Apple CEO Tim Cook: 'We Want to Get Every App We Can on the Store, Not Keep Them Off'

[InGen]

Can someone answer me this. Is Apple obliged legally to have an App Store at all? I mean if they released.4 iPhone models this year and decided to create one of those models without an App Store altogether and have only apple apps + pre-approved pre-installed apps are they not allowed to create such a device? Or is Apple now obliged legally to create every apple device with an open store-front built it?

 

[Kierkegaarden]

it's a lot more than 30 percent if you consider most apps won't make any money but they still get 100 bucks/year from the developer

The $99/year developer fee is the opportunity cost. Small price to pay for reaching over a billion devices.

 

[smulji]

Now if I tried downloading Netflix through the iOS store and signed up for a subscription Apple takes 30% of that and not just once, EVERY time my subscription renews.

That's not entirely correct. Apple only takes a cut when the user uses Apple payment backend system. And Apple only takes a cut during the first year. From the 2nd year, it's 15%. If you are so concerned about Netflix giving Apple a cut, you're more than welcome to sign up as a customer on Netflix's website, download the app, and sign in for free => no need to give Apple a cut. Apple only gets a cut if the user was acquired via the App Store.

 

[derekamoss]

[automerge]1595999103[/automerge]

That's not entirely correct. Apple only takes a cut when the user uses Apple payment backend system. And Apple only takes a cut during the first year. From the 2nd year, it's 15%. If you are so concerned about Netflix giving Apple a cut, you're more than welcome to sign up as a customer on Netflix's website, download the app, and sign in for free => no need to give Apple a cut. Apple only gets a cut if the user was acquired via the App Store.

You are still just proving my point that Apple tries to gouge every cent they can instead of making it easier for the consumer.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

There is more software available now more than ever, thanks to the App Store and what it started. More opportunities for developers — and like anything in business, some will be successful and some will fail. Apple created a fair, even playing field and is investing many resources into helping developers create better software every single year.

 

[User 6502]

The current system is better than anything that existed before. You don't like it? No one is forcing you to consume or develop iOS apps...move on to Android or Windows, or a different career field. You can't force Apple to run their company a certain way, or reduce their fees, or stop advertising for their own apps. It's their store. They thought of it, developed it, invested the $$ and made it happen; therefore they get to set the pricing, just like any store owner. If people don't like it they will vote with their wallets and Apple will adjust (or fail). Why is this concept so hard for people to understand. It's called Capitalism.

Companies have to respect laws whether you or them like it or not, or they will be forced to pay fines or even shut down. Apple is no exception.

 

[smulji]

[automerge]1595999103[/automerge]

You are still just proving my point that Apple tries to gouge every cent they can instead of making it easier for the consumer.

Generally speaking, consumers love the App Store. It's certain developers that have a problem and those developers are given the ability, per the rules, the be able to bypass Apple's fees. Problem is they want to bite the hand that feeds them.
[automerge]1595999437[/automerge]

Companies have to respect laws whether you or them like it or not, or they will be forced to pay fines or even shut down. Apple is no exception.

You're right but it hasn't been proven that Apple's broken any anti-trust laws. That's what tomorrow's investigations are for.

 

[User 6502]

Free apps get Apple 0%. A penny is a lot more than that. $100 is a minor fee to keep the yahoos who aren't developing real apps from submitting them. I'm surprised it's not a per-app fee.

Apple makes nothing from my bank's app, credit card, utility company, Amazon app, Kroger, etc.; of course, they get the $100, but that's nothing. They're not in it hoping to make $100 from developers who make free apps.

And yet they happily collect all those yearly $100 from developers. Why is that?

 

[bookofxero]

Right - not like that $100 goes towards providing, maintaining, and developing tools or access to customers. It's exactly like throwing your money out the window... 🙄

And yet they happily collect all those yearly $100 from developers. Why is that?

 

[User 6502]

Right - not like that $100 goes towards providing, maintaining, and developing tools or access to customers. It's exactly like throwing your money out the window... 🙄

You do realise that banking apps, WhatsApp, Facebook and all the other free apps out there have to be on the store otherwise nobody would ever buy an iPhone? Apple has let them stay otherwise customers will just go elsewhere… it doesn’t keep them there out of kindness or generosity.

 

[Puonti]

I don't see Apple being forced to allow competing app stores on iOS / iPadOS / tvOS / watchOS, but if it happened I'd love Apple to make it literally a choice for the user:

Choose which app store you want to use. You can change your choice whenever you want, but all apps from other app stores are removed from the device for security reasons. All apps on device at any given time would have to adhere only to one app store's security / privacy / pricing / etc policies, so that it's always very clear where you need to turn for support and which app store is to be held accountable for allowing something potentially controversial to be installed on a device.

Competing app stores would have the leg up on Apple because regardless of any annual fee they would have to pay Apple for the right to run an app store on Apple's devices would be nothing compared to the potential profits they could make by undercutting App Store. And other third party app stores doing the same thing. After they set up a reliable backend for running an app store in the first place. And enticed high-profile developers to sign up with them, too. And provided support for their developer customers and end users alike. All of this globally, of course.

The minimum cross-store requirement would be that all developers are registered with Apple (the same as now), because this would allow Apple to block anyone trying to do Bad Things(™) on a system level (write an app, submit it to a more lax app store, get it on devices and from there try to undermine Apple's on-device or in-cloud systems and services).

Apple would of course need to complete moving their remaining default apps to App Store for this to make sense - you could reasonably expect to have the Settings app stay on the device regardless of the user's app store choice, but perhaps not iMessages, Facetime, Files, etc. They aren't, strictly speaking, system-critical, especially since you could install alternatives for them. And Apple could always choose to also submit them to select third-party app stores they determine are worth it, just like developers could submit to multiple app stores.

 

[wigby]

You know what provides the best experience for consumers? Choice. Imagine a world were you could only buy tires, or replacement batteries or floor mats from your authorized dealer. They could set the price to whatever they wanted and argue they were doing it with the consumers best interests in mind.
The problem with that, the problem with THIS, is that not everyone is a mouth breathing simpleton that needs or wants everything spoonfed to them. Some people like the variety of choice even if it comes with certain risks. Let Apple set safeguards inside the OS to block abuse by rogue software with ulterior motives, just as they do already on the Mac platform. Continue to rat out any app that does something it shouldn’t be like accessing the camera, contact list or clipboard.

Apple absolutely does not need to lock all users behind an artificial paywall in order to “provide the best user experience,” and that argument is made only more ridiculous by the 30 some odd third party apps currently installed on my MacBook, none of which were downloaded from the App Store.

I can’t wait to hear Tim’s arguments against all these points tomorrow, though. I’ll have a bowl of popcorn waiting.

But most Apple users want a walled garden. They actually want less choices. That is why they have and continue to choose Apple. Just because a small minority wants Apple hardware to work with an open software model does not mean Apple should provide it. It only means another company should come along to provide that in the form of competition.

 

[Wanted797]

Okay. Let’s start with Gab.

 

[travelsheep]

I'm crazy in love with the App Store design. I never get tired of looking at it. ❤

 

[theotherphil]

[automerge]1595999103[/automerge]

You are still just proving my point that Apple tries to gouge every cent they can instead of making it easier for the consumer.

I tend to purchase all my software and subscriptions from the App Store exactly because it is easier. One single merchant has access to my credit card details and I can see all my subscriptions in one place. How exactly is Apple’s user experience inferior?

 

[smulji]

I tend to purchase all my software and subscriptions from the App Store exactly because it is easier. One single merchant has access to my credit card details and I can see all my subscriptions in one place. How exactly is Apple’s user experience inferior?

It isn't inferior. That person's beef is that Apple gets a cut of Netflix's subscription. As an end user, that's Netflix's problem. Not mine.

 

[Michael Scrip]

I know some developers are upset that Apple take 30% of every sale. (even though it's been like that since... forever...)

But I wonder if it would be worth the extra hassle to submit and maintain your apps on multiple app stores... even if those other app stores took less of a cut.

Any extra revenue from selling your app on other app stores might be offset by the extra work to provide updates and support on multiple app stores.

Sure... a developer might only give up 15% on some other app store... but they're still gonna be on Apple's app store since that's where the bulk of Apple users will get their apps. So now a developers has to deal with two app stores, and two developers accounts, and two payment systems, etc.

I just think it might be more trouble than it's worth.

But I guess if other app stores became a thing... it might make Apple lower their percentage.

Which, I think, is the biggest complaint from developers.

Though as a user... I'd still prefer to get my apps from Apple's App Store... rather than "Frank's App Store"

 

[aaronhead14]

Yeah, but Apple likes to cripple competitors’ apps and make them inconvenient for customers. Like not being able to buy movies in the Vudu app, or not being able to buy eBooks in the Kindle app. Apple wants you to buy those types of things from them, so they intentionally make the experience worse in competitors’ apps. It’s sad and, frankly, annoying.

