I don't know what facts you think you're talking about but it's very clear there are many unhappy developers 🙄🙄🙄
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 Files Appeal in Epic Games Lawsuit, Asks to Delay App Store Changes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If a game offers those add-ons, it's the developer who offered them, not Apple, what in the world are you even talking about?
By the first quarter of 2006, Symbian had a commanding 60.08% share of the global mobile operating system market. In second was PalmOS (12.72%) followed by Windows Mobile (9.25%) and BlackBerry OS (8%).Oct 13, 2019
https://www.phonearena.com › news
Granted variants of Symbian were used on both Nokia’s Smartphone models and some of their regular phone lines, but even if we take 1/2 of that number we are looking at about 60% of the phone market in 2006 being smartphones of some type.
Edit - Trying to fix formatting here is awful. I highlight the block select it to unbolt, which it does. Save and it is back to bold. I guess something is stuck from the text pasted into the message before the bold text.
Last edited:
You’re misapplying the numbers. Those are marketshare figures specifically for smartphones. Nobody calls the software on a simple flip phone a mobile OS. You’d think it was plainly obvious that 60% of people in the U.S. were not using smartphones in 2006. I suppose you could be forgiven if perhaps you weren’t around at the time or were too young to remember, but I was in college in 2009 when I got my 3GS and I was definitely a relatively early adopter at the time.
Here’s two different sources for smartphone adoption in 2006. One says 3% and the other says 6%. Neither of those figures can be called a “huge market.”
U.S. Smartphone Penetration Surpassed 80 Percent in 2016
A lot has been written about how extraordinary the year 2016 was, and there’s a good chance you read some of those articles, tweets and Facebook posts on your smartphone. That’s because 2016 was also the year that smartphone adoption surpassed 80% of all mobile phone owners. This milestone was...
Are Smart Phones Spreading Faster than Any Technology in Human History? – MIT Technology Review
www.technologyreview.com
Sorry. You’re right. Conflated two quick searches when I made a quick search.You’re misapplying the numbers. Those are marketshare figures specifically for smartphones. Nobody calls the software on a simple flip phone a mobile OS. You’d think it was plainly obvious that 60% of people in the U.S. were not using smartphones in 2006. I suppose you could be forgiven if perhaps you weren’t around at the time or were too young to remember, but I was in college in 2009 when I got my 3GS and I was definitely a relatively early adopter at the time.
Here’s two different sources for smartphone adoption in 2006. One says 3% and the other says 6%. Neither of those figures can be called a “huge market.”
U.S. Smartphone Penetration Surpassed 80 Percent in 2016
A lot has been written about how extraordinary the year 2016 was, and there’s a good chance you read some of those articles, tweets and Facebook posts on your smartphone. That’s because 2016 was also the year that smartphone adoption surpassed 80% of all mobile phone owners. This milestone was...www.comscore.com
Are Smart Phones Spreading Faster than Any Technology in Human History? – MIT Technology Review
www.technologyreview.com
per Canalys the shipments in 2006 was about 8.5% of mobile phones. 77m smartphones in the Canalys report. 1b phones total per NBC news that year.
I predate smartphones too and lump in my brain pdas and smartphones a lot of the era. And as I was working at the time it seemed most everyone had a Crackberry or Treo in their pocket. Those few without one of the smartphones probably had a pda sitting next to it.
Opening the door to third-party IAP sources is going to bring so much fraud that people eventually will deeply regret it.
You’ll see… the only ones who will not benefit but instead suffer from this will be the consumers.
Hopefully the appeal succeeds and reverts the original ruling.
Actually, only reputable developers who provide specific services, such as Netflix, Hulu, etc., should be exempted.
You’ll see… the only ones who will not benefit but instead suffer from this will be the consumers.
Hopefully the appeal succeeds and reverts the original ruling.
Actually, only reputable developers who provide specific services, such as Netflix, Hulu, etc., should be exempted.
