple app store and that is the root cause of the problem.
Apple can charge whatever they want to charge to host the apps on their app store provided the user has a choice to use the app store or not.
Imagine a private tollway operator blocks all freeways and forces you to use their tollway, at their "fair" price.
Going with what Steve Jobs had said, there is an alternative. It's called a web app, HTML5, completely open and unrestricted. You can argue that it's not the same, but it is an alternative to have an "app" on iPhones without having to deal with the app store. Apple doesn't block that. In fact, Apple encourages it by allowing user to pin the "bookmark" into the homescreen as an icon so it looks like a regular app.
I even use web apps on my Android. Chrome can even give you notifications. Functionality wise, on certain apps, it's more than enough. We are no longer in the early days of HTML5. Modern browsers can do a lot of stuff nowadays.
[automerge]1592554973[/automerge]
I think the argument shouldn't be the fees. It should be about Apple's inconsistencies in applying their own policy. Even Apple already admitted that they shouldn't have approved the app to begin with. So why not simply doubling down on that?
Yes, eBooks can also be sideloaded to iOS devices and most apps could be made available as a web-app that circumvents the Apple Appstore altogether. That e-mail app is a prime candidate for a good web-app.
Hell, even games are being run on servers with just a client these days, if devs have an app in the AppStore it's because they want to be in that AppStore.
Yeah, I can have one up in ten minutes and I can choose provider, like OVH. It's XXIst century, webhosting, bandwidth and traffic is very cheap. Most developers are not Rockstar, Adobe and Serif and have small needs. It's going to be far cheaper than paying 30% to Apple. Same goes for payment integrations - most of them have clear cut APIs and even small online stores use them.
You talk about it like it was something huge to manage. Everything you listed is simple with modern OSes like Linux which is a standard when it comes to webservers. Most of good Mac apps are still web-hosted, and that's why MAS is ghost town.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but in a hundred years web apps will never reach performance of native app. Not to mention they can't access all capabilities of the device. That's why serious services always provide native app.
That's not what I was saying. Read the post I was quoting again and what I said. This guy was writing like you COULD NOT get ebooks any other way on your Kindle, other than Amazon. And that somehow according to him made it right for Apple to do what it does.
Again, have you actually run one as an app developer? Note that you still have to code, market your app, provide customer service, while still maintain those servers and payments and any issues.
And is it actually cheaper than 30% to Apple? Most developers are offering inexpensive in-app purchases, like a few dollars. Are you sure your server rental cost (in addition to the time and energy you put into dealing with the other vendors) gives you better cost profile? If that's the case, then why were the developers themselves were cheering at apple when apple announced the 70-30 split?
[automerge]1592556260[/automerge]
You can argue about performance, but that's not the argument here though, right? The argument is whether there's a way to put apps on iPhones without having to deal with Apple. There is. Web apps.
As for eBooks, I'm simply answering your question here
And the answer is yes.
[automerge]1592556438[/automerge]
Of course, majority of politicians gets money for free from taxpayers. That's why so many people wants a government contract. The cost benefit analysis that they did tend to be flawed.
Have I run a webserver? Yes. Have I hosted my app there? No. What would it take? Placing file on webserver and linking to it. Then adding license purchasing option on website. Tada. Don't want to write your own licensing backend? No problem. My company bought off the shelf solution for couple hundred $. That's literally all it takes.
Webhosting costs from 0$ to 2500$ (premium dedicated server with huge bandwidth) a month where I live. You can upgrade your plan on the go, they switch it up in 120 seconds unless its dedicated (than a little longer). Now factor in licensing app, hosting and do the math.
Unless you mean app that has server-based back-end. Then you still have to code it yourself. Or is Apple going to code your backend for you?
[automerge]1592556940[/automerge]
Then I phrased it wrong. The guy was suggesting you can't sideload ebooks to Kindle which is a main medium for that device. I proved you can and asked: can you sideload apps to iOS devices, which are main medium for those devices?
Not legally, you have to hack the DRM like you can also hack the iPhone. Nobody is making unapproved apps for the Kindle, Xbox, Nest, harvesting machine or any private platform. Only hacking is allowed when possible.
Though I think 30% is too high, Apple should be allowed to set it's rate...
Actually I see an opportunity for Android... if their store charged say 10% then cross-platform apps and subscriptions have the potential of being 20% less on the Android Play Store... e.g. "Hey" email is $99/yr on Android, $120/yr on iOS... if folks want iPhones and their apps/subs they can pay the "Apple tax".
Actually I see an opportunity for Android... if their store charged say 10% then cross-platform apps and subscriptions have the potential of being 20% less on the Android Play Store... e.g. "Hey" email is $99/yr on Android, $120/yr on iOS... if folks want iPhones and their apps/subs they can pay the "Apple tax".
I’ve never been charged any tax for anything bought in the App Store. You must have a special account. If you’re referring to the gross margin on the hardware maybe it’s time to move to android.
There might be countries that implemented some sort of "online tax." For example, Indonesia where I am, will be implementing 10% "VAT" for online transactions, including subscriptions (eg. Netflix, spotify, etc). Thus I asked the poster if it's something like GST/VAT. But the poster simply responded it as "special tax" or "Apple Tax." Not sure what that means...
I think what a lot of these comments are missing is how much the nature of software has changed since 2008. Back then Software as a Service was in its infancy and all paid apps (pre-IAP) were a one-time purchase. Since then, almost everything has become a subscription model, and it's a lot less justifiable to give Apple 30% in perpetuity.
Additionally, in most of these cases, we're not talking about good app/bad app or how well the App Store does marketing and discovery etc. We're talking about a web service that does its marketing through other means and collects its own subscription fees yet wants to create a thin client iOS app for user convenience. Yet Big Apple will now increasingly shake them down for 30%. Big Apple even has the ability to put a company out of business for not complying, the iOS platform is big enough that consumers might go elsewhere if a service doesn't offer access via app.
Business isn’t about doing fine my friend. It’s about having a sustained revenue or you wouldn’t be able to R&D new products like the Apple Watch or the AirPods.
Just cuz a business has more customers doesn’t mean they should or would lower their profit margin. Businesses aren’t charities and if they behave like one they wouldn’t last very long in the field. Economics 101!
30% wouldn't be so bad if the search worked. Right now if you search for something exactly, you often get something else due to the paid ads and curation. I realise Apple have given up on ever getting search to work. In fact they now bury the "search" feature. I honestly believe I could create a better app store. Third party stores could really help app discovery.