Uh, no. The article states that developers asked for this information specifically in their lawsuit, and that's what Apple is providing. I don't understand why they asked for this information, or how it helps anything.
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 Publishes First-Ever App Store Transparency Report
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep, exactly, i don’t buy Apples “transparency“ report. They surely put anticompetitive rejections into the same category.
Maybe I believe if they setup a somewhat anonymized public searchable database with app name, full developer communication, the exact rejection reason and how they identified the fraud.
Last edited:
Well it tells us Apple with Almost 37 million developer accounts , so, about $3.7 billion profit
Of of the 36 billion apple earned from the appstore in 2022
3.7 billion 10% is from developers.
That's a hefty profit just like unused gymmebership cards.
Oh it's actually incredibly valuable information in this report that cab be used with other open source information to get a better understanding of potentiall anti competitive actions by Apple.
And to calculte if Apple taking 30% for in app purchases is a reasonable take or if it's close to pure profit for Apple
Well, we saw this two different ways. Whenever I hear a dev bitching about being rejected, I automatically assume its because they were doing something shady.
No, if you search for MS Authenticator, an Ad for a different app called Authenticator is the top result. An Ad is the first result for pretty much all searches on the App Store for any app with significant download volume, even when the search is for the specific name of an app. The Ad may be one purchased by the app's developer themselves (e.g. Microsoft purchasing an ad for "Microsoft Authenticator"), just to stop a different app from misleading consumers into downloading the wrong app. That's the whole point. It's a nice racket for Apple, though.The Offcial MS app is the top hit if you actually specify it’s the MS app you’re looking for instead of just authenticator
My experience has not been that. I've had Apps rejected because, for example, Apple required blue background and my App had a blue background. Apple still rejected the App for some unknown reason I never found out. For those of you that don't understand, "blue background" was not the issue, but it is intended to represent the nonsense of Apple's response. Each time, I found a way to get a different review team, and magically my app was approved.
All those fraudulent apps will just wait for side loading and wreak havoc in Europe.
Then wait for the EU to cry again.
Then wait for the EU to cry again.
Whether the App Store should have paid ads at all is a valid question.
But the Ad is clearly labeled, has a different colored background, and the publisher namer is not similar to “Microsoft“. In addition, the ad app has < 1000 reviews, while the Microsoft Authenticator has > 200,000. Even a cursory examination would reveal which is the result the OP actually wanted. Do you guys just automatically click the first result in all your Google searches?
You should have to check. It's the same as walking into a car park and jumping in somebody elses car because you were busy/ distracted. The onus is firmly on you to check that an App is the actual app you want. There's hundreds of "paint"/ "office"/ "messaging"/ "music"/ "password manager"/ "authenticator" apps. Picking the wrong one when you know exactly which one, and by which publisher is not Apple's fault.
"fewer than two" ... that is marketing speak. Makes the rest of the numbers less credible.
It’s not mutually exclusive. Apple wants developers to stay inside the App Store because it’s so lucrative, and it can still represent a net benefit to end users in terms of improved security and convenience.
they were providing an example of the problems with search in the App Store.
Having just looked for MS authenticator myself, I can tell you it was tricky to work out which were which, and yes, the rip off came first and has a subscription. Always look at the in app purchases section and who is the developer before downloading an app.
So you’re upset because you clicked on the first app that searching “Authenticator” brought up without paying attention to the fact it’s an ad, the Microsoft Authenticator app has the name “Microsoft” in it, and you didn’t bother looking at the app’s company name that’s literally right underneath the name of the app. But sure, it’s Apples fault.
That’s an issue by Microsoft changing the name of the app NOT Apple.
example: RSA had an Authenticator app for years that was updated during iOS 15-iOS 16 transition and even when installed searching for “SecureID” on device will isolate the app.
Although in the App Store Searching for RSA does reveal the top hit, for the correct app now (and the last 6mths). Prior after the upgrade to “SecureID” Va the former name “RSA Secure ID” would confuse users - an app that I heavily supported switch my last employee on a daily basis for 3yrs!
Rmemeber icons for an app are not the only things that change.
Microsoft’s Authenticator shows up as the 2nd search result after an AD for Google Chrome here in Toronto Canada. But it’s the first APL result using “Authenticator”.
Attachments
Hmm.
So why does a free chat app that has no in-app purchases or other end user revenue stream NEED to know your Financial Data/information??!!
Sounds like data mining.
Attachments
There's Whatsapp payments in some countries.
What do you want to say? Of course they do. It’s impossible to use millions of apps, but there are many regions in the world, so the number is to be expected.
So in total, China removed 159 non-game apps, more than tenfold the amount the second country, India, removed.
Out of the hundreds of games they wanted removed which probably had some proprietary chat module which they could not grind the data directly from.
Out of the hundreds of games they wanted removed which probably had some proprietary chat module which they could not grind the data directly from.
Just like i don’t buy their fraud stats, i don’t buy that all these terminated developer accounts were rightfully terminated.
Remember the “Dash” App? And the Apple call records he released.
The Dash guy just had luck because the App was very popular among developers, and he went public. Apple don’t even gave him the chance to try to explain or to fix the situation. They just cut the communications.
Phil Schiller had to re-enable the account because of public pressure.
But what can a not so very popular App Developer do if he gets his developer account terminated? Yeah nothing!
They look at the 30% earnings of the App, and if less than X, they simply cut the cord and don’t care.
Remember the “Dash” App? And the Apple call records he released.
The Dash guy just had luck because the App was very popular among developers, and he went public. Apple don’t even gave him the chance to try to explain or to fix the situation. They just cut the communications.
Phil Schiller had to re-enable the account because of public pressure.
But what can a not so very popular App Developer do if he gets his developer account terminated? Yeah nothing!
They look at the 30% earnings of the App, and if less than X, they simply cut the cord and don’t care.
Last edited: