Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Y'all, don't you think that Apple is going to want to keep apps in the AppStore?

I very much doubt they'll allow the ecosystem to fracture into 1000s of stores

Meaning that, now that they have to compete, they'll lower their cut and meet devs halfway until devs are more inclined to stay on the AppStore than move off



We can already see this happening with the current terms: the store fees in EU have been lowered from 30% to 20% max (to be precise: 17% + a 3% processing fee, afaik)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AstonSmith
I'm semi-pro capitalist and semi-pro free market.

Capitalists don't want competition. They want monopolies or companies with a big moat. It the easiest and surest way to make money.

Free market means non-regulated (or at least a minimum of regulation). Are there many free markets? No, very few if any, but increasing government regulations, doesn't make it more free, but more regulated.

Maybe you're confusing free with fair?

I'm certainly not a big champion of government regulations to achieve fair markets when such regulations benefits mostly other companies which are capitalist themselves.



Apple can indeed be the beneficiary of the liberties of a free market even though itself acts to limit it for others. It kind of follows from the definition of free.

You probably believe there must be some kind of symmetry here.
Actually no, the argument you’ve presented is not logically conclusive and there is a conflation between free and fair and regulated.

In a free market, where there is no government regulation, there is no way to establish a monopoly. When there is free competition, no single seller will have exclusive control over an industry.

Is there a truly free market anywhere? Not in an official capacity. Just as there is no perfect democracy etc. but it is an ideal we strive for. Fostering competition revitalizes the market and keeps the system of supply and demand healthy.

When any single entity has a choke hold over an industry (if it’s not endorsed or enabled by government regulations, like copyright and patents or exclusive licensing) then it is usually short lived and stifles the market for a time.

Monopolies are never healthy products of a free market and they can only be established WITH regulatory support from government bodies. As contrary as that may seem it is indeed true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR



It was actually Berthseda with their elder scrolls game that started micro transactions in 2006….



Then EA did it with FIFA in 2009.

As I said in my earlier post. The big games consoles started to realise how much money there was in this model and pushed on Apple to allow for micro transactions. I think they were probably in their games already but were paid for outside the AppStore. Obviously Apple wants their cut so needed to make micro transactions an official way to pay

The games companies started this mess.

Publicly that is what most people are aware of. But as an industry insider and someone who worked on these projects since 2003 I can tell you it was fostered by the telecom companies as it was directly related to their existing model of business.

The gaming companies were encouraged by the telecom providers to make their mobile games utilize microtransactions as they made money on every transaction. Just as Apple does today.

Heck even Apple simply adopted the same 30 percent revenue share model the telecom companies had been charging for their mobile marketplaces for years beforehand.
 
Actually no, the argument you’ve presented is not logically conclusive and there is a conflation between free and fair and regulated.

In a free market, where there is no government regulation, there is no way to establish a monopoly. When there is free competition, no single seller will have exclusive control over an industry.

Is there a truly free market anywhere? Not in an official capacity. Just as there is no perfect democracy etc. but it is an ideal we strive for. Fostering competition revitalizes the market and keeps the system of supply and demand healthy.

When any single entity has a choke hold over an industry (if it’s not endorsed or enabled by government regulations, like copyright and patents or exclusive licensing) then it is usually short lived and stifles the market for a time.

Monopolies are never healthy products of a free market and they can only be established WITH regulatory support from government bodies. As contrary as that may seem it is indeed true.
You're missing the whole dynamic of oligopolistic behaviour, barriers to entry, and market failure.
Almost every market has some form of failure, hence the need for government intervention in an at least minimal way (e.g. ensuring enforceability of contracts). Some have more extensive systemic failures, and warrant more intervention to make the market some way competitive.
Software licencing and IP is an interesting area - it's designed to protect the inventor from predatory practice by competitors, but sometimes it seems the tech market is being strangled by IP and abusive software licencing. Maybe instead of regulating the market, governments should reduce the protections awarded to IP. IP is an artificial construct after all, a property right constructed by governments.

For the moment the EU has chosen to go the market route.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lyrics23
Just answer the question: why are Apple so bitterly fighting and denouncing the regulation? Instead of, you know, just complying and providing a better service/store that consumers trust, at competitive rates - also known as competing?

Do you really believe they’re doing it out of the goodness of their hearts, for consumers safety and convenience? 🤣
Put yourself in Apple's shoes. What exactly is there to like about it?

I think what really irks Apple isn't so much the money part (though money is important too), but the loss of control, and I have a suspicion it goes all the way back to the 1997 keynote at Macworld, where Steve Jobs announced Apple's partnership to Microsoft (to a fair amount of booing, IIRC). Never again would Apple be held hostage to an app that was bigger than Apple, which is possibly a factor why Apple Music was set up as a hedge against Spotify, the same way you had iWork's as an alternative to Office.

