”UNBELIEVABLE” this is frightening. Technocrats are out of touch all right. This kind of psychologically dissociative behavior is alarming 🚨.
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 CEO Tim Cook: 'We Want to Get Every App We Can on the Store, Not Keep Them Off'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Bell was a geographically based monopoly.
An iPhone is not necessary and you can use other phone on your wireless carrier.
Thank you for playing...
That was probably one of Apple's greatest decisions. Alex Jones is a psychopath and a hate monger.
You didn't read the comment you replied to?!?
I'll say it slower this time... "$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."
Banking apps?? Seriously. You’re going to go to bat for the most corrupt institutions in the world over Apple...love that.
For the rest, what came first, the apps or the App Store or the iPhone? All of those apps/services you mention can easily be accessed via a browser as well, they don’t need a native app. The fact is that these apps choose to be on the store to provide a superior experience to the consumer using an iPhone. No one is forcing them to, and they hardly even notice the paltry $99/year for the fully supported developer account. I honestly can’t get my head around how you have a problem with the developer account annual fee.
The fee isn’t even the issue - not even the movement of the goalposts for certain big players in regards to those fees - that’s just business negotiation. There are ground rules and there are negotiated rules for those that get big enough for Apple to consider it mutually beneficial.
It is the anti-competitive practices Apple has been employing to stifle competition against its own apps and services that is the real issue. It is deflection tactics to talk about the fees because that is where Apple has the most solid ground - everything surrounding their developer and App Store fees is totally legit and they have every right there - there is no gouging going on or anything even remotely shady about that part.
You seem to think that devs should be entitled to all these great developer tools and provided with a multi-billion device storefront for free - that is the very definition of insanity IMHO. You do realize that a retaining a 70% cut was only a pipe dream that independent developers could barely have dared to ever hope for in their wildest imaginations before the App Store came along? Before that they were looking at 30-40% at best.
You must be in your early 20’s at the oldest not to understand this.
Also, SAAS subscription business models are a choice that software developers make, and it is far more lucrative to them, locks in customers and lowers the barrier of investment for consumers, even though it is more costly in the long run for the consumer. If they make their money through Apple, how is that business model choice any different than a one time payment model? If Netflix offered a one-time $500 lifetime subscription, and acquired that customer through the App Store, why would that be any different than retaining a customer for 4 years paying monthly?
Think the other way round:
Netflix is using the visibility and services from the App store that Apple is providing them, but they dont want to pay for it.
It’s as much as you see a Nike shoe in Footlocker, you speak with the employee, try them, you decide to proceed with the purchase. But, on the Nike box they bring you it says “dont buy it here, come to nike.com and forget footlocker, we give you a 10% off”. Maybe with a nice QR code linking to nike.com to make the process easy for you.
Do you think footlocker would be happy, or that it would be fair for them?
And how many other stores sell Apple iOS software? Apple has created its own monopoly over iOS software distribution and created a false sense of obligation for what they do. They haven’t given people or businesses any other plausible options!! That’s sick. That’s really sick. And Behind a lot of platitudes and self aggrandizing rhetoric Apple has done a lot of low down dirty business. Tyranny and greed in the name of progress. They need a STRONG dose of Sherman Anti-Trust and some serious class action lawsuits to cure their ills. The Apple Inc. millionaires have lost their heads along time ago to hubris.
It is very easy. There is only a problem if you want to make money on the app and are not willing to share with Apple.
[automerge]1596015877[/automerge]
It is certainly better for me because it allows me to not be a direct customers of the app developer. They don't have my email address, they don't have my phone number. they don't have my credit card number. So they can't contact me at all unless I provide them with that information.
Last edited:
It is a membership fee for the developer program. It is their to fund the developer program.
Developers do not pay $100/year to be in the App Store. They pay that to be part of a program for developers which provides them certain benefits and resources.
This is my personal humility views.
