To be honest, I’ve been wondering about which are the guy’s apps too. I don’t exactly like the arrogant tone he used in the first page, so I’d just want to know which apps to avoid in the future. As for review bombing, shame on anyone who does that.
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 Pays $100 Million to Settle Developer Lawsuit and Agrees to Multiple App Store Changes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is not true at all. If I bought something directly, I easily call my credit card company to reverse the transaction if something was a scam.
With Apple, it is a pain to get your money back because they refuse it most of the time. And they will block your Apple account if you do a chargeback on your credit card which would normally be an easy way to get your money back.
It looks good to me. They must be more positive for their platform. These changes will help. There will be some who want the world and won't settle, but they won't get what they want no matter what changes happen. Being unreasonable and stubborn won't make things work.
Yes, and they can sell on the AppStore. They can also sell on Android if they don’t like the AppStore. You said developers wanted a choice, and that is the definition of choice. In this case, a non-exclusive choice. The can sell on one, the other, or both.
Apple’s AppStore is pro-competitive. With the AppStore there are at least two business models competing— Apple’s and the various Android stores. Without the AppStore, there is essentially one business model given a monopoly by government fiat.
And you do know why people are defending the current model, because we are all telling you why we are defending the current model: we like it. Some like it as developers, some like it as customers.
If you don’t like it, there is another model you can avail yourself of. Why salt the fields?
I‘m a lot less sympathetic towards Apple‘s position on a lot of things these days (adding spyware, releasing software with all changes scaled back until the only new thing is … spyware 🙄), so for the most part, screw ‘em.
But the great thing about the App Store payment system is it‘s always been easy to get refund on crappy apps, and convenient to see all your subscriptions in one place, and cancel them If you want to. Consumers like the convenience of the one-stop shop, and I’m not sure they’ll be happy to let it go.
Only the larger devs will create their own payment/subscription system; the other 95% will tie up with a third party system which will probably undercut Apple for a few years until they’ve built up a massive base of devs who can’t leave without losing their customers … and that’s when the trouble starts.
There were a lot of these stores around when Palm Pilots were a thing, and Windows Mobile was almost a thing. The devs weren’t happy then either, because outfits like Handango were taking at least half the sticker price on every sale.
So while “Rotting-Apple” me says, “Have at it!”, the “Developer-Friendly” me thinks devs should research what things were like before the Apple Store, to make sure the grass will continue to be greener elsewhere.
Handango revises developer agreement, developers despair at increased cut
Crikey, it's tough being a Windows Mobile developer. If making a go of it in the WinMo software market isn't hard enough in itself, then the biggest and baddest software shop in the ecosystem is right there to make your life harder by taking a sizeable chunk of your earnings! From an email recent...
www.modaco.com
Yes, that’s a 50% minimum cut, rising to 70% if your sales hit a million dollars.
Aaah, the good old days.
Last edited:
I‘m not sure that everyone‘s experience matches your own. The only time I have been refused is if I bought the app through an in-app purchase having tried it out. Every other time, they’ve refunded it without a problem. That’s my experience anyway.
I hope this increased flexibility allows developers the ability to expand upon the options that App owners have with their favorite apps. As a example, seems like a smaller game company could offer specific purchases taking place outside of the app store to support their profitability better then paying Apple for just trying to capitalize on the popularity of user customization of a game. The same would be true for someone selling a utility App that wants to market a package of add-ins at a discount.
Whilst this is clearly an effort to head off the many cases being bought against Apple and its App Store, which I don't think it will do.
This, I think, would have lost them the case in court as it is complete control and monopolistic to force developers to not be allowed to inform customers of other ways to pay for their services, other then the App Store:
'Under the terms of the deal, Apple will let developers use communication methods like email to tell customers about payment methods available outside of iOS apps'
I guess those iPhone 13 price increases are real?
This, I think, would have lost them the case in court as it is complete control and monopolistic to force developers to not be allowed to inform customers of other ways to pay for their services, other then the App Store:
'Under the terms of the deal, Apple will let developers use communication methods like email to tell customers about payment methods available outside of iOS apps'
I guess those iPhone 13 price increases are real?
Perception is a funny thing, I love it though.
ive reread your post above vs your earlier post in this thread and Im understanding they’re on either side of this agreement. I mean your analogy I quoted above seems to fit with Apple (owner of front/back yard), to be paid fair price according to how much you make. I must be seeing this wrong, right?? Riiight?
either way for both sides it works & agreed.
yes but the OS and other related sw (modem controll etc) is owned by apple and licenced to the user under the terms set by, DingDing Ding Apple so unless the license, which you agree to when activating the phone) is legal apple still has A lot of power. I'm no legal expert so I'll not comment on the specifics. So if apple decides not to allow additional app stores to run on their os (maybe the'll have to change the license so older phones may get the functionality), utimatly that has to be tried in court
Your comment is exactly what I would expect from someone review bombing a app.
Users should have to opt in to marketing, not opt out. This is not very clear if Apple are opting user in by default. My relationship is with Apple, not the developer of the app.
“Under the terms of the deal, Apple will let developers use communication methods like email to tell customers about payment methods available outside of iOS apps”
I find incredible how these kinds of speech gags are even possible for so so long amongst intelligent people.
This is a lousy deal for devs enriching Apple properties. Apple got these developers exactly were the company wants them to be, servants. I wonder who effectively is behind this lawsuit considering the current world wide discussions on the topic … hummm … very convenient. Anyway, two unknown devs from nowhere … $100M? They can now retire.
I find incredible how these kinds of speech gags are even possible for so so long amongst intelligent people.
This is a lousy deal for devs enriching Apple properties. Apple got these developers exactly were the company wants them to be, servants. I wonder who effectively is behind this lawsuit considering the current world wide discussions on the topic … hummm … very convenient. Anyway, two unknown devs from nowhere … $100M? They can now retire.
Last edited:
Developer here. I have a paid app on the store since 2009. Happy since day one with the global sales opportunity Apple has offered. Can't even imagine how I would have ever reached such a large audience without the ecosystem build by Apple. Sure it would have been nice if the commission was 15% or less from day one but at the end it doesn't matter. For a one-person developer without global sales/marketing resources/budget, the $99/year+30% (now 15%) commission is a no brainer!
There is nothing, neither technically nor legally, preventing a developer from sending out emails to their customers. Only thing they need to do is get their users to register or other way provide their contact details.
So maybe the deal here is that Apple is offering to add a new API for apps to contact anonymous users via email. That would be more than just speech and a real valuable enhancement to the platform. I would love to get an email out to the users of my app. But since I don't require any form of registration, there is no way I can do that UNLESS Apple creates a new 'communication methode'. Sounds like this is exactly what they have committed to do!
Yes, get all the benefits and systems of the iPhone platform without actually having to pay for it. See, that's what it comes down to.
It's not about rights. It's not about choice. It's about not wanting to actually have to pay for things. It's like wanting nice roads, but refusing to pay taxes to pay for them.
Yeah. That's how the world works. If they decide they're done, you have to decide to find something new or follow them, not throw a fit that you want things your way.
That's precious. And in a followup, your company isn't even part of the case. You're not one of sample litigants that forms the class and is part of the suit..you "plan" to sign on.... But I'm sure your letter will make the prosecution lawyers who've hammered out a deal with Apple to suddenly change their mind.
I agree.
So, an "even better business opportunity for developers" in Apple's own words, but something that they were resisting and it took a class-action lawsuit ruling for them to adopt?
- 3.1.3 Other Purchase Methods: … Developers cannot use information obtained within the app to target individual users outside of the app to use purchasing methods other than in-app purchase (such as sending an individual user an email about other purchasing methods after that individual signs up for an account within the app). Developers can send communications outside of the app to their user base about purchasing methods other than in-app purchase.
But hey. It looks like a “nice” settlement. You know, Apple allowing devs do what they can already do. Weird.
Last edited:
Uh, you do realize that Google also charges pretty much the same percentage fees to developers as Apple, right? And Target and Wal-Mart also do not pay their suppliers the exact price they charge you, they take a cut. That is sort of how stores work.
Lots of stuff Apple does bugs me, but the idea of them setting up a storefront and selling apps for developers, and handling all the hosting and payment processing while only taking 30% for it was a pretty amazing concept a decade ago. Do you have any idea how much CodeWarrior used to cost, just to try to develop a program?
Every time I asked for a return I was given. I did not ask for it much though. Once a year or so?
Last time was two months ago. There is a music lesson service, costs 100 a year. Subscribed once for a year and forgot to cancel the subscription before renewal … we simply haven’t been using it for months.
For me in that regard the App Store works quite well.
The Coalition for App Fairness's view ...
"Apple’s sham settlement offer is nothing more than a desperate attempt to avoid the judgment of courts, regulators, and legislators worldwide. This offer does nothing to address the structural, foundational problems facing all developers, large and small, undermining innovation and competition in the app ecosystem".
Apple's sham settlement offer.
"Apple’s sham settlement offer is nothing more than a desperate attempt to avoid the judgment of courts, regulators, and legislators worldwide. This offer does nothing to address the structural, foundational problems facing all developers, large and small, undermining innovation and competition in the app ecosystem".
Apple's sham settlement offer.
Now that small developers only have to give a 15% cut for everything Apple offers... I wonder what it would cost if they were responsible for renting their own server, building a website, managing user accounts, handling taxes in 100 countries, etc. Seems like it would take a lot of time... and time is money.
I realize a lot of it would depend on how much data the app was using... the bandwidth if users were downloading gigabytes of data, for instance. But I'd still be curious to know a general idea of what it would cost to host and sell a simple app yourself.
One big thing... you'd be paying for a server every month.... whether someone buys your app or not! I'm sure there are cheap servers out there... but not everyone can be a sysadmin. Nor would they want to commit to monthly server rent when they are just launching their first app... or deal with installing e-commerce software or managing data buckets.
Thankfully... Apple provides a nice neat all-in-one solution. You don't have to worry about any of that technical stuff. It's great for small developers. And you only have to pay a small fee after you sell something.
As for large developers who can do it all themselves... or for those who are selling digital content (things like Kindle books or VBucks) yeah I can see why they balk at the 30% fee.
I realize a lot of it would depend on how much data the app was using... the bandwidth if users were downloading gigabytes of data, for instance. But I'd still be curious to know a general idea of what it would cost to host and sell a simple app yourself.
One big thing... you'd be paying for a server every month.... whether someone buys your app or not! I'm sure there are cheap servers out there... but not everyone can be a sysadmin. Nor would they want to commit to monthly server rent when they are just launching their first app... or deal with installing e-commerce software or managing data buckets.
Thankfully... Apple provides a nice neat all-in-one solution. You don't have to worry about any of that technical stuff. It's great for small developers. And you only have to pay a small fee after you sell something.
As for large developers who can do it all themselves... or for those who are selling digital content (things like Kindle books or VBucks) yeah I can see why they balk at the 30% fee.
Except you’re wrong. If anything, I only add to ignore lists and even if I order something and it comes in a bad condition, I’d rather solve it via support than place a quantity of negative reviews.