That ruling that you are asserting ends EULA’s doesn’t do what you think it does. I don’t think Apple’s vast legal team has just missed an important piece of case law or are hoping other people don’t notice. The original case is for software that was on sale on a website and is paid for before the user has chance to review and accept the terms.
The difference with Apple is fundamentally different for the following reasons:
1) You are buying the hardware, not software (iOS).
2) iOS is not for sale, and has never been for sale elsewhere.
3) Before iOS is activated on the device (which you own), the iOS terms and conditions are presented for the user to read with an option to accept or cancel.
You absolutely can choose not to accept and not use the software in which case a) You take back the phone to Apple for a refund as you lack the skills or an OS to install or b) you install your own OS.
If you choose accept, you are bound by the terms and conditions set forth.
It is literally different in every way to the case that you present as “EULA’s are not enforceable in Europe”. That’s not the case because it really depends on the context. Yes, buying software off the shelf and then being presented with a EULA may be unenforceable.
What Apple is doing is presenting the user with an agreement before the OS is activated for use and the option to use it or not. By agreeing, you are entering into a legally binding agreement. It has already been ruled that clicking agree is as binding as making a signature. It’s all in the presentation.
Last edited:
Sign up for a free developer account, download XCode, compile and install software on your own device. You only need a paid account if you are going to distribute your app on the App Store.
I really dont think you have understood my answer - either becuase you won’t or just can’t understand it. Earlier a guy complained about his IPS being a monopoly in his area, and a more important case than Apple. But using your reasoning: there is nothing stoping another company or even himself investing $millions into building a rivaling infrastructure and then providing cheap (probably lower than cost) internet to his house - so what is his problem, right???
Most modern monopolies are build on being successfull and developing the next big thing. Being successful is not the issue - but at some point the dominance one company have over the customers or other companies becomes to large, and then it becomes an issue. Mobile devices has become a all dominant factor in todays world and Apple has therefore also become an all dominant power with its walled garden. Apple is destroying other companies being using the dominance of iOS in several ways, such as monopolistic price-setting, locking use of technology, and just copying/implementing features making whole companies/markets obsolete. There was several cases against Microsoft abusing its power and they didnt even have a walled garden in place.
Saying that nothing is stoping Epic or other companies from just building a rivaling iOS platform is as stupid as asking someone to build his own ISP infrastructure because he is not happy with the current service/competition is his area (Actually even more stupid, as mobile platform requires millions of users, phone manufactors and developers on board). As I said, there is a difference between been a fanboy and a sheep. For a fanboy it is okay to ask questions before bending over just because Apple ask you to, as a sheep you just do it. In the same manner it is okay to like the products but still ask questions about Apple policies. Just as only sheeps uses the term “we just like it that way” about everything Apple does.
Edit: You talk about increasing competition is the key for innovation. While supporting actions which only goal is to destroy all and have zero competition when users have walked inside the walled garden of Apple.
Last edited:
Depends, software altercations do not relate to my consumer rights. And apple would need to prove I damaged it within my first 6 months of ownership in Sweden, other nations even longer
you’re missing the part. I can sell any altercations I want as long as I don’t include apples IP.
AND I HAVENT AGREED TO Anything to use my device I own.
The license agreement is ILLEGAL AND NOT VALID. Eu courts have already established this.
e
I am the owner, I’m sorry but EU Supreme Courts have already said this. US laws aren’t enforced
That’s the only thing I can’t do as I don’t have a right to sell copies of it because then I’m copying someone’s IP
I have more rights than the company
Apple takes 30% and the Swedish state takes 25% so your numbers need to be lower. But yes that would be perfect. Pric win life’s VAT and processing fees. This would be if you use apple or any other system.
For one thing, I agree. But if you purchases multiple products for 500-1000kr combined I would rather not pay 30% extra if I don’t need to.
I care, because their profits can show that they are quite literally ripping me off. Now we are here because multiple nations and courts have agreed that apple is indeed ripping you off. You are free to be robbed blind.
