As a developer, that's a stupid short deadline for such an all encompassing feature. Heck just *testing* that kind of change would take at least 2 weeks. Planning would take 2-4 weeks.
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 and Google Given Mid-October Deadline in South Korea for Filing Plans to Allow Outside Payment Systems in Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is all coming together nicely! Good news for consumers. Everyone finally starting some type of action against the walled garden of monopoly. Naver Pay is still the best!
still a bit hilarious though considering more Samsung's were sold in this market.
still a bit hilarious though considering more Samsung's were sold in this market.
I always find it interesting that government can sit on its ass for years by "studying" something, like how they'll clean up hazardous waste sites, yet when it comes to non-governmental entities they always give them a real tight deadline to come up with a solution.
Last edited:
Majority of developers and consumers will opt in for Apple's IAPs.
IAPs are mostly impulse purchase. Who wants to set up a new account, fill up all payment information, etc, just to get some gems? Consumers will prefer the convenience of Apple's built-in IAPs, and most developers would prefer to use Apple's IAPs since it will require more investment on their side to deal with another payment gateway, the international accounting, and extra customer support requirements.
The only ones getting an advantage here are the big developers where they already have their own payment system setup outside the app store in the first place (eg. Adobe, Netflix, etc).
IAPs are mostly impulse purchase. Who wants to set up a new account, fill up all payment information, etc, just to get some gems? Consumers will prefer the convenience of Apple's built-in IAPs, and most developers would prefer to use Apple's IAPs since it will require more investment on their side to deal with another payment gateway, the international accounting, and extra customer support requirements.
The only ones getting an advantage here are the big developers where they already have their own payment system setup outside the app store in the first place (eg. Adobe, Netflix, etc).
Flawed logic, it's like asking the mom and pop shop on the corner to stop complaining about Amazon taking a portion of their sales away because they don't want to try to build their own Amazon competitor. Large companies aren't the only ones affected by these decisions.
Apple should just create a bifurcation in the app store. One Trusted Network that has Apple as the payment processor that uses all apple api and tested on webkit. And the other that doesn't use apples payment and is part of the untrusted network, in order to be listed on the untrusted network you have to pay apple a 30% listing fee.
Here's a plan to be able to manage your platform without accepting outside payment.
Remove your platform from whichever country launch it in your own country and accept the laws written there?
I totally understand apps similar to Netflix where you may download the app on your phone but will primarily be using it on other devices not having to use Apple’s system and pay a percentage of a monthly subscription, but creating a blanket rule to allow everyone to enjoy the benefits of the App Store without having to pay Apple for it is extreme. No doubt things will continue to change and evolve, but as I understand this ruling, (which hopefully I am just mistaken) it doesn’t make sense.
That is exactly how capitalism works. If you don't feel conformable then go elsewhere. That is what I will do.
I am excited about this and about 3rd party App stores.
One possibility: Apple will allow payments by certified companies (PayPal and the various payment companies common in Japan and South Korea).
Exactly, but it should be the users choice, not Apple's dictate.
So you'd rather get a free game and then have to pay $$$ for the premium in game currency or progress at a snails pace. Remember when the Dieblo game series didn't have DLC? You paid once and got a complete game. Now you pay for the game, then pay extra for stuff that should have been included in the game, but isn't because DLC. Some of the DLC cost more than the game.
Maybe you're fine with paying $10 a month to use Office 365 instead of paying a $300 once and using it forever. I've got a copy of Office 2010 (windows) that is every bit as useful as the latest Office 365. It would have costed me well over $1500 in subscription fees if I could not buy a license outright at $300.
While I don't know the legality of doing so based on this ruling, as Apple my solution would be to say to developers "OK, you can accept third-party payments...no problem. With immediate effect we are charging a license fee for the developer tools...and that license fee is on a "per sale" basis."
I build websites and some of the tools I use (plugins for Wordpress) are licensed on a "per website" basis...not on a "per developer" basis, so there would be a precedent for this surely? Sell 100 copies of your app...pay $10 per year (for example)...sell 1 million copies of your app...pay $100k per year...perhaps less with a "volume discount".
That would solve the problem...until some bleating whiner decided to complain that it was somehow "anticompetitive" for Apple to actually be able to set the price of their own products and wait for Daddy Government to step in...
I build websites and some of the tools I use (plugins for Wordpress) are licensed on a "per website" basis...not on a "per developer" basis, so there would be a precedent for this surely? Sell 100 copies of your app...pay $10 per year (for example)...sell 1 million copies of your app...pay $100k per year...perhaps less with a "volume discount".
That would solve the problem...until some bleating whiner decided to complain that it was somehow "anticompetitive" for Apple to actually be able to set the price of their own products and wait for Daddy Government to step in...
I won't trust giving my CC info to a third party system. If I encounter an app like that I just won't use it. It will be interesting to see how many other people do the same.
Haha! Ever been to South Korea? South Korean people do EVERYTHING using smartphone apps. So I guess South Korea is a very important market Apple doesn‘t want to miss. And who is next? Australia? Europe?
Technically, it is very easy for Apple to block products from their app store in specific countries. In Europe, we are currently experiencing in some countries that suddenly ALL Apple-Music subscription audiobooks were no longer downloadable from one day to the next. Korea can get ready for a trial of strength, I'm curious whether their "market watchers" has to row back with their aberrant idea.
Then you can count the days until the hopefully democratic country gives up its blackmail attempt and returns to the sensible current status quo, because smartphone users would naturally find a closed App Store somehow unpleasant.
I would recommend Apple not to let itself be blackmailed by a few developers and other non-customer interest groups, in whatever level of power....
Because these exist in all countries of the world, and they could spread like a plague.
Last edited:
I think this is the most interesting possibility. Instead of your 30%, instead charge 5 or 10% as an "API license fee". It'd be free money without having to process the actual transactions.
If my logic is flawed, then I should be able to enjoy some of the benefits of your paycheck without contributing anything to you, no?
I would like mom and pop shops on the corner to stop complaining that technology is developing and the world is moving on. The internet has been developing for decades, any business that hasn't adapted yet is just asking to go extinct. "Boo hoo, Amazon has been taking more and more of my business every year for the last 25 years." Okay, what have you done to adapt to the changing times?! "Boo hoo, I can't hire any employees, nobody wants to work anymore." No, nobody wants to work as an expendable cog in your toxic soul-crushing heap for $7.75 an hour, companies paying a living wage are having no issue hiring. "But my business can't survive unless I pay my employees below poverty wages." Then you have a garbage business that deserves to die, slavery has long since been abolished. All of these whiny mom and pop businesses can't get lost quickly enough, good riddance. The great ones aren't complaining because they don't feel entitled to make zero progress over decades and still have money pouring in. They spent their time advancing their business instead of whining and not surprisingly that approach tends to succeed more often.
Here's a plan to respond to my comment: know that I don't care if Apple pulls the entire App Store from South Korea just to make a point. I'd encourage it, maybe then South Korean citizens would whip their legislators into shape a bit. Imagine building a world-class platform with hundreds of millions of users that enables developers to generate a tremendous profit, and they are happy to accept the profit but don't want to pay you anything for what you've built. They want all the upside, but you take all of the risk and downside - and make sure the platform stays up so as to not negatively affect their ability to profit from it. Amazingly stupid, every individual would never accept such an offer but Apple is expected to.
This is such crap. I cannot understand why governments think that Apple should somehow subsidize and provide a platform for these developers to peddle their software on but allow them to charge outside of the Apple ecosystem and pocket the cash. They want to force Apple to provide them a free platform at Apple's cost with no cost to the developer. What next? Movie studios wanting Apple to host and distribute their movies but allow for the studios to charge outside of Apple and pocket all of the cash? If I was Apple I would remove them from the system entirely because without the App store, many of these developers wouldn't have near the number of users they have now.
What if the developer uses the ‘Apple Pay’ button to pay for the in app purchases? They give a lower price (10-20% cheaper) than using apple‘s built in the app with the 30% cut (10%+ more expensive to you).
Would you then go for the cheaper deal for yourself or still pay the premium?
Never change a running system, even if you still hold such strange constructs against it..