Another great point: when you signup thru SMS subscription or buy some ringtones your telecom operator also get a cut from it. But if itself sells some ringtones then they can undercut price because they are the content provider and operator at the same time. That's how many businesses work. You then can continue selling ringtones or quit if you can't make money
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.
Apple Accuses Spotify of 'Resorting to Rumors and Half-Truths', Sets Record Straight on App Rejection
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you don't want apple to get a cut then don't charge. Its as simple as that.
So?
And if you were Apple, Spotify etc you'd do the e x a c t same thing.
Suddenly Apple is the sinner and apparently you are the Saint?
O ok
The app is free.
But if you want to pay for the subscription through Apple... Apple has to get their cut.
Im reminding you of the rules since you seem to have forgotten them. They've been the same since the beginning. Spotify knew the rules going in. Now they are trying to special treatment.
LOL! you caught it!!!!Oh... did you mean Spotify shouldn't charge at all for the premium subscription?
Yeah... that would make sure Apple doesn't get their cut!
I just saw your edit.
Free apps have the upper hand.
LOL! you caught it!!!!
Yeah... I didn't know where you were going with that until your edit
[doublepost=1467441751][/doublepost]
"John Doe has the upper hand!"
Then it should be just like the Mac is. You have to go into setting and allow 3rd party installs from "Identified Developer" or "Everyone". If you don't, you're only allowed to install via Mac App Store.
When i downloaded spotify on mac, I'm on a Apple Platform, yet Spotify isn't paying 30% of my monthly fee when i sign up, and spotify is an "identified Developer" to Mac OS X.
Majority of software OS's leave it up to the user to know whats good and bad, Apple only manages that with iOS because they can monopolize with the App Store
[doublepost=1467442333][/doublepost]
It's because they should have the option to use their app to get signups directly.
What the hell? Is this real? Do I have to give apple 30% of my electricity bill? I've downloaded many apps. How is this even legal?
They are trying to get subscriptions outside of Apple. From a source in which they developed. The problem is the platform is Apples.
What are you suggesting? They charge themselves 30% of the Apple Music subscription cost?
It's not like the mac is because with iOS you are talking about a phone and not a mac. Two different devices. The app store exists to protect people from downloading malicious software. A phone is an absolute need if for nothing else safety purposes. It needs to work at all times. Otherwise you are cut off from the world.
Apple created a way for developer to develop apps for it and even web apps for it that don't go through the app store.... While very similar, people have different expectations of a computer vs a phone.
I really shouldn't have to bring that up something as basic as that.
I understand the difference, but the system is still the same. What is missing is the ability to get a "trusted developer" token of some sort and the ability to host your own app away from the app store.
Don't get me wrong, If my company was in Apple's position, I would be doing the same thing. on the other hand, If my company was in Spotify's position, I would also be doing the same thing as them.
In any app on the app store, none of the app's services is done on Apple's servers except, of course, the hosting of the binary on the App Store. Spotify doesn't use Apple's servers to serve their product, but the same can be said about the 2,000,000+ apps on the App Store.
Instead of calling people "sheeple", maybe you should familiarize yourself with the App Store Guidelines.
Everything that is to be consumed inside the app, Apple takes a cut.
A physical product, like the ones you have to ship to your house, are not allowed to be sold through in-app purchases. But things are changing, because you couldn't sell in any way those physical products in an app a few years ago and now you can.
But what Spotify wants is exemption from following the App Store rules, that every other developer (like myself) has to abide. Apple is not doing any "special treatment" to Spotify.
I have seen PR moves like done by plaintiff attorneys as a survey of public and peer professional feedback. It can be used as a "testing the waters" if there is some sort of consensus that justifies a lawsuit.
I'm really surprised that Apple responded so quickly. This rattled someone and it may have been directed by Tim himself. Thus, if the feedback from this public dialog is in Spotify's favor, expect to see one more Process Server walk into the legal office of Apple in a few weeks.
Thanks for quoting this. This specific clause in the contract could be considered anti-competitive if the hardware OEM running the app store has a similar and competing product.
If courts favor Spotify, the entire app store could be spun off into a Clarius-like spin-off not colluded with Apple.
I wouldn't bet on that. Never underestimate a group of new money young adults with bravado and drunk in their own success to not go further. A generation ago, it was an upstart Apple staring down IBM with the Mac release blowing a hole in Big Blue's bow making it the only non-IBM PC platform to survive the 90's. Now the tables have made an ironic turn.
IMO, the entire concept of a hardware OEM operated app store has not really gone through any rigorous court trails with grand-an-hour attorneys testing the business model with existing anti-competition laws.
This comes from a pirate whom developed on NeXT, Sun, SGI, Apollo, Atari and Amiga machines back in the day. Then there are the real old school that I bow to with Prime, Tandem, DEC, Sperry and Data General development background.
Get your popcorn bag ready. This'll be a good one!
Last edited:
And if someone told you five years ago the UK would Brexit, you'd laugh at them. We have interesting times here.
It's Apples store... period. Like it or lump it, it's only fair for Apple to be able to sell what they want and put whatever policy they want into place. Would you like someone to come into a store you opened, your business, and tell you that you not only HAD to sell a product, but you had to sell it for x amount? That's absolutely criminal and it's why Apple is clearly in the right. If Spotify doesn't like it, they can take it off the app store and become Android exclusive.
Well Google does that too. If you don't like it, create your own mobile operating system and build your own phones and support them. The benefit of building all this infrastructure and supporting it is if you make a good platform you get to charge people to use it. If you charge too much they can leave, if you're software is buggy people can use an alternative, etc.
Apple has a choice for payment vendors, as does Spotify.
In either case, Spotify is at a disadvantage - you either pay 30% and have the same convenience, or pay the same, but go through a website. Of course going through the website for a one-time subscription signup is not a big deal, but it is still an inconvenience, especially if you can't even place a link to the website. Again, a better example to highlight the disadvantage that non-Apple products have for the consumer is the Kindle app, as you have to go through the website to pay for books routinely, and links in books don't work.
Brand loyalty is such a tool...
it seems to me what Spotify is trying to do is give people a clear choice between using the Apple payment service or the Spotify web pay service. but Apple seems to not want to define that option in a clear to the customer manner. if you want to use Apples payment service or Spotify's payment service should that not be your choice? your choices should never be limited. Apple needs to rethink their rules to be fair to the customer. of course Spotify does not want to have to pay out to Apple. but they will have to if someone uses the Apple service. and Spotify showed they were willing to work with Apple on this issue.
[doublepost=1467456163][/doublepost]
this is about how you pay for Spotify. if you went to Walmart and you had to open an account with them in order to buy something in their store.(use only their payment service) because they did away with paying by any other means including cash. would that be good for the customer? what if all the stores started doing this. the online stores need to give you every option to pay for goods of any kind. that includes Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc..
[doublepost=1467456163][/doublepost]
this is about how you pay for Spotify. if you went to Walmart and you had to open an account with them in order to buy something in their store.(use only their payment service) because they did away with paying by any other means including cash. would that be good for the customer? what if all the stores started doing this. the online stores need to give you every option to pay for goods of any kind. that includes Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc..