The problem with your defence of this is you are under the impression Apple is able to act as it sees fit when in fact they are supposed to act based on fair and reasonable terms under the DMA. Asking developers of trucks to pay for the cost of the engine while developers who build cars get the engine for free are not neutral terms. The DMA is attempting to create a more level playing field.
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
The problem with your defence of this is you are under the impression Apple is able to act as it sees fit when in fact they are supposed to act based on fair and reasonable terms under the DMA. Asking developers of trucks to pay for the cost of the engine while developers who build cars get the engine for free are not neutral terms. The DMA is attempting to create a more level playing field.
With alternative app stores, then we can get apps to address the exact things you just mentioned. Another reason why this is great!
Except the EU has decided they have to move in the direction of a neutral store, being closed doesn’t prevent them from being a neutral store.
Why would they have to get out of the store business? The CTF s the SDK fee which applies to all apps regardless of the store they are sold in.
If Apple needs an App Store hosting/review fee it needs to be universal and separated from the commission. The commission should only apply to Apps using Apple’s payment processing.
It makes no sense for the App Store hosting/review costs to be based on a per transaction commission because that doesn’t actually capture the how much it costs Apple to host and review the apps, an App like Netflix or Walmart costs Apple far more to host and review than does a small indie dev and it makes no sense that the former pay nothing and the latter a 15% commission. The App Store hosting/review fee should be more like the CTF which is based on a per download basis because that more accurately reflects the cost of hosting and reviewing a popular app.
As I’ve argued above, the way Apple structures their commission is ridiculous because it has absolutely no relation to the actual costs born by Apple to run the store.
I think they should exempt apps that are truly free, as in no ads, no IAP, no companion tie-in product, no monetization of any kind.
Doesn’t matter how big they are as a percentage, what matters is that there are about 450+ million active smartphone subscriptions in Europe and apple has about 30+% share which is over 135 million people. That is why this matters. It doesn’t matter that they are smaller than google, smaller than google is still hundreds of millions of people.
Who cares? I don’t live in the US. I live in my country. Apple is a multinational company offering its services worldwide.
You can get free vaping equipment via local health services in many countries. It’s a fantastic aid to quit smoking, which is the real killer, let’s be honest.
Apple is taking some moral high ground and forcing it on its users. At the very same time it’s actually encouraging games that addict users including children to spend real money. It’s banning or limiting apps which aid dissidents and other government whistleblowers under strict regimes when said regime tells them too.
They’ve no right. They’re morally corrupt.
There MUST be a way of allowing apps outside of apples control on the iPhone, and if Apple don’t allow that then they must be forced to allow it.
Apple has set the rules even if you don’t agree with them. It’s not as if there is precedent in the business world treating classes of customers differently.
US Congress, US and global health authorities (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9001701/), and parents cared that children were becoming addicted and harmed by vaping products resulting in the threat of government oversight if companies didn't self-regulate.
Your understanding of Apple and how it operates around the world is severely truncated. Apple is a US company that operates internationally while headquartered in Cupertino, CA. It is absolutely and without question beholden to US Congressional inquiry, oversight, and any/all legal structures that operate within the US--including liability in particular. To argue anything else is a juvenile understanding of the context, at best.
This wasn't a moralistic stance from Apple but even if it was you don't have a particularly strong argument if your argument coalesces into "who cares?" about a global epidemic negatively impacting minor children's health.
You would have served yourself well to look into the issues you're whining about--the salient concerns, why the entities did what they did, etc.--but instead you chose to dig your heels in deeper. Having explained the factors to you, however, there's nothing more for me to add and you're in no space to comprehend anyway.
EDIT: one more thing... I find it curious that you never named the app so no one reading this knows whether it was Apple who removed it, as you allege, or if the vendor stopped updating it, or any details whatsoever. In fact, I suspect this is just a story you read about or created to stir controversy. Nothing in your past posts indicate a particular level of credibility.
Last edited:
See, so you do care.
Also you never wrote any arguments as to why "Android is inferior". You obviously don't have any arguments.
Ah but you dont want Apple to be the morals guardian (except with gambling apps???).
Apple have stated they dont allow emulators (that arent authorised - the has been a C64 emulator i remember downloading). They allow rights owners to release apps like PacMan etc. It's up them to decide if they can make money from doing so.
There would be many who agree about "scummy gambling apps" and just as many using them who want them there.
Apple is not playing the moral card. Just the legal one.
The picture is very relevant. They both show the apps. One offers you the ability to use an add free service.
The simple fact of the enormous user interface friction that exist for a free Spotify user to upgrade to premium. Spotify wasn’t allowed to advertise any information to the user in anyway.
And you are essentially saying that incited user friction have zero negative consequences and going against industry norms and experience.
In-app subscription optimization strategy for 2023: how to increase app revenue — Asodesk Blog
If your app users are not purchasing subscriptions, you should focus on optimizing your subscription funnel. Learn how to develop the best strategy to maximize your app subscriptions and increase app revenue.
How to Identify & Fix User Friction (+Causes, Types)
Explore the causes and types of user friction, and how to identify and fix user friction to create a better user experience and interface.
whatfix.com
The anti-steering provision of Article 5 (4) of the DMA: a law and economics assessment on the business model of gatekeepers and business users - European Journal of Law and Economics
Data is a success factor for digital platforms and the core of their business model. The rationale behind this is that data allows for improving the matching process between users which creates value for the platform. Since some large platforms act as gatekeepers, the Digital Markets Act (DMA)...
link.springer.com
Predicting Consumer Behavior Based on Big Data of User-Generated Online Content in Retail Marketing - Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management
The purpose of this study is to create, using big data from user content in retail marketing, a prediction approach to predicting consumer behavior. Based on an approach with two key components, prediction is achievable. The first step is accurate big data analytics of user-generated material...
link.springer.com
It could as well activated blinking lights or customized user profiles for what the user wants to vape and mood etc.I see you still cant explain what the essential vaping app actually did function wise.
You keep deflecting. You brought up that you wