Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Protests Call for Third-Party App Stores and Lower Platform Fees in Japan

ss2cire said:
With not paying the $99/year you won’t be able to officially release on iOS App Store nor Mac App Store. Your app won’t be signed either, which means you will probably have a hard time getting anyone to run it. But good luck ??
Click to expand...
Read what I was repying to people. Here is the direct quote:

Apple Charges that $99 to developers even if they don't have an app! What is that covering????

Bolded section is why I responded.
 
Mr. Skeleton said:
Thank you for taking the time to apologize. Your apology is accepted and we can move on from this issue at hand
Click to expand...
I am not the one apologizing or need to apologize. Perhaps you should read the post I was responding to. Here let me help you.

Apple Charges that $99 to developers even if they don't have an app! What is that covering????

This is why I said it was wrong. AND IT IS. I am running XCode RIGHT NOW without giving Apple $0. Bold part is the issue I had with the statement I quoted.
 
Ethosik said:
I am not the one apologizing or need to apologize. Perhaps you should read the post I was responding to. Here let me help you.

Apple Charges that $99 to developers even if they don't have an app! What is that covering????

This is why I said it was wrong. AND IT IS. I am running XCode RIGHT NOW without giving Apple $0. Bold part is the issue I had with the statement I quoted.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t seem wrong to me. I paid $99 once just to use the beta, worth it. I think I paid the $99 fee 3 times.

Made one app that made $77, and then got $250 from the apple developer lawsuit.

So I seemed to even out here!
 
Mr. Skeleton said:
Doesn’t seem wrong to me. I paid $99 once just to use the beta, worth it. I think I paid the $99 fee 3 times.

Made one app that made $77, and then got $250 from the apple developer lawsuit.

So I seemed to even out here!
Click to expand...
You said you made an app. The person I quoted said Apple charges you even if you don't make apps. That is what I had an issue with on his statement. XCode is free.
 
Ethosik said:
You said you made an app. The person I quoted said Apple charges you even if you don't make apps. That is what I had an issue with on his statement. XCode is free.
Click to expand...
I didn’t even make an app, was a stick pack.

So can we conclude our business here?
 
Post 403.....

"Made one app that made $77"

What is the third word here? You said you made an app, am I supposed to be a mid reader when you did not say sticker packs until a LATER post?!

My gosh people.
 
Ethosik said:
Post 403.....

"Made one app that made $77"

What is the third word here? You said you made an app, am I supposed to be a mid reader when you did not say sticker packs until a LATER post?!

My gosh people.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is correct. I made a sticker pack app application
 
Okay lets just stop this and be clear - XCode is completely free to download and use. You do NOT need to pay $99 UNLESS you want to distribute and sign your apps. I am currently using XCode free of charge $0 to Apple.

Clear? This clears up the post two or three pages back now that said even if you don't have an app you need to pay $99 which you don't.
 
paradox00 said:
Microsoft owns Windows, but they wouldn't be able to get away with restricting apps to their own store. There are a similar number of iOS devices in use worldwide as there are Windows devices in use. For any "they aren't a monopoly" arguments: I've described how iOS users are a captive market in another lengthy post, so I'm not going to repeat myself here. At the end of the day, there are well over 1 billion active users in the iOS market, and I view any argument that Apple is somehow entitled to 15- 30% of all transactions in that market for eternity as absurd.

Why is it absurd? Apple opened up the App Store to third party developers so they could a) develop less software and b) advertise that their phones have thousands of apps (now much more). Without developers, Apple's iPhone sales would be horrible at this point, probably single digit percentages of what they are now. Apple would be toiling away trying in vain to make enough apps to compete with Android's third party ecosystem, but there's no way they could do that on their own.

The cumulative development hours that third party developers have collectively put into building the iOS ecosystem massively dwarfs the time Apple has put into doing the same. The idea that Apple is responsible for 30% of that revenue is absurd if you think of it in terms development time spent. If Apple took a 0% cut they'd still have disproportionate gains based on man-hours put into it, just because of all the extra iOS devices they were able to sell. Apple deserves credit for creating a revolutionary device, and for making it so developer friendly. They have been rewarded massively in hardware sales because of it, but they are also massively overstating their role when it comes to third party software sales revenue.
Click to expand...
I don't think "they don't deserve it" is a good argument for why they are a monopoly.
 
coachgq said:
It’s simple to me. Without apple, where is Spotify going to get subscribers? The web and android? How much would that cost them? If the built a phone that people wanted then apple couldn’t sell their music software in the Spotify App Store without giving a cut. Dave’s killer bread has to give up a cut to sell at Walmart. It’s the same thing. If Dave wants to build a store for just his bread he gives up nothing to anyone.
Click to expand...
That is your point of view. But, let me ask you. Who in the world would buy a $1000 iPhone without Insta, Twitter, WhatsApp, Signal, Spotify? Without GMaps? Exactly - nearly on one …

