App Store VP Departs as Apple Prepares for Organizational Changes

[WarmWinterHat]

I'm all for lower fees to developers, just not for developers under the name of Epic.

I'm for lower fees, period. Who is on the receiving in is of no concern.

The rent-seeking digital "services" economy is garbage.

 

[tranceme]

2 teams = more costs and broken things...

 

[shadowboi]

Maybe turning it into this huge pile of 💩 wasn’t a really good idea?

Press-releases, ads, so-cal “now trendy” etc. I miss AppStore from iOS 6 which was as simple as turning on the TV

 

[CarAnalogy]

LOL, “so many”, riiiiight.

They know why a minority of people are criticizing the App Store, they just don’t agree. Of course they are going to do the minimum possible and drag their feet. The whole situation is an asinine abuse of power by the EU to benefit a handful of EU companies like Spotify and a MASSIVE waste of Apples time and resources.

Different groups are criticizing them for different reasons. And via different methods. I don't agree with all of them. But I read a lot of Apple news and developer blogs and the people I hear complaining are the Apple developers that make some of the best apps on the platform. That's who I worry about having legitimate complaints.

 

[TracesOfArsenic]

Funny, given how a company called "Epic" is one of the main actors lobbying and legally fighting for lower fees to developers.

Is it funny? It's expected, given they're the ones that have lead the charge on these cases. Without Epic fighting a lot of this wouldn't have even see the light of day.

 

[xmarcuswildx]

How about we finally allow theming of the iPhone with a theme store? It’s such a simple addition. It was an easy jailbreak mod. Apple could implement something so easily. Instead they give us the garbage tint.

 

[needsomecoffee]

As long as Phil Schiller is still ultimately in charge, nothing will change.

The C-Level club of older white guys in key roles has been amazingly resistant to change/retirement. Tim, Craig, JohnG, Eddie, Joz, and maybe Kevin. Pretty well-established cub they got there. Expect more of the same as CarAnalogy noted. (I exempt Johny from this club as his team has KILLED it to date, and I wonder how the hell JohnG has kept his job.) The cement hardened around the C-Team's feet quite some time ago.

 

[svish]

Good to know about the changes at Apple.

 

[BrightDarkSky]

Apple doesn't need to open up the App Store. It's their store and they can run it however they like.

That said, because iOS has over a billion active users who depend on it for day to day usage, both personal, school, and professional settings, the level of utility status means that Apple should not be able to artificially restrict users to the App Store and force a cut out of whoever is selling to the users.

A little bit contradictory

 

[Meatwad]

That said, because iOS has over a billion active users who depend on it for day to day usage, both personal, school, and professional settings, the level of utility status means that Apple should not be able to artificially restrict users to the App Store and force a cut out of whoever is selling to the users.

You make it sound like they have no choice. They can all buy Galaxies...

 

[wbeasley]

LOL, “so many”, riiiiight.

They know why a minority of people are criticizing the App Store, they just don’t agree. Of course they are going to do the minimum possible and drag their feet. The whole situation is an asinine abuse of power by the EU to benefit a handful of EU companies like Spotify and a MASSIVE waste of Apples time and resources.

Minimal compliance is what most people and companies do with tax yet no one seems to have an issue there...

You nailed it with the sledge on Spotify and the EU doing their bidding.
I'd rather Apple spent money on improving software and hardware and not legal battles...

 

[Minghold]

I don't understand how it was easier or better in any way to split the App Store like this. They need a fundamental re-analysis of what they're doing with software distribution, and it's not going to happen with Schiller in charge.

Apple is a nearly fully-enshattified company at this point. What "they need" (i.e., what we need) to do is to fire the 98% of the company that isn't involved in coding operating-systems and manufacturing hardware and moving it into consumer hands. Sell off the ecocystem to third-parties, and quit trying to parasitize app-developers. In other words, scale the business-model back twenty years.

This, of course, being the exact opposite of what they're doing now as a stagnant, corrupt Zaibatsu screwing customers and employees left and right.

 

[serryjeinfeld]

I'm for lower fees, period. Who is on the receiving in is of no concern.

