I don't equate app and app developer. And why would Apple be considered a developer? Just so I know, which non-stock Apple Apps use private APIs?
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 Offered to Halve App Store Fee to Get Amazon Prime Video on iOS and Apple TV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't equate app and app developer. And why would Apple be considered a developer? Just so I know, which non-stock Apple Apps use private APIs?
When Tim said "rules are applied to developers equally" i would assume that means rules including 30% revenue share. unless of course Tim is being a double-talking hypocrite.
Don't get me wrong. I don't really care that much about Apple's app store policies - i don't personally find them to be a big deal and i think these probes and lawsuits are kind of frivolous. But what I'm not down with is lying and being hypocritical and that's what i see here.
You might not but most people will. Cook knows that. Also why does it matter if it’s a stock app or not? Doesn’t Apple now offer the ability to remove some stock apps (you can add back via the App Store)?
I think some in this thread need a reminder: Tim Cook is not himself an infallible Apple product. It is ok to criticize. It makes Apple a better company, or at least paves the road, vocalizing that they can do better.
The fallacious question you meant to ask is "Has *every* developer been offered the option to seek exemption?" and I think we already know that the answer is no.
Who was denied the option to submit a request?
[automerge]1596122450[/automerge]
I don't think most people would consider Apple a developer.
The issue is that Tim claimed they treat all developers the same. Amazon having an app on AppStore makes them a "developer", and they get a lower negotiated deal... making Tim a liar.
I understand that you're trying to move the goalpost of the discussion to fit a narrative but the article states that "apple offered to halve app store fee" -- we're not really talking about the option to ask. We're talking about an offer. If you'd like to discuss the topic at hand that'd be great lets do it.
Another special deal which goes against their "everyone is treated exactly the same" lie.
The AppStore dominates because it's the ONLY application store for iOS devices.
Apple has no competitor for iOS app distribution. So it's more of a "take it or leave it" situation than one of trust.
So if anyone can submit a request to get an exemption that means they’re all treated the same even if Apple only grants the exception to certain developers? Look we all know certain developers are going to get preferential treatment. Apple needs Spotify and Netflix on it’s platform more than some small indie developer. So Cook shouldn’t make the argument everyone is treated the same when we all know they’re not.
So it's not fair because Apple didn't ask first? Come on. Name one similar app that was not available on the app store but was not offered a lower rate? Most apps video apps either agreed to the offer or are not a comparable app.
[automerge]1596123988[/automerge]
Anyone can ask. Doesn't mean they will get what they want. They all go through the same process to convince Apple it's worth making an exception.
[automerge]1596124046[/automerge]
It's not the only App Store for iOS, but it's the only official one. That should be worth a lot to developers. Although, many developers probably wish it was the only one.
Nope. 15% is very reasonable.
He thinks he has a "gotcha" argument but is really just trying to ignore the obvious inequality on the app store. It's the same thing people do when they say everyone in the U.S. has the same opportunity to make something of themselves while ignoring the fact that the whole system is stacked in favor of the wealthy. Like, yeah technically the opportunity is there but when you make it impossible for the small guy to actually compete, is it really an opportunity?
I agree. I wish I'd gotten anything close to that on some of the software I've done over the years. I only got 20% for the first $100k of sales, and 25% after that. I just didn't have to ability to pitch to school districts on my own. It's a very narrow market. At least it helped me buy some food and wine during the past two decades.
It's Apple's right to make deals with other companies. That's how business works. Find middle ground that mutually helps both sides.
[automerge]1596126026[/automerge]
[automerge]1596126026[/automerge]
It's not "an app". It's a full on service. They both made concessions and found middle ground. That's how adults do business.
I dont think that's what most people are arguing. Apple says they treat all developers equally then they go and offer sweetheart deals behind the scenes making them dishonest at best.
Get back down off your high horse and go reread the statement - you’re getting outraged over your misinterpretation of the statement, rather than what it actually says.
That’s metadata about the Amazon content (show titles, who’s in it, what year it was filmed) being shared from Amazon TO Apple, so that Siri can answer questions and do searches. It has nothing to do with data about customers (or their Siri queries) being shared in either direction.
It always gets me when someone states “the customer ultimately pays...” as if they’re revealing the ‘horrors’ of the business world.
Everything ANY company in world EVER does is ultimately paid for by customers, so I’m at a loss trying to understand what point you’re trying to make.
On the flip side, anything you do in life is paid for by the company you work for.
At the end of the day, saying that the ‘the customer ultimately pays’ is not only obvious, but it’s the only way anything in business COULD work.
Last edited:
I thought Amazon realized how many Amazon Prime customers want it's App on Apple platform. But, Amazon is evil and Amazon didn't listen customers crying for Prime App support on Apple platform but money. I never care Amazon Prime and now Walmart has same or better price on products and pick up from local store; I shop online and in store at walmart.
As the article states, “ ...documents published by the U.S. antitrust subcommittee have revealed.”
I don't know what or who is right. For what I know I have the VUDU app on appletv and watch what I own, but can't buy anything.. but on my Vizio tv app I can buy stuff on it so does vizio get a cut or different deal? Same with other apps. I don't use google or amazon or windows devices is it the same? I subscribe to Netflix through apple but I don't keep it active just a few months at a time when I watch some new series on it and then turn it off because I have enough stuff to watch... so they pay 30% and never 15%. But if you sign up through Netflix online its the same price. So they lose 15-30% revenue for the easy signup. I suppose its just the cost of doing business, like my restaurant we deliver ourselves but I'm active on doordash and bitesquad even though they take 30% commission its for those users who only use those services, I don't advertise that I use them and I still get $15k a month in payments from them. Yes I lose ~$7000 but not many of those would order anyway and some convert.