At a basic level, I believe Apple doesn’t think companies should be able to use the Apple ecosystem as they see fit, including acquiring users and generating revenue, and then not compensate Apple for its own work and efforts. That's partly why the CTF was introduced for apps that choose either a reduced commission or alternative App Store placement.

Apple sees it as their platform and their IP, with a right to monetise it as they deem fit. For the EU to just come in and attempt to negate everything with a wave of their hand is an affront to everything Apple has stood for over the last few decades.

The other not-so-subtle intent of the CTF is to preserve the status quo and keep small and medium developers on the existing terms, which Apple likely believes are better for consumers. On a broader level, I am fairly optimistic that most customers and developers will choose not to interact with the DMA and instead opt to stick with the status quo. The DMA will likely not have a material impact on Apple's financial picture. Rather, I feel that this is all about Apple doing what they think is right in trying to protect consumers.

The other issue is that Apple must not only allow EU competitors to leverage the iOS platform but also ensure competitors don’t act in bad faith to harm Apple users. To put it another way, Apple continues to bear the costs of vetting apps destined for third party app stores, but are unable to block them for objectionable content. If you thought that piracy was bad in the App Store, what happens when duplicate apps appear in third party app stores that Apple has zero veto power over?

Also, yes, Apple does block some apps which users may think are fine, like emulators (though Nintendo recently just had one struck down), but you are also looking at stuff like vaping, pornography, extreme hate speech and gambling.

This, admittedly, is in part what has me (a little) worried about Apple. If it were just about the money, I am pretty confident that Tim Cook, rational as he is, would know when to cut his losses. I am starting to wonder if Apple truly believes they are the reason why iOS developers even enjoy the success that they do, and are defending that righteous tenet with the fervour of a true believer. How far will Apple go with regard to defending that tenet?

I guess we will know in time, and probably sooner than later. :confused:
 
One thing is clear: If there’s one entity that does not want to compete, it’s Apple. They’re anticompetitive.

Just answer the question: why are Apple so bitterly fighting and denouncing the regulation? Instead of, you know, just complying and providing a better service/store that consumers trust, at competitive rates - also known as competing?
LOL...mobile already has the lowest software prices of any computing platform. If you're expecting companies to lower prices because they don't pay a commission anymore or have different credit card processing you're in for a rude surprise. Look at Spotify/Netflix: they moved all the subscription payments to the web where there's 0% commission + their own card processing and there aren't any incredible bargains to be had for consumers.
 
Last edited:
If you're American I quite frankly don't see how it affects you or anyone else around you since the changes aren't coming to your devices yet
It affects me because.

1. I hate USB c. I actually refuse to use usb c and solely wirelessly charge my phone

2. I don’t want or need RCS.

Hopefully it will be EU only. And if not, hopefully it can be turned off.

3. Hopefully App Stores will stay over there because I don’t want to have to worry about installing my apps from a 3rd party. I prefer apple App Store.

4. The EU is trying to butcher iOS and turn it into an android fragmented mess. The more involved they get the more annoying iPhones will become.

Nothing they are mandating benefits me or millions of others and instead enthusiasts who refuse to buy android but want to butcher iOS to become like it.
 
LOL...mobile already has the lowest software prices of any computing platform. If you're expecting companies to lower prices because they don't pay a commission anymore or have different credit card processing you're in for a rude surprise. Look at Spotify/Netflix: they moved all the subscription payments to the web where there's 0% commission + their own card processing and there aren't any incredible bargains to be had for consumers.

Back when Spotify premium subscriptions were available through the App Store, they were charging customers a 30% higher price to subscribe through the App Store. It was cheaper to subscribe through Spotify's website. Therefore, if the App Store commission was lowered Spotify would presumably charge the lower price to those customers.
 
It affects me because.

1. I hate USB c.
That's another piece of legislation. Forward your complaints to Apple as they have chosen to implement it worldwide. Though I suspect they were already planning on switching sooner or later, seeing as their MacBook and iPad Pro lineups had already switched over.
I actually refuse to use usb c and solely wirelessly charge my phone
You do you.
I don’t want or need RCS.
Ok? You do know it's disabled by default, right? Also, it only affects you if you text people without iPhones with the default messaging app.
Hopefully App Stores will stay over there because I don’t want to have to worry about installing my apps from a 3rd party. I prefer apple App Store.
As I've already told you, third party app stores are limited to the EU for the time being. Besides, you could keep using the app store even if that weren't true.
The EU is trying to butcher iOS and turn it into an android fragmented mess. The more involved they get the more annoying iPhones will become.
enthusiasts who refuse to buy android but want to butcher iOS to become like it
You quite clearly don't know what "fragmented" means in this context. Or what Android is, for the matter.
Nothing they are mandating benefits [...] millions of others
You don't know that. Or have you talked to those millions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It most certainly does not-- two totally different jurisdictions.