The rent-seeking digital "services" economy is garbage.

Fees pay for services Apple provides for the user and developer. To expect Apple to break even or lose money from the App Store is ridiculous.

*maybe* I'd agree Apple doesn't deserve that much for ongoing media subscriptions like Spotify, but for other fees, Apple absolutely deserves it.

 

[AppliedMicro]

I'd rather Apple spent money on improving software and hardware and not legal battles...

I’d rather third-party developers spent money on improving their software, service or pricing and not paying commissions to the one of the world’s biggest and most profitable company and rent-seeker.

and not legal battles...

Tell that to Apple. They’re probably spending more money than anyone else on those battles.

To expect Apple to break even or lose money from the App Store is ridiculous.

“Jobs said that he didn't expect the App Store would be a big profit generator, with Apple instead launching it to add value to the iPhone”

https://www.macrumors.com/2018/07/25/steve-jobs-app-store-interview/

I'd agree Apple doesn't deserve that much for ongoing media subscriptions like Spotify, but for other fees, Apple absolutely deserves it

They deserve it for delivering an app to a consumer through their App Store.
Not for the ebook or in-game character skins created by third-parties.

 

[wbeasley]

The whinging about Apple's unfair commission on IN APP PURCHASES continues...

Ignoring the other platforms all seem to have standard or negotiated fees...

"
Amazon App Store: 30 percent standard commission on apps and in-app purchases. Subscription commission is 20 percent on video apps and 30 percent on everything else.
Developers that make less than $1 million per year in app store revenue can receive a 20 percent commission and 10 percent in “promotional credits” for Amazon Web Services through Amazon’s Appstore Small Business Accelerator Program for as long as they qualify.
Microsoft Store: 15 percent commission on apps and 12 percent commission on PC games starting August 1st, 2021. A 30 percent commission on all apps, games, and in-app purchases on Xbox consoles."

Anyone who focuses solely on "bad Apple" and ignores the rest is being extremely biased.

Source: https://www.theverge.com/21445923/platform-fees-apps-games-business-marketplace-apple-google

 

[wbeasley]

Fees pay for services Apple provides for the user and developer. To expect Apple to break even or lose money from the App Store is ridiculous.

*maybe* I'd agree Apple doesn't deserve that much for ongoing media subscriptions like Spotify, but for other fees, Apple absolutely deserves it.

Spotify cries poor over in app purchases (which people actually dont do currently as the app is free so Apple make nothing) yet pays the worst commission to artists/rights holders. Poor us boo hoo...

 

[AppliedMicro]

The whinging about Apple's unfair commission on IN APP PURCHASES continues...

Microsoft Store: 15 percent commission on apps and 12 percent commission on PC games starting August 1st, 2021. A 30 percent commission on all apps, games, and in-app purchases on Xbox consoles."

…and the deception with outdated information continues.

“Microsoft Store offers developers a flexible and transparent revenue sharing model (including in-app purchases, subscriptions, ads, and tips) that lets you choose your own commerce platform and keep 100% of the revenue for non-gaming apps, or use Microsoft’s commerce platform and pay a competitive fee of 12% for games and 15% for apps.”

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/apps/publish/publish-your-app/why-distribute-through-store

👉🏻 And that is of course how it should be: Microsoft may charge a fee for using their commerce platform. But they shouldn‘t be allowed to force everyone to use their Store or commerce platform for payments.

Ignoring the other platforms all seem to have standard or negotiated fees...

You’re ignoring all of the other transaction processors that do not charge the same “standard” fees.

And also that „everyone charging the same“ is an indicator for lack of competition (just what antitrust law and regulation is supposed to regulate)..

Spotify cries poor over in app purchases (which people actually dont do currently as the app is free so Apple make nothing) yet pays the worst commission to artists/rights holders

If Spotify has a dominant, gatekeeping position in the music streaming market, they should be investigated and, if necessary, regulated.

 

[NOATAK]

There is no second team required. Approval of apps outside the App Store should not be handled by Apple but the third party store itself and should require absolutely no additional fees.

