Apple Hit With €500M Fine as EU Enforces Digital Markets Act

[I7guy]

Except when those rules contradict your local laws. HOA rules get invalidated through legal judgements all the time.

The comparison of an HOA to an App store is a false equivalency. HOAs, imo, have way too much power to ruin people's lives. The ios app store is a competitive digital marketplace, with a set of rules that has basically gone basically unchanged in the general sense and not out to shut people down, but to encourage success.

The EU should just tell Apple what it wants, but I think there would be a lot of negative press. So instead "death by 1000 cuts".

 

[leonremi]

The comparison of an HOA to an App store is a false equivalency. HOAs, imo, have way too much power to ruin people's lives. The ios app store is a competitive digital marketplace, with a set of rules that has basically gone basically unchanged in the general sense and not out to shut people down, but to encourage success.

The EU should just tell Apple what it wants, but I think there would be a lot of negative press. So instead "death by 1000 cuts".

What Europe wants?
For Apple to just freaking open its platform.
I can install any app on my Mac without paying a cent to Apple.
This should be exactly the same thing on IOS.

 

[turbineseaplane]

What Europe wants?
For Apple to just freaking open its platform.
I can install any app on my Mac without paying a cent to Apple.
This should be exactly the same thing on IOS.

It’s amazing how this point gets lost all the time.

There is nothing unique about the hardware in an iOS device versus a Mac.

They are both just Apple Silicon powered computers.

 

[I7guy]

What Europe wants?
For Apple to just freaking open its platform.
I can install any app on my Mac without paying a cent to Apple.
This should be exactly the same thing on IOS.

Yeah that’s what Europe wants but let them say that outright and also let them tell Apple they are no longer allowed to charge a fee.

As I said this is death by a 1000 cuts.

 

[leonremi]

Yeah that’s what Europe wants but let them say that outright and also let them tell Apple they are no longer allowed to charge a fee.

As I said this is death by a 1000 cuts.

The death of what?
Apple remains absolutely free to make money on anything where it adds value:
- the hardware
- the apple branded services and software (if they want to make Pages or Numbers or even IOS updates paying software, it’s their prerogative)
- whatever value WILLING developers see in the App Store (visibility, curation, security, paiement system etc)

For the rest? This is my machine, I should be free to to deal directly with developers (aka install/buy apps) outside of any Apple interference.

Is it really so hard to understand ?

 

[I7guy]

The death of what?
Apple remains absolutely free to make money on anything where it adds value:
- the hardware
- the apple branded services and software (if they want to make Pages or Numbers or even IOS updates paying software, it’s their prerogative)
- whatever value WILLING developers see in the App Store (visibility, curation, security, paiement system etc)

For the rest? This is my machine, I should be free to to deal directly with developers (aka install/buy apps) outside of any Apple interference.

Is it really so hard to understand ?

Don’t forget they are also free to make money on the use of the IP on the phones like the ctf fee or standard fees and commissions. As far as side loading it’s a bad can of worms. Yes you should be free to side load and no one is stopping you, but Apple at this point isn’t obliged to help you.

The topic has become a hot button for those who want Apple to be regulated vs those who say buy what works for you if the iPhone doesn’t meet your criteria.

 

[Abazigal]

The death of what?
Apple remains absolutely free to make money on anything where it adds value:
- the hardware
- the apple branded services and software (if they want to make Pages or Numbers or even IOS updates paying software, it’s their prerogative)
- whatever value WILLING developers see in the App Store (visibility, curation, security, paiement system etc)

For the rest? This is my machine, I should be free to to deal directly with developers (aka install/buy apps) outside of any Apple interference.

Is it really so hard to understand ?

Yeah, I too would like to be able to access my steam library on a Nintendo switch and undercut Nintendo when it comes to purchasing game titles from their App Store, thus depriving them of their 30% cut. After all, I paid for the Switch with my own money. It's my machine, right? Why should Nintendo get a single cent more after the sale?

 

[leonremi]

Yeah, I too would like to be able to access my steam library on a Nintendo switch and undercut Nintendo when it comes to purchasing game titles from their App Store, thus depriving them of their 30% cut. After all, I paid for the Switch with my own money. It's my machine, right? Why should Nintendo get a single cent more after

I don’t think your argument is a cunning as you think it is.
First of all, yeah, there’s no valid reason for the Nintendo to be closed down, and yes I should be able to sideload Steam onto a Switch.

More fundamentally though, the Switxh is just a gaming system with - relatively - few owners.

iPhones are general purpose machines and the main « computer » for a significant part of the population.

 

[Abazigal]

I don’t think your argument is a cunning as you think it is.
First of all, yeah, there’s no valid reason for the Nintendo to be closed down, and yes I should be able to sideload Steam onto a Switch.

More fundamentally though, the Switxh is just a gaming system with - relatively - few owners.

iPhones are general purpose machines and the main « computer » for a significant part of the population.

I am not trying to be cunning or a smart Alec, but merely to highlight the financial side of the matter.

The iOS App Store takes money to maintain, and currently, money comes from the annual developer fee as well as 30% cut from app revenue. Apple does not take any money from free or ad-supported apps. I do not think that the iOS App Store should be a loss maker, much less expect Apple to fund it using iPhone money.

Apple has also made the effort to aggregate the best customers in the world (ie: users with more disposable income). I do not feel that it is unreasonable to charge developers a cut for the role Apple plays in growing the overall pie for everybody. What developers basically want is to be able to access and leverage Apple's user base for free, without giving anything back in return (the ability to sideload apps and circumvent the App Store would in theory mean that devs don't even need to pay Apple $100 a year).

If the ability to sideload apps was so important to users, the iPhone would never have enjoyed the success it does today. I feel that positioning the iOS App Store as the sole way of access apps remains the greatest good for the greatest number of users. For the fewer who desire more flexibility, well, there's always Android.

This helps ensure that users continue to have a meaningful choice of two sufficiently-differentiated platforms (iOS vs Android), rather than force one to become a carbon-copy of the other in the name of "choice".

 

[leonremi]

I am not trying to be cunning or a smart Alec, but merely to highlight the financial side of the matter.

The iOS App Store takes money to maintain, and currently, money comes from the annual developer fee as well as 30% cut from app revenue. Apple does not take any money from free or ad-supported apps. I do not think that the iOS App Store should be a loss maker, much less expect Apple to fund it using iPhone money.

Apple has also made the effort to aggregate the best customers in the world (ie: users with more disposable income). I do not feel that it is unreasonable to charge developers a cut for the role Apple plays in growing the overall pie for everybody. What developers basically want is to be able to access and leverage Apple's user base for free, without giving anything back in return (the ability to sideload apps and circumvent the App Store would in theory mean that devs don't even need to pay Apple $100 a year).

If the ability to sideload apps was so important to users, the iPhone would never have enjoyed the success it does today. I feel that positioning the iOS App Store as the sole way of access apps remains the greatest good for the greatest number of users. For the fewer who desire more flexibility, well, there's always Android.

This helps ensure that users continue to have a meaningful choice of two sufficiently-differentiated platforms (iOS vs Android), rather than force one to become a carbon-copy of the other in the name of "choice".

God forbid the App Store be a loss maker.
The IPhone would suffer the same fate as the PC or the Mac and ….and….and….never mind !

 

[mrochester]

God forbid the App Store be a loss maker.
The IPhone would suffer the same fate as the PC or the Mac and ….and….and….never mind !

Running services at a loss and subsidising from other profits is highly anti-competitive.