Apple cooks this iOS platform for developers to monetise their app. Therefore, developers should pay for the 30% cuts. Imagine this, you are given the choice to give the billion active users market, but you decided to stay in that platform, should you abide the rules? Apple does not capitalise the market, every developer given their freedom to make any applications as their wills. However, Apple is responsible to take care of their own business too. They has to protect their platform by disallowing developers to create another virtual App Store or distribute their app through any other channel. Apple allows any kind of application in their App Store, except for those which will harm iOS users experience. Imagine this, how can we allow guess to change our living room arrangement? All and all, this is our house, we have to keep our best experience, right?
Apple cooks this iOS platform for developers to monetise their app. Therefore, developers should pay for the 30% cuts. Imagine this, you are given the choice to give the billion active users market, but you decided to stay in that platform, should you abide the rules? Apple does not capitalise the market, every developer given their freedom to make any applications as their wills. However, Apple is responsible to take care of their own business too. They has to protect their platform by disallowing developers to create another virtual App Store or distribute their app through any other channel. Apple allows any kind of application in their App Store, except for those which will harm iOS users experience. Imagine this, how can we allow guess to change our living room arrangement? All and all, this is our house, we have to keep our best experience, right?
There it is. This logic I cannot understand.
So you want apple eliminating the ability to downloading and installing apps from other places outside the mac app store. If I’m spending 2k+ on a laptop, I better be able to install software from where I please.
wtf is wrong with you people? Honestly where do you come up with that logic?They should be holding iOS in the same regard as macOS, not the other way around.
I swear some of you act like this is a religion. It’s a phone ffs. If there are other options for people to install apps, it doesn’t mean YOU have to stop using the App Store.
Someone in another thread was like “if they open up to installations from other sources then my next phone will be an android” like?? What point are you trying to make?I swear to god yo, ****ing insufferable.
I remember when dark mode came out a bunch of you were complaining. As if you HAD to use it. You people focus on the wrong **** here
What I find sorely missing from all of these discussions are statements of balanced pro-con-opinions, e.g.:
Sure, the 100 dollar fee for devs is nominal, and Apple maybe actually needs more money to provide a stable framework (but they only need to make that once and then upgrade which probably does not require millions of 100 dollar annual payments) in which to develop and deploy high quality app.
But then, who profits from apps being on the app store?
The devs making money, certainly. And the providers of free apps to enhance the customer experiences of other products.
But also Apple, for making money from them, but they also substantially profit from free apps like banking apps, messenger apps, whatever, simply because it makes the devices magnitudes more useful beyond the stock features provided, in the same way that banks profit from being able to offer customers the option to do some of their banking on their phone. If there was no app store, the burden to justify selling a >600 dollar phone to people on an annual basis would rest entirely on Apple and would have to be paid out of the profits made from hardware sales. Because why would I need a new phone if all it does is show the weather and basic text messages in addition to phone calls.
So yeah, Apple should make money from payments processed through the App Store, but they also need these apps to generate hardware sales, as demonstrations of the capabilities of new devices vs old ones and so forth.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg of a thorough argument that balances reasons pro and con.
Currently, most of what I am reading are one sided knee jerk reactions pro and con, and I wish a publication with modest journalistic aspirations would actually present a more comprehensive view of the complexities involved in deciding decisions. At least I would like for law makers to ask these types of questions...
Sure, the 100 dollar fee for devs is nominal, and Apple maybe actually needs more money to provide a stable framework (but they only need to make that once and then upgrade which probably does not require millions of 100 dollar annual payments) in which to develop and deploy high quality app.
But then, who profits from apps being on the app store?
The devs making money, certainly. And the providers of free apps to enhance the customer experiences of other products.
But also Apple, for making money from them, but they also substantially profit from free apps like banking apps, messenger apps, whatever, simply because it makes the devices magnitudes more useful beyond the stock features provided, in the same way that banks profit from being able to offer customers the option to do some of their banking on their phone. If there was no app store, the burden to justify selling a >600 dollar phone to people on an annual basis would rest entirely on Apple and would have to be paid out of the profits made from hardware sales. Because why would I need a new phone if all it does is show the weather and basic text messages in addition to phone calls.
So yeah, Apple should make money from payments processed through the App Store, but they also need these apps to generate hardware sales, as demonstrations of the capabilities of new devices vs old ones and so forth.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg of a thorough argument that balances reasons pro and con.
Currently, most of what I am reading are one sided knee jerk reactions pro and con, and I wish a publication with modest journalistic aspirations would actually present a more comprehensive view of the complexities involved in deciding decisions. At least I would like for law makers to ask these types of questions...
Gotta read the article or do your own research/ the vast majority of developers keep 100% of their profits. Many,like Spotify, use the App store to have 100 + million customers on advertising supported tiers without having to pay Apple a cent!
[automerge]1596019542[/automerge]
You’re a tad confused it seems. The point of the law isn’t how much Apple needs to charge, supply and demand will set that
"We want to get every app we can on the Store, not keep them off."
Unless you are an app like Gab. An app that breaks no laws of the United States but was removed from the App Store on purely subjective grounds, selectively enforced.
Tim Cook takes his marching orders from the ADL - an organisation that actively and explicitly admits to working to suppress legal speech online by trying to twist it into something they call "hate speech" - a term that has absolutely no basis in law, as confirmed by the Supreme Court.
Gab is far from the only example of this kind of blatant discrimination and selective enforcement of app store access rules. Regardless of anyone's opinion of platforms like Gab or other social media, when Tim Cook says something objectively and provably false like "we want to get every app we can on the app store", people should be very worried indeed. This is the CEO of the most powerful company on the planet, spitting in the face of Americans and spitting on the Constitution. I hope he gets ruthlessly exposed for shamelessly lying to the American people like this.
This company needs to be forced to accept all legal apps via their app store, or at a minimum, provide the ability for third party app stores to exist on iOS. That is the absolute minimum that should be done. The power this company wields over the economy and social life in general is absolutely staggering.
Unless you are an app like Gab. An app that breaks no laws of the United States but was removed from the App Store on purely subjective grounds, selectively enforced.
Tim Cook takes his marching orders from the ADL - an organisation that actively and explicitly admits to working to suppress legal speech online by trying to twist it into something they call "hate speech" - a term that has absolutely no basis in law, as confirmed by the Supreme Court.
Gab is far from the only example of this kind of blatant discrimination and selective enforcement of app store access rules. Regardless of anyone's opinion of platforms like Gab or other social media, when Tim Cook says something objectively and provably false like "we want to get every app we can on the app store", people should be very worried indeed. This is the CEO of the most powerful company on the planet, spitting in the face of Americans and spitting on the Constitution. I hope he gets ruthlessly exposed for shamelessly lying to the American people like this.
This company needs to be forced to accept all legal apps via their app store, or at a minimum, provide the ability for third party app stores to exist on iOS. That is the absolute minimum that should be done. The power this company wields over the economy and social life in general is absolutely staggering.
Spotify also has a premium subscription that you CAN't sign up through the netflix app on iOS because if they did Apple would take a cut for the subscription. But that is all moot anyways since Spotify has a free tier so Apple allows them to create through the app. Netflix doesn't. In the scenario you placed Netflix would be forced to having a free Tier with ads on it or lose thirty percent on iOS store
Apple doesn’t have a dominant market share in smartphones. But it controls/dominates the market for apps which run on iPhones.
Developers can’t choose their App Store or use alternative distribution methods, so Apple’s 30% cut of all App Store revenues is monopolistic and arguably excessive.
Name one thing he said that's not true.
[automerge]1596023563[/automerge]
And these developers wouldn't exist without Apple. They knew when they started what the deal was and they accepted it. Don't like it? Make your apps for another platform.
or Apps for my Xbox,PS4 or Switch ? Walled gardens there too.....
Seems like the key point to me, is app developers want access to iphone users' wallets, but don't want to pay Apple their share through IAP. Apple is not forcing any app to use IAP, like Netflix, but for those who do, Apple wants a consistent user experience.
As far as "b" do you have some examples, other than Tile? (which is all over the place in terms of discussion)