Spotify’s “end of summer promotional pricing” which applies to anyone who hasn’t had premium before.. which is noone.
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 Allows Spotify to Show Pricing Info to EU Users in iPhone App
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You think building software is not money rightfully earned? Do you have an idea of all the infrastructure that a service like Spotify needs?
Does wendys allow third parties to sell their burgers? Otherwise it’s Apples to oranges.
So refreshing to read a well informed, reasoned argument from someone with experience.
It’s literally not. It’s like if the product had a label in the packaging that said you could buy their products on their website. Which many actually already do. Like “shop on mybrand.com”
For real!
Even though I have an Apple One Premier sub, the only thing I don't use in it is Apple Music so would love to have the ability to wake to a 3rd party app
Still shocked that such a function is not available even all these years later
Yup, and same with Logitech recently with them making people think that they would be creating a mouse subscription with that whole forever mouse fiasco
Technically, yes, as you can get their food delivered with all of those 3rd party food delivery services
I think the media blew up a throw away comment... they'd have had to be insane to try that 😅
They have the right to. It's their platform and they need to be able to do what they want with it. The idea of forcing them to allow apps to advertise they can get it cheaper elsewhere is the dumbest **** I've ever seen. That's like forcing Target to allow a company to sell in their store but put up ads saying they can buy it cheaper at Walmart. Dumb as ****.
Yup, that's precisely what they did
There would be no way that they would do that, right?
Last edited:
That's the real Steve Jobs. I'm old enough to remember when Bill Gates was the big bad boogeyman who used the power of Windows to destroy other companies at will. Steve Jobs and Apple were supposedly the antithesis of this attitude. Now the tables have turned, which is weird in and of itself, but it pales in comparison to the surreality of watching Apple fans champion Microsoft's scorched earth approach. Not a single person who thinks Apple should be able to pick and choose winners and losers based on platform dominance seems to be aware of the irony of their position.
Actually not true! Businesses in countries like the US have to follow laws, as much as they might not want to.
Grow up, Apple. You have (in your app store) the world's most popular music streaming service, which you didn't contribute a penny to license the music, and you still have the nerve to demand a commission.
Wanting to charge 27% or 30% commission when Apple is providing none of the licensed music and podcasts Spotify is offering is just outright selfish.
Baby clothing stores aren't operating in a monopoly or duopoly and the baby clothing business doesn't even nearly have the same entry barriers as mobile operating systems or application stores.
I think it was more the general public that "blew up" a throw away comment and overreacted which is what too often happens on social media/forums. A CEO saying they could "possibly" envision a subscription mouse does not mean it is very likely or imminent as some seem to have taken it.
And Spotify has every right to complain if they feel a company is not properly following a law/regulation.
Not if it violates a law/regulation.
This is more about the seller promoting ways to buy their product directly from them, which does happen in retail stores as I pointed out in my post #81 in this thread.
Who do you think is paying for the dev tools offered on which Spotify created their app? Not to mention the hosting fee and vetting the submitted apps for malicious code for starters. It costs more than $99 a year if you include expenses from millions of free apps.
Your argument proves how little you're familiar with what goes into software development.
Wait until you find out that poster thinks the $99 developer fee also includes a license to use Apple’s IP without further compensation to Apple in all cases because free apps are allowed to use Apple's IP without further payment.
I suppose theoretically Apple could demand a fee from every website viewed upon an iPhone. Those websites take advantage of the technical prowess of the devices- it's not like it's cheap to design and build an iPhone after all. They could also up the App Store fees and start charging free apps even if those free apps don't even advertise or generate revenue.
People might stop using the iPhone at the point that apps withdraw and websites get blocked for not paying the fees 😅 Apple need those people collectively as much as they need Apple...
Look at Apple threatening WeChat with fees in China. Apple are dead and buried in the Chinese market without that absolutely essential super app.
Individual apps serve individual purposes and there's almost always an alternative. But if you're comparing a single app with a whole ecosystem I'm not sure how to counter that.
Websites make money from advertising and building profiles and Apple isn't hosting any of those websites on their servers so it isn't costing them any money. And you're paying for the "prowess" required to access those websites when you paid for the device and the software that comes with it.
The more I read your response the more I'm convinced you're making an argument just for the sake of it and not providing any actual info.
If you're unaware of WeChat or its significance on the entire Chinese market, I don't know how to counter that. It is massively more significant than any manufacturer or platform.
My response to you, in the previous post, was tongue in cheek, as one silly argument deserves another. 🤡
Apple. And Spotify gets access to it by paying the $99 developer subscription.
As evidenced by thousands of other free apps, Apple can (and is willing to) provide that service for free for members of their developer program.
It costs less if you include all the hardware sales Apple makes because of availability of apps.
Not in all cases - Apple forces developers to use their purchasing / payment processing service for any sale of digital services/goods.
This is of course unjustifiedly differentiating, anticompetitive (considering how much Apple competes with providers of digital apps/services) and opportunist rent-seeking. So no surprise that the EU has now enacted some legal restrictions on it.
They evidently are. I mean…
- Is the Spotify app free to download? Yes.
- Does it “use Apple’s IP“? Well, at least according to you it’s a yes, isn’t it?
- Does Spotify currently sell subscriptions and provide further payment to Apple (except a few very old legacy subscriptions, possibly)? No.
Inside and outside of Europe - with or without the DMA.
👉 Also, what does Apple’s giving in here change with regards to Spotify?
They can now display pricing and subscription information - a clear immediate win for consumers.
It’s not as if Apple would lose out on any commission revenue or as if Spotify users would lose a comfortable way of subscribing or paying - given that both have been unavailable in the app for a long time anyway.
Last edited:
Once again proving you're not remotely familiar with how software works and your unwillingness to understand when someone's trying to explain.
Apple's able to provide all that for free apps cuz they're able to subsidize it with the revenue generated from the commissions. Prices have been going up every year but the dev program still costs $99 a year still.
Please do some research instead of trying to sound smart when you're evidently not in this dept.
You do realize there's more than one country in this world right? And this might not help your case but I did live in China for over a year and am fully aware of the reach and significance of WeChat in the market.
If you think my argument was silly then I might as well go ahead and call yours what it is. Total nonsense, not silly.]
You can try to reason with willful ignorance but you're never gonna succeed. So this would be my last response to the both of you.
Luckily the EU agree with me, and not you. Sorry about the lawmakers and their 'nonsense' laws. (Also, I lived in China for longer than you, so that's another mark in your loss column. 😉)
Lastly, I knew there was no reasoning with you, so there was no need to try.