That's a false dichotomy. Developers don't have to choose between not making money and the App Store. They can also choose to make money on other platforms.
They can chose between making less or more money, and I want to increase their opportunity to make money by allowing other stores and delivery methods to compete for the developers money and user traffic.
The irony of this statement is overwhelming.
They do. They charge $99 PLUS a commission subject to terms.
I disagree. Free OS updates started when the App Store opened.
As usual, you're pretending that the only value that Apple provides to developers is a store. You are well aware that's not true. The main value that Apple provides is the platform (which third-party stores do not.)
Is it ironic? The fee can increase or decrease or even use revenue sharing. The developer fee is adequate 1€ or 1.000.000.€ a year
iOS he free updates before the AppStore launched. Console had free updates, Linux had free updates and many more had it. Same with apps through the store as well. Developers bring equal value to apples platform.
Your error is assuming developers are entitled to use Apple's IP to make money. They're not.
If you are using someone else's property to make money, and they ask to be compensated for use of that property, then you need to pay them for that use or not use it. It doesn't matter that someone else gets it for free, or that you'd make less money. If you don't agree with their terms, then you need to decide what is more important to you and act accordingly.
They're not mandated to only sell in the mall. They can sell in the mall across the street, at the store next door, or online. But if they want access to the mall's customers, using the mall's property, then they need to pay the mall if the mall asks. They're not entitled to use the mall's property just because that's where most people in the town shop.
It’s not the malls customers. The customers happens to use the mall and can’t use any other mall nor acces any deals without an obligatory 30% service fee ontop. The property is the users
And I agree developers aren’t entitled, they pay the 99€ fee and can then include it in the app, or write their own code that runs on users devices and interact with their copy.
That’s like saying your $60 Costco membership means you can walk out with a TV for free. "I paid to walk into the store, so I don't see paying for the products in the store as a valid enforcement measure to collect revenue when its lopsided."
The $99 fee gets you access to the platform, not unlimited rights to monetize it however you want without sharing revenue.
I mean, the app literally won't function without using Apple's property. How can you honestly argue it isn't using Apple's property?
That Costco meiscto enter the store as a customer… you can still pay a fee to be in the store and then pay the commission for sales done from the store, then anything outside of it unless they opted for it. I have nonissue with fees in the store, only outside it.
Currently you can access the platform with unlimited right to monetize and use the Ip. Only exception if said app informs you of possible purchases or you conduct some special purchases.
If you enter money through some other means you are suddenly freecto purchase anything for free🤷♂️. Drive it by adds or usexthe browser but consume it in the app and it’s fine
Has anyone had a conversation with these folks to let them know that… they don’t HAVE to be developers? There’s a WORLD of other professions out there that don’t require any developer level engagements with Apple. Or, do they really think, “I simply must be an iOS developer OR, I’ll just die!”?
There are things about raising livestock that I don’t like, that’s one of the reasons why I have made the conscious decision NOT to raise livestock.
Have you thought about making it even easier for them? If they have great ideas I would prefer it’s as easy for them to profit off it and provide it to be in the best way possible. Why should someone who wants to raise livestock or develop apps have it harder for no reason but being in the way?
If allowed, you will be. Companies seem to be unable to avoid encrapifying themselves. Given the opportunity to force you to use their own App Store instead of Apple’s they’ll do it and tell you it’s a great idea at the same time. Then, when they end up leaking your financial details, they’ll get a slap on the wrist and just keep on rolling.
Not a single company can force any of you into using a store as long as you can use alternative option your device.
This is a good thing for customers like me.
I need Apple to work as as shield against developers. I don't want anything from them except their apps and services.
Then continue with only their store