So Apple already gets a huge piece of the cake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Zdigital2015 said:
No you can’t…almost all shops charge the exact $59.99 for a brand new game when it comes out and for sometime afterwards.
Click to expand...
Yes i can. And there are for physicsl disks for the PC, Xbox and PlayStation.
5A0638B1-97F9-4098-AEF0-791482E728EC.png89E6C435-E600-451D-9D3D-6027D5995102.png

Or for online keys.
D7DCA62D-ED85-435C-A3D8-46418381EE9C.jpeg7C1CE928-718F-43EF-BC19-A10AEC0A8510.jpeg

It’s almost you make things up. These are Swedish price where I live and euro prices for steam. I have multiple options to buy games for different prices sometimes more sometimes less differences etc. some stores give you something extra with the games and others don’t. And then I haven’t even talked about the ability to buy discountes games customers returned to some stores.
 

Attachments

  • 581720F5-D46F-4E84-87D1-DA35FEAF77C2.png
    581720F5-D46F-4E84-87D1-DA35FEAF77C2.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 59
  • Like
Reactions: user002
Speaking of consoles...

We all know there are multiple stores to buy XBox and Playstation discs: Walmart, Target, GameStop, online, whatever.

But don't Microsoft and Sony get 30% from every purchase... regardless of which store you use? Physical or digital?

And that's the issue, right? The fees?

It doesn't matter if there are 1, 2, or 10 stores to buy games from... if the platform must take their cut.

I thought that's what this whole thing was all about: developers hating fees.

So the question is... if Microsoft and Sony can collect 30% from a game sold at Target... why can't Apple collect 30% from an app sold on "Frank's App Store" ?

?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zdigital2015
gnipgnop said:
Spotify was lying about that. 99% of their subscribers on iOS are paying via the internet and aren't subject to the commission. That came out as part of the discovery process in Spotify's EU complaint against Apple.
Click to expand...
Spotify didn’t lie. The 1% are grandfathered in. Spotify haven’t allow IAP for 5 years or more
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
jameslmoser said:
Nothing about the proposed regulations is saying that if a developer chooses to use Apple's Store, payment options, etc, that Apple can't keep charging what they are charging. Apple Charges that $99 to developers even if they don't have an app! What is that covering????
Click to expand...
Every Mac developer and cydia distribution doesn’t pay 99$ to apple
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
dk001 said:
Think you missed the predecessor to these ... this was if there was a 3rd party app store (Apple forced to allow) - what or should Apple charge anything for Apps that never saw the App Store and sold 3rd party only.
Click to expand...
I see. It would have to be more than 30% due to the additional expenses. Maybe 60%, but I could see Apple having an argument for taking more.
 
gnipgnop said:
The mobile store section runs from page 93 to 100 and the mobile OS section runs from 100 to 106.

Generally speaking, it's not focused on consumer related issues beyond claiming that there are "high costs to switching" for mobile users and that mobile users don't often switch between platforms. Personally, I would question the "high costs to switching" part since phones are not generally more expensive than desktops/laptops and the software involved with mobile is definitely cheaper. Like I've mentioned, they don't try to do any comparisons for standard consumer issues like price, quality, selection and satisfaction.

They also don't really praise Google/Android as being any better than Apple/iOS when it comes to the mobile stores or operating systems. The report includes this section:

"Similarly, the ability for consumers to sideload apps—installing apps without using an app store—does not discipline the dominance of Apple and Google in the mobile app store market. Apple does not permit users to sideload apps on iOS devices, and few consumers have the technical savvy to “jailbreak” an iOS device to sideload apps.514 Google does permit sideloading on Android devices, but developers find that given the option, consumers prefer to install apps from app stores and few opt for sideloading.515 Google has created significant friction for sideloading apps to Android devices. One developer explained to Subcommittee staff that sideloading entails a complicated twenty-step process, and users encounter multiple security warnings designed to discourage sideloading.516 Additionally, software developers that have left the Play Store to distribute software to Android users via sideloading have experienced precipitous declines in downloads and revenue and report problems updating their apps.517

Thus, the option for sideloading apps on mobile devices does not discipline the market power of dominant app stores."
Click to expand...
515 Google has created significant friction for sideloading apps to Android devices. One developer explained to Subcommittee staff that sideloading entails a complicated twenty-step process, and users encounter multiple security warnings designed to discourage sideloading.
This is not right even remotely. It's a two or three step process, at the maximum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back