My point was that when Spotify premium subscriptions were offered through the App Store, they were available at a lower price through Spotify's website. Therefore, if new app access competition (sideloading, alternative app stores) pushed Apple to lower commissions it could in fact mean a lower price for users choosing to subscribe through the App Store.
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 Reinstates Epic Games EU Developer Account, Paving the Way for Alternative App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My point was that when Spotify premium subscriptions were offered through the App Store, they were available at a lower price through Spotify's website. Therefore, if new app access competition (sideloading, alternative app stores) pushed Apple to lower commissions it could in fact mean a lower price for users choosing to subscribe through the App Store.
Game streaming was a very high-profile one. Browser engines too. An open source repository is another. Censorship in general that is stricter than the iTunes Store ever was (they blocked a Nine Inch Nails app for containing content from their album The Downward Spiral that they continued to sell on iTunes).
Just curious, why have you used Android for 16 years if it's (in your opinion) such an overrated mess of a mobile OS? Also, in another recent post you stated, "I don't have an aversion [to] android. It's okay I guess." So, which is it? An overrated mess or okay?
And customers (both developers and users) can still use the App Store if they want to. If fact, using it may be an even better experience going forward as Apple may be pushed to make improvements due to the new app access competition (sideloading and alternative app stores). That would be great!
NFC: do you think it’s possible it took some time to create a *safe* public API to grant access? Maybe so!
Cloud gaming: it really kinda sucks so maybe Apple was doing you a favor 😂
Neither of these are particularly INNOVATIVE, however.
Still haven’t seen an example of the stifled innovation the *DMA* going to unlock.
Attributing changes Apple has already made to the DMA isn’t really going to cut it.
Sometimes small changes make a big difference.
I think that Apple's insistence to take a 30% cut from every sale of digital items is holding a lot of innovative business models back right now. Would it not be nice, from a consumer perspecitve, to be able to buy books inside the Kindle App? That would be a very convenient feature to have I think.
And I would hope they do! I’m simply pointing out that forcing users to download a separate App Store to gain access to a billionaire owned app is not a better experience for iPhone users.
Besides Epic, it will be interesting to see who actually thinks bothering with a separate App Store is a winning idea. My guess is very few takers.
I think the iPhone 7 was the first hardware to have the NFC chip. It can't take that long to make a safe API for the NFC interface.
Yeah, Kindle is another one where the 30% fee forces a competitor to have an inferior in-app experience vs the Apple solution.
Meanwhile, Apple has no problem taking 0% from the Play Store with their custom in-app billing in Apple Music.
Meanwhile, Apple has no problem taking 0% from the Play Store with their custom in-app billing in Apple Music.
Kindle/Amazon is off course the market leader in this segment. But we have local e-book stores in Europe as well, who can't offer books on iOS currently. In some countries it is especially problematic, because books have fixed prices in all distribution channels. There is no way to absorb Apple's commission and not lose money.
Yes, that would be “nice” for Amazon, a place authors just love, right?
Guess what percentage Amazon takes from a book sale…
“Kindle publishers are paid either a 35% or 70% royalty for each book sold. Amazon takes 65% on books that sell below $2.99 and above $9.99. They keep 30% on books that sell between $2.99 and $9.99, so you make more money per book in this price range.”
Is that fair, or should the DMA step in here too?
You're entitled to your opinion. As we all are. I don't think it's terrible. Due to the fact that the AppStore was and is based off what physical stores do. They didn't make it up out of thin air. Not just for purchasing, but for actually acquiring the goods/services sold at a store. AKA download and install. Difference being, the store is within the same device you keep with you. Be it Apple's or now, a 3rd Party store in the EU. Where a physical store you walk out of when you're done shopping.
EPIC literally put a different purchase link within the App, breaking the T&S. That is exactly what they want to be able to do. Same for Spotify and Netflix. How are we missing that from this discussion. Difference being Netflix and Spotify didn't break the T&S to push their points. EPIC did. Now, in the EU they get to make the app how they want to. You can sell with Apple or use another payment processor, or setup a new store. They can contact the end user about whatever they want (in the EU). Life is good.
They can charge whatever they want on their store. Just pay Apple the .50 euro's past the first million downloads. Keep your promises (agreements) going forward. Please and thank you.