 

[UrbanJoe1]

Smartphones/devices & their web-connected software have and continue to be EXTRAORDINARILY disruptive & vital to nearly every business they involve with (and nearly everything else also). On that basis alone they should be MANDATED to be be an open software platform. Android is already there. Apple can work a little harder to keep their store prices justified... Choice & control are the issues. And there are way, WAY too many million/billion iPhones & iPads around to be a 100% closed/controlled ecosystem. PERIOD!!!! Offer a “couture” experience through the App Store. Fine. No problem. Just don’t refuse people to be able to build and market & obtain custom apps outside of kissing the rings of the Apple Kings. No tech executives should have that much power and control. PERIOD!!! Time to put the technocrat dictators back in their place.

 

[smulji]

Which, I think, is the biggest complaint from developers.

That's one complaint. The other being that Apple doesn't enforce its rule consistently from one developer to the next. Some developers think there's favoritism going on.

 

[topdrawer]

The $99/year developer fee is the opportunity cost. Small price to pay for reaching over a billion devices.

every developer adds value to apple devices. no fee would be a very small investment on apple's part to add so much value to their platform. and you don't reach all those devices. 99% of those users will never see your app.

other platforms have fees but they are one time fees. some even give your money back if you don't make any money. in the end the ecosystem is not fair if apple is making a trillion dollars and most devs are losing money, because it's not just the fee, you have to buy into the ecosystem and purchase the hardware for the privilege to develop for mac/ios. for a fee, i would expect those tools to be available on windows and linux.

i have games i want to distribute for free. i already gave apple thousands of dollars just for the tools to develop for them, is it really that much to ask for a way to distribute my games without ads, for free?

 

[Coconut Bean]

The problem then comes when the added choice doesn’t give me more of what I want, but instead saddles me with more issues that I have to contend with.

The people who are happy with the way the iOS App Store is run risk having these benefits taken away by those who desire more freedom. Fortnite is the classic example where the developers made android users sideload the app just so they could skirt around payment methods, while the iOS app was still made available normally.

How do you decide whose needs take precedence over that of another party? It is precisely due to the absence of choice that has made purchasing iOS apps so safe and frictionless, and personally, I feel that is more important for the majority of users than choice.

But that’s just me.

Oh yes. Not having payment methods in Spotify because of Apple's anti-competitive payment policies is suddenly a feature. 😂

 

[Eso]

It isn't inferior. That person's beef is that Apple gets a cut of Netflix's subscription. As an end user, that's Netflix's problem. Not mine.

Except that Netflix maybe decides not to offer a sign up option through the app at all, meaning you first have to sign up through the web before returning to the app. That degrades the user experience.

Alternatively, perhaps Netflix decides to offer a sign-up option in the app, except they charge you 30% more for your subscription through the app to compensate for Apple's fee. What's ridiculous is that you could have paid less through Safari on the same device! Once again, terrible for the end-user.

This is what you are defending - it's so mind-boggling that I don't even consider it to be rational.

 

[derekamoss]

Except that Netflix maybe decides not to offer a sign up option through the app at all, meaning you first have to sign up through the web before returning to the app. That degrades the user experience.

Alternatively, perhaps Netflix decides to offer a sign-up option in the app, except they charge you 30% more for your subscription through the app to compensate for Apple's fee. What's ridiculous is that you could have paid less through Safari on the same device! Once again, terrible for the end-user.

This is what you are defending - it's so mind-boggling that I don't even consider it to be rational.

Yeah that's what i have been trying to say the whole time.
[automerge]1596005842[/automerge]

I tend to purchase all my software and subscriptions from the App Store exactly because it is easier. One single merchant has access to my credit card details and I can see all my subscriptions in one place. How exactly is Apple’s user experience inferior?

because apple forces Netflix subscribers to go to a website to sign up for the subscription. Once again it wouldn't be so bad if apple did block the ability for them to create a link in the app that opens safari on iOS so they can then sign up online. In fact, if I remember apple makes it in their terms where Netflix can't say to start a subscription go to netflix.com on your phones browser, etc even if it ISNT posting a link. Just a tutorial within the app would ban the app even per Apple's guidelines all so they can get their own slice of the cut. It would be all good if apple allowed both signing up through apple pay and also allowing a tutorial or link to sign up on a webpage and the funny thing is Apple would still get their money because 90% of people don't even know anything else and would sign up within the app and would only loose 10% of the people who for some reason didn't sign up, through the app.

 

[jonblatho]

You can't force Apple to run their company a certain way

Ask the Bell System how that line of thinking went for them.