More importantly, it doesn't change the character of the individual actors-- who is more of "a jerk" in your phrasing. Epic's violation of terms makes them an untrustworthy party. That doesn't change in the new arena with different rules-- Epic made clear they don't care about rules, so there's no reason to expect them to care about these.
Apple makes it clear it doesn't care about rules 🙄
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samplasion
Personally as an American I find this Eu nonsense annoying and the butchering of iOS to make it android like is asinine
Well, there is plenty of American nonsense for you to get your teeth stuck into if what’s happening in Europe is upsetting you so much.
I hate USB c. I actually refuse to use usb c and solely wirelessly charge my phone
That’s just… well, up to you I suppose.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems like it's only "Us vs Them" in the minds of very passionate Apple fans. Most are not on a side, those who are happy with the gatekeeper decision might also be unhappy with other EU decisions, like asking for an encryption backdoor. A lot of them probably still enjoy Apple's vertical integration, too (I don't anymore, but I understand the appeal). It's not all black and white.

It's not even about the EU, this is happening worldwide, the RCS thing was mandated by China, and that's going to be great since I can finally text internationally without needing to download Line or WeChat or something. I don't even understand what the downside is supposed to be outside of some bizarre tribalism.
 
Back when Spotify premium subscriptions were available through the App Store, they were charging customers a 30% higher price to subscribe through the App Store. It was cheaper to subscribe through Spotify's website. Therefore, if the App Store commission was lowered Spotify would presumably charge the lower price to those customers.
Spotify only used IAP on iOS for two years. The reality is that they always preferred 0% commission and were never a very good example of anticompetitive behavior by Apple. How do people think Spotify had 99% of their subscribers on iOS signed up through the web? It was the standard method for them. Their customers were much more accustomed to web payments than using IAP.
 
My take is that Apple and Google have too much control over mobile operating systems, and that their tight grip is hampering innovation and stifling competition. That's why I support efforts to make better rules for this "App Economy". The proposed legislation is the first attempt at this, certainly not perfect, but a first step. I'm also confident that other developed countries will swiftly follow with similar laws, with the US likely being a laggard, because of a much more laissez-faire type of economic policy.
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy and Lyrics23
You quite clearly don't know what "fragmented" means in this context. Or what Android is, for the matter.
I’ve used android for 16 years. It’s been a fragmented mess and shockingly Apple is going that way.

Every time someone criticizes android thr argument is “you don’t know android”

It’s an (overrated) mess of a mobile os. It’s not researching the cure for cancer or hiv. It’s not complicated lmao.
 
I dunno, after living under that clean, sterile, utopian dictatorship for so long I kind of started finding the idea of messy freedom rather endearing. It's not perfect, it's a bit clunky, but it's yours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR
My take is that Apple and Google have too much control over mobile operating systems, and that their tight grip is hampering innovation and stifling competition. That's why I support efforts to make better rules for this "App Economy". The proposed legislation is the first attempt at this, certainly not perfect, but a first step. I'm also confident that other developed countries will swiftly follow with similar laws, with the US likely being a laggard, because of a much more laissez-faire type of economic policy.
And yet….There are literally millions of apps and a vibrant iOS ecosystem (I won’t speak of the mess called Android).

So who exactly was “stifled”? What amazing “innovation” was denied?

Oh, you mean Spotify couldn’t link to their own website in the app? Or Epic couldn’t sell V-Bucks direct to kids?

That’s the “innovation” you missed? 🤔
 
The systems that make the iPhone work are the hardware, the OS, and the APIs that make application development possible. The store isn't needed for any app to run. Apple absolutely is a middle-man when it comes to selling Apps. Just because they are the only middle-man (because they mandated themselves into that position) doesn't mean that their store is such an integral part of the OS that it has to exist in order for apps to exist. Decades of OS APIs existing without being tied to stores prior to and after the invention of the iPhone makes such a notion ridiculous on its face.
Indeed, but the App Store makes the experience *better for Apple’s customers*.

Is Apple looking out for themselves too? of course! That’s what a company is supposed to do.

But if you think fragmenting the iOS ecosystem into a bunch of stores so a few big companies can save some money will improve the *Apple customer experience*, then you are deluded.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309 and I7guy
That’s the “innovation” you missed? 🤔
Apple used to restrict access to the NFC chip programmatically, to prop up its payment solution Apple Pay. This was a major impediment for local payment schemes to introduce competing payment products. It also meant, that iPhones could not be used to access systems for public transport in many countries. The DMA mandates, that apps have to be given access to the APIs needed to implement the above mentioned payment or public transport functionality.

Cloud gaming services were not allowed on iPhone until recently. The only way to use them inside Safari as a webpage. This restriction has been lifted, making the experience much smoother for users. I think it's reasonable to say that the public pressure building up in advance to the DMA has influenced this decision by Apple.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.