Before the EU rules took affect and only within the EU, you "can" pay with a different payment processor. Save yourself 3%. Enjoy. I don't expect Netflix or Spotify to make any changes due to this. They will most likely still not offer signups via the app or allow IAP within the App due to still having to pay Apple a 27% cut. At best they will move off the store and go with EPIC or start their own. My money is on no change though. More than enough people know how to get signed up for their services, and it is not a big enough deal to move and get people to do it all over again via another store.
EPIC had this ability (similarly analogous to this). They could have removed IAP, and just had you go to the website. Not like they don't advertise all over the place (TV, Social Media, Internet Ads, etc.). No different than Spotify or Netflix.
Yes, it makes it less convenient but, not really detrimental to getting those kids to getting their vBUCKS.
Not to mention, the ruling they did win within the US would have allowed this. Zero paid to Apple at the end of the day. Which is what they wanted. And zero loss of business for deleting some code from the iOS app.
Would have fit your explanation perfectly. You get something for nothing at the AppStore, go home and pay the vendor (not the store) directly.
Point is above. This whole thing could have been handled better and for everyone's benefit. But, we are here now. It is what it is. 30% was never an issue till the developers got greedy. I'm waiting for price drops from Spotify, Netflix, and others that leave the store so we can save.... Oh wait, that will never happen.
I would say it's not the best at any of those things. But, it does have all those features/capabilities.
It contains a digital store that serves as the download and installation mechanism for the device (iPhone). It performs the function of a store where you shop and purchase goods/services. AND, as the means for distribution/installation on the device. It was made to work this way. Be it Apple's store (only) for everyone else outside the EU. Or within the EU where you can have 3rd party stores.
I don't think it is fair to blur the lines only when it suits. I can argue the same thing for the Apple watch. It is a computing device. That can run different applications. Including virtual stores. But, I think it is safe to say most folks will not lay the title "computer" next to an Apple watch. We really should treat the devices as they are categorized.
From what I have seen on these forums is that many will argue it's just a computer in your pocket, and it should behave and be treated as such. No stores, no rules, just wide open for "us" the consumer to do with as we wish. Thanks, Apple and Google. Now bugger off and let me the end user, play.
If that is the case, then let's treat everything that can compute the same. Consoles, watches, routers, printers, media streamers (Nvidia shield, or Linux TV boxes, Nests), the list goes on. They all compute. They all run some kind of OS. They all network, they all get updates and have connections to the internet. They are all the same.
We know they are not all the same. They are built for their respective uses. I think we should treat them as such.
Your phone isn't a traditional computer. There I said it. We agree.
It doesn't.
Thank you.
I'm comparing the functions of the AppStore to a physical store.
Pretty sure I've stated many times an iPhone can compute like a desktop. But, they are not the same thing and belong in different categories. Just like all computing devices belong in their respective categories. Comparisons can be made between all of them. But, the store part is well, a store. What else would you compare the AppStore to if not a physical store?
Wow, that's rich. The two big guys giving each other preferential treatment.
What are you talking about? Can’t they set up a website and sell books there?
There is this thing called the Internet 🤔
But why should the experience on competing eBook stores be worse than the Apple Book Store? That exactly is anticompetitive behaviour.
Would you be okay going outside of Apple apps and using Safari to make purchases for Apple services?
Amazon is not good for authors and nobody is defending them, but this specific topic is about the iOS experience.
Good point. But there is a difference. As an author you can chose another distributor for your eBooks if you want. When you're succesful, you can negotiate to get a better deal from Amazon. Therefore I would argue that there is still competition in this space, even if Amazon has a dominant position.
Apple just following Google’s rules is preferential treatment?
And what preferential treatment is Apple giving Google again? The billions they collect for making Google search the default?
I think Google might disagree 😉
So this all boils down to successful/rich people/companies have more choices!
I’m a successful author, so I get a good deal!
My company is worth billions, so I can host my own App Store!
Who would have thunk it!?
Google's Play Store rules clearly state you must use Google Play's billing system for in-app purchases. The existence of a custom in-app billing system in Apple Music, which is against these rules, essentially proves they have a deal with Google, in the same vein as Spotify's deal with Google. Neither service is above backroom deals, it seems.
Yes, the same rules apply to all digital sales in the App Store.
Should the % be zero?
Should Amazon take less to compensate for Apple’s cut?
Could they have made a deal for books to split the difference?
Entirely possible, but that’s not what happened, so now you gotta use Amazon website — ah well 🤷🏻♂️
I have provided some examples how the experience for users will improve. You're still not convinced. I guess we have to agree to disagree.