Lately Apple has gotten really obnoxious and is doing a lot of anti-consumer stuff to alienate its fan base. There's no reason for them to charge for a store that isn't hosted or managed by them. Instead of making their own store as attractive as possible so that customers would rather continue to shop there, they'd rather do everything in their power to make it difficult for others. They seem to need a punch in the face to wake up and I hope it comes soon.

 

[dampfnudel]

It's my phone and I should be able to do whatever I like with it, apple-approved or otherwise.

I don't think companies should be allowed to control how consumers use their devices.



Japan is requiring the App Store to open up. India is discussing it as well.

What are their reasons?

Not to have their citizens feel left behind and restricted compared to EU citizens. I’m guessing that eventually Apple will have to do it everywhere including their home market.

 

[laptech]

Now is a good time to jump ship because the EU will be constantly monitoring the app store to make sure it complies with EU law and with such scrutiny being put to bare on the app store and it wont be the app store chief who will get it in the neck if things go wrong, it would have been Matt Fischer. Best to leave now before the EU get's it's claws deeper into the app store because there is no way Phil Schiffer is going to carry the can if the EU does not like what is going on and continues to go after the app store, Matt Fischer knows it will be him. He has made a good decision to leave.

 

[mrochester]

Not for the ebook or in-game character skins created by third-parties.

the functionality in the OS to allow that to happen belongs to Apple. They charge developers for its use.

 

[AppliedMicro]

the functionality in the OS to allow that to happen belongs to Apple. They charge developers for its use.

If you’re talking about Apple’s In-app purchase system:
Yes - and they‘re free to charge developers anything they like to.

And precisely that should (and was) primary focus of regulatory action and legislation:
To ensure that Apple does not have a monopoly on such functionality.

If, however, you’re talking about the general ability to display sprites or ebook pages on the screen:
That is offered to both consumers and third-party developers „for free“ (as part of a device purchase and/or developer agreement). Games and ebook readers can be made available to consumers via Apple‘s App Store free of commission.

And the selective „we‘re going to charge you large commissions on top. But only if we‘re having enough leverage on you, because you’re offering digital content“, while 1. cementing their dominant market position by allowing use of,said functionality to all kinds of other developers/apps for free and 2. competing by offering their own competing services for digital content, needs to stop.

the functionality in the OS to allow that

No OS functionality is required for digital in-app purchases.
Developers can make and roll out appropriate systems themselves.

 

[mrochester]

If you’re talking about Apple’s In-app purchase system:
Yes - and they‘re free to charge developers anything they like to.

And precisely that should (and was) primary focus of regulatory action and legislation:
To ensure that Apple does not have a monopoly on such functionality.

If, however, you’re talking about the general ability to display sprites or ebook pages on the screen:
That is offered to both consumers and third-party developers „for free“ (as part of a device purchase and/or developer agreement). Games and ebook readers can be made available to consumers via Apple‘s App Store free of commission.

And the selective „we‘re going to charge you large commissions on top. But only if we‘re having enough leverage on you, because you’re offering digital content“, while 1. cementing their dominant market position by allowing use of,said functionality to all kinds of other developers/apps for free and 2. competing by offering their own competing services for digital content, needs to stop.


No OS functionality is required for digital in-app purchases.
Developers can make and roll out appropriate systems themselves.

I agree developers can make and roll out appropriate systems themselves. I believe that’s what the DMA allows.

 

[wbeasley]

And still the double standards continue...

If Microsoft are charging for in app purchases, no matter what the amount currently is (and changeable anytime MS deems they want to - up or down) then why are they not coping flak on here? Just "Apple is Evil" to the usual gang of EU supporters...

 

[wbeasley]

There is no second team required. Approval of apps outside the App Store should not be handled by Apple but the third party store itself and should require absolutely no additional fees.

Lately Apple has gotten really obnoxious and is doing a lot of anti-consumer stuff to alienate its fan base. There's no reason for them to charge for a store that isn't hosted or managed by them. Instead of making their own store as attractive as possible so that customers would rather continue to shop there, they'd rather do everything in their power to make it difficult for others. They seem to need a punch in the face to wake up and I hope it comes soon.

so this outside team just do it for free? LOL