You are literally subscribing to a service not purchasing a song. I know a lot of music fans that would rather pay more to the artist than the store if they could, and they do when they can. You’re arguing like it’s a bad thing I would be against more information.
I can, as I can see that when I bought Spotify for 10$ a month.
VAT:2.5$
apple: 3$
Spotify: 4,5$ to share.
but Apple Music:
VAT: 2.5$
Apple: 7.5$ share
Well no ****, om Tallinn about theor CDs, iTunes or other places they sell the music. Not streaming it
I can get music from anywhere on my iPhone, I can’t get my apps from anywhere but the App Store. Spotify have Competition. Apple App Store have zero competition.
why do you think nobody cares about the Mac App Store?
No need. Why do you think Spotify sued apple in Europe and not in USA? Because they broke European law. American laws aren’t relevant even if apple is an American company.
every EU nation have legal agreements.
if this American company don’t show up they would be deemed guilty and have an invoice sent to them. Or a private debt collector would get the debt.
That’s is exactly what the South Korean law states. Apple can’t force them to use apples IAP or deny apps with their own IAP system.
apple would just remove a revenue stream with zero effect on developers.
It doesn’t matter, apple will still need to pay taxes in other nation they sell products in. Ireland will just lose tax income.
Ireland, Hungary and Estonia have just signed up to support it. So it’s a done deal.
Eu agreed to pause their plants untill after the global tax rate details are presented. Eu still plan to have their tax revenue collected. USA will lose money ether way.
We will se if it will be implemented, depending how efficient the new global tax rate will be in collecting it at point of sale. Or France will just reintroduce their 3% tax rate on total revenue on apple.
Developers aren’t affected. These are taxes on apple and other big companies. Considering it’s on apples revenue l, not profits.
Sounds like apples problem that they allow apps to be displayed for the low low price of 99$ A year. Walmart buys the products and then sell it to customers. And keep the profits.
Every physical store I have ever shopped in uses this model.
i think everything will be still purchasable on app store, with a discount if u buy via link. Just like on ebay, full price if u buy on the platform and pay with paypal: you are fully insured. Or u can contact the seller, pay with bank transfer outside ebay, get a discount, and have zero insurance.
Sure. And Apple could charge by the app, download, hosting fees. If Apples IAP isn't used.
You can jailbreak and I think there is a work around with Test Flight (or at least there was).
Your point is a good one in that there is no readily available iOS feature or instruction on doing it.
Charging developers to enroll in the developer program, then charging them again as a percentage of their revenue for apps sold in Apple's AppStore (since Apple doesn't let developers bypass the store to distribute their apps).
Except Apple doesn't let developers distribute their apps in Apple's App Store - it requires them to do so. I'm fine with Apple charging developers for distribution if and when developers choose to use Apple to distribute their apps. And I fully agree their store reduces barriers to entry and is a great deal for many developers. But nothing in that arrangement should preclude developers from being able to bypass those benefits and distribute their apps on their own if they so choose. To say otherwise is to say Apple can't be competitive and profitable with their app store if they have competitors.
So by that logic, a Costco membership should entitle you to pick whatever items you want for free, because Costco is double dipping. In a movie, you've already paid for the movie and snacks are extra, they should be free? And on and on and on. Need to rethink your "criticism" and why it makes no sense.
If the letter of the law is followed then Apple will not win this because their store is anti-competitive. Virtually every commercial enterprise on the planet that once held a dominant position in the market place was told to open themselves up to competition because a) it stopped them being dominant and thus able to dictate prices and b) doing so ultimatly benefits consumers. I do not see why other companies are told they cannot be dominant and dictate prices but yet Apple can.
Developers aren't Apple's customers - Apple's customers are Apple's customers. Developers want to sell products to Apple customers. Costco doesn't charge vendors to sell products to Costco's customers.
You're right, not a great analogy. So let me try this way. The $99 is for the training, materials, certificates, support, test flight, ability to distribute as many apps. The IAP is for the use of the infrastructure. Apple allows one to not use IAP and use it's infrastructure for free. It's not double dipping.