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 Loses UK Antitrust Lawsuit Over App Store Fees, Faces £1.5 Billion in Damages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Setting an artificial threshold of X number before a platform must be opened up doesn't make sense to me. Should be on principles, regardless of marketsize as long as there is competition (Android is the competitor in this case).
For an argument like that to work, you would have to have a situation where you ONLY have digital games available, and we all know that is not the case with the games console market. Both Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo offer physical media for their systems. Maybe the next gen will be comparable, but currently it is not.
My PlayStation has no disc drive. One cannot be added after the fact. Even if one did, buying a physical disc still results in a 30% cut to the platform owner.
So again, how can I buy a game for my PlayStation and avoid paying Sony 30% (spoiler alert: I can’t.)
Firstly yes you CAN add a disk drive to ANY PS5 slim or Pro, that is a fact, and if you buy a game off eBay or from a second hand store, nothing goes to the platform owner. So again your point is not valid, the games market and the iOS App Store market are NOT the same.
How would iOS being “forced open” be any different? If the goal is to increase competition or lower prices, the evidence from Android suggests that won’t happen. The Play Store remains dominant, its fees haven’t dropped meaningfully, and the supposed openness hasn’t translated into tangible consumer benefit, and in fact led to their detriment in the form of malware. Meanwhile, forcing Apple to open iOS would introduce all the privacy and security downsides of sideloading while taking away the closed, curated ecosystem that millions of users specifically choose.
Those who prefer an open ecosystem already have Android. Why remove the closed option for those who value it?
The reality is that, despite years of “competition” from Samsung, Amazon, and others, prices haven’t dropped. If even Amazon (one of the most cutthroat companies on earth) couldn’t lower them to gain share, that tells you these fees reflect the actual market rate, not some made-up monopoly tax. Forcing iOS open won’t change that. All of the security and privacy downsides with no benefit to consumers.
But good news everyone! Spotify won't have to pay for using Apple's intellectual property! Now if only regulators would let them not pay those pesky artists for THEIR intellectual property, Spotify would really be in business.
Don't worry, your prices won't go down though.
Well you can’t you say?
The prices have come down. The commissions have lowers on multiple places. Epic has now 0% for everything untill a million, 0% for stores or your own payment system, Microsoft store has 0% on apps, 15% of they use their commerce platform instead of their own and 12% for games.
But indeed on iOS there’s no store competition so nothing to push the prices down🤷♂️
Doesn’t work on mine:
And again, retail sales result in a 30% cut to Sony. Are you ok with Apple getting 30% of sales from the Epic game store? Is Tim Sweeney?
They’re not down on the PlayStore. Just because Epic is subsidizing unsustainable commissions with Fortnite profits doesn’t mean prices have gone down elsewhere.
Well shame then. Hopefully it gets rectified.
I’m okey with Apple getting 30% if epic and others use apples payment and advertising services. It’s abid hard to compete with a store whern you end up with most of the revenue for the developer just taxed away by every layer in the tower before even the 25% VAT. So 30% to Apple then 15% to Epix and the VAT before tax pl the profit occurs… sad really.
Most in app subscriptions and purchases are cheaper on the developers webpage by 10-30% ,
Maybe they should. It would be interesting to see how that business model works out for Tesla. Until governments, of course, start interfering and have them pay huge fines for being anticompetitive.
I mean, I understand where you’re coming from, but it’s not like your local game retailer is using Sony’s payment and advertising services. But Sony still gets their cut, the retailer gets their cut (usually an additional 20-30%), packaging and shipping aren’t free, etc. and the end result is developer/publisher is left with in a lot of cases, significantly less than half the retail price. Which is why the App Store charging 15% to almost all developers is actually a really good deal!
And if they can get people to sign up on their website then that’s great. But the conversion rates on an in app purchase are significantly higher than a website, and that’s value created by the platform owner. It’s only fair they be compensated for that value. I’m all for allowing the developer to say “$15 in app, but you can get it for $10 on our website” in the app.
But I firmly believe the universe where every app requires you to download an alternate store or go to their website and create an account, hand over payment details, etc. isn’t actually better for customers.
I despair of this country. Despite Brexit, we continue to jump on the bandwagon, following Europe into these ludicrous rulings that interfere in a private business. Idiotic politicians pretending they know better than big tech and all the consumers who purchase their devices get right on my nerves.
I don’t want the software on my devices changed by politicians. ENOUGH.
I don’t want the software on my devices changed by politicians. ENOUGH.
Smartphones are more or less a necessity in today's world. You do not have to buy a console to meet your end's needs. A smartphone is needed because everyone including the government is going digital and making apps, and then eventually pretend everyone already uses them so they're given the green light to fire many of their own employees to use AI instead and not bother with those who still prefer physical presence. I'm not saying I like this, but it is how it is, smartphones now hold the hard power in the tech industry.
This is why you can't compare iPhones to PlayStations, you're assuming both are leisures when it's clearly not the case. This is probably gonna stay US-only, but in some cases you need an iphone specifically, not just any smartphone. Compared to a Xiaomi, Oppo or Samsung device where at least you still have the illusion of choice and can do whatever you want with that phone.
well I'm sorry but this line of logic is already outdated. you're free to download from the app store as you always could, everything else is fearmongering
All other discussion points aside, I would hope we can all mostly agree on this one point.
If one is of working age and engaged in society and working life, barring some edge cases here and there, it really is true.
(I say this as someone who doesn't like that fact, at all)
I’m not the type of person I’m worried about. I’m tech savvy. I’m suspicious. Not everyone is. People trust and rely on the simplicity of Apple’s ecosystem to keep them safe. As soon as you forcibly tear down these guardrails you open iOS to the same kind of possibilities that hackers and scammers exploit in Windows and other less secure / less controlled platforms.
The stores at least have actual costs and services directly related. And the developers can open their own stores as well and effectively take all the revenue except the much smaller fee that Xbox or PS would have. And potentially just sell codes in boxes etc.
So for example let’s say the minimum commission that is possible for Apple to run thr AppStore store is 5% to cover any fixed costs such as reviews, networks, servers etc etc, then we have the payment processing that might be another 5%. Then 5% headroom for some variable fees such as Sales tax( Not VAT). That would put it at 10-15% as the lower bounds for either running the store with little to no profits. And anything above that is profit.
And the reason Apple had 30% in the beginning was because the fees was higher back then, let’s say 20% for fixed costs and 5% payment processing and 5% variable fees.
If a developer or competitor thinks they can deliver the same service at the same cost but better, or even cheaper then I think it would be best if they had the opportunity. Just as with physical goods the opportunity is there.
And if they think the conversion rate is high by their own website then that’s a risk they can take. It’s all just a question of how and what Apple can take a fee/ commission for.
Paying for the app in the store I belive Apple can ask for any amount without restriction, the same would be for the IAP function. But let’s say if the developer uses ApplePay or something else, then they will get no access to AppStore data or advertisement. If they use the AppStore icon on their website and the app is either payed or have any in app purchases they pay a 0.5€ IP fee if it’s free in the stores or 5% commission instead of the 30% store fee because the app is discovered outside the store, and the link will do that automatically. And 0 if the app is free without any in app purchases.
I belive that would never come to fruition because of the cost associated with it and will just exist in every store because unless they’re prohibited because of thebstires rules.
I think it can be better as it also allows apple to make more streamlined quality content as it won’t just be the single outlet. Similar how appleTV+ doesn’t compete with Netflix, Amazon,HBO or Disney on the sheer quantity and volume of shows, but more on quality of the shows they also make and include.