It already exists, that is what makes this whole issue so nauseating. Develop app, reach out to potential customers to via whatever non-app store method you choose to buy subscriptions, or vbucks or what not, submit to App Store for review include a purchase option for that teeny tiny few people who will purchase it that way, customer downloads and logs in, and away to the races.
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-Commissioned Study Highlights Success of Third-Party Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You seem to underestimate the lengths that a certain loyal fanbase will go to spin even the most consumer-adverse design decisions as somehow "innovative".
1) that is a great idea. Amazon should stop making a profit on goods sold, I mean people pay for Prime right, services rendered, after paying for Prime, all your goods are at cost to the seller. AirBNB, buy a subscription, then no more 30% of rental revenue. Perfect
2) Legislatures should pass laws enabling companies to do this, and allowing bonding of developers, and severe jail time for scammers. As it is right now, Apple, Google, Amazon, etc cannot do what you say
I know right, Google only charges 30%, shame on those lazies. Must be all apple if the market charges for something, must be the loyal fanboys fault. Oh wait, let's let the market decide (Capitalism 101). If google, amazon. Microsoft, Epic, Steam, apple all charge fees, who are we to say what the correct fee is? Now if the market starts lowering the fees, companies could choose to lower them with the market, right?
When do I start receiving my cut from the App Store that I apparently own a stake in then? Perhaps we do have different definitions of "control," as yours appears completely detached from reality.
Investors won't mind as long as Apple continues to rake in profits by skimming off the top from everyone else. Investors don't care where the dollar comes from, whether it's by developing and launching an innovative new device or by simply taking it in through "services", as long as it comes in.
Thanks for proving my point. Some of us would rather Apple go back to being an intensely consumer-focused company to drive profits by innovating amazing new technology. Not by being lazy and seeking profits through rent-seeking behavior, often compromising user experience in order to maximize profits.
Apple has plenty of other profit streams, and there is opportunity cost if the ecosytem collapses.
Agreed about legislation. Perhaps the current prospect of cyberwar as a result of the Ukraine conflict will focus lawmakers' minds.[Sorry - just realised how naive that sounds....]
No, but you can minimize it. This is no different than the example given of what the tobacco companies did.
That's the thing. We all don't have to have the same thoughts in life as you are implying. There is no point to prove, other than that people have different positions and expectations in life. Thanks for emphasizing that point.
The loyal fan base is the reason that apples revenue is where it is. Nobody is forcing an iphone onto anybody; I can't image hundreds of millions buying a device that doesn't suit their requirements.
I'm not even talking about their apps specifically, but more about the rest of their business. You don't need to innovate on new technology for consumers to buy if you can be profitable by just collecting rent.
Indeed, your position appears to be that you're ok with an Apple that now just wants to coast on past successes, rather operate the way they used to where consumers and innovation were focus number one. We do hold different positions here for sure.
But that’s not the Apple we have. The vast majority of Apples profits come from it’s innovative new products.
So true. I wonder if they have a chart that shows where their apps would be ranked if it weren't for the self-dealing/preferencing. Apple Music, Apple Maps, iMessage... looking at you.
Just get over it Apple. Apple’s App store is a MONOPOLY.
Apple is anti-competitive, don’t care about consumer choice, has more control over peoples’ devices than they do and Apple knows that its cash cow App Store would get demolished in certain categories if it were to compete with the likes of Steam, Netflix and Game pass.
Apple would love to try and pull that restricted wall gardened stuff on MacOS.
Apple is anti-competitive, don’t care about consumer choice, has more control over peoples’ devices than they do and Apple knows that its cash cow App Store would get demolished in certain categories if it were to compete with the likes of Steam, Netflix and Game pass.
Apple would love to try and pull that restricted wall gardened stuff on MacOS.
The majority of Apple's revenue comes from iPhone sales. A better camera and faster processor is a mighty low bar for "innovation".
I think you have unrealistic expectations then.
Well apple has been said to be coasting on these very forums. Based on Apples performance (ie revenue) if that is the definition of coast, I am quite okay with it. However, to me Apple is focused on consumers and innovation. I mean you can fool some of the people etc, etc. People on MR heartily believe that Apple has duped 100s of millions of consumers. Well to each their own.
You seem to conflate coasting with failing. They are not the same. You can coast and still make plenty of money.
With all due respect, you are missing the point. Sure in a general case a company can coast along and make "plenty of money". But if I take MR forum posters definition of coasting I am happy with it. But to me Apple hasn't been coasting they are laser-focused and it's reflected in their revenue.
Now now - Apple is still innovative. I mean, just a couple of weeks ago everyone was marveling over the innovative power cord and vesa mount design on their newest, most innovative monitor yet!
Then apple is right in line with the competition as far as innovation; even if it is a low bar.
As a small time developer I find the app store search is rigged. If I search for my exact app name (for one of my established apps), it comes many places down the search. For other searches of app title keywords eg Sudoku, my app does not appear at all. As an analogy if I am selling a sandwich, when people search for my sandwich potential customers are given a results list of ice creams.
Ah yes, "right in line with the competition," where Apple has always been when innovating and performing at their best...
I understand the consumer desire for sideloading apps or a third-party app store, but I don't understand the legal reasoning demanding them to do so.
You can't demand McDonald's start selling your own food products in their stores. What's the difference?
I also don't understand the demand Apple open up all parts of its software to other apps. I guess I fail to see the difference in Apple's actions and the actions many other product producers- not just hardware and software - take all the time. KFC isn't forced to share its recipe with other fried chicken restaurants. Amazon doesn't sell everything on its marketplace.
The only way Apple should implement these things is through the court of public opinion, not through the actual courts.
You can't demand McDonald's start selling your own food products in their stores. What's the difference?
I also don't understand the demand Apple open up all parts of its software to other apps. I guess I fail to see the difference in Apple's actions and the actions many other product producers- not just hardware and software - take all the time. KFC isn't forced to share its recipe with other fried chicken restaurants. Amazon doesn't sell everything on its marketplace.
The only way Apple should implement these things is through the court of public opinion, not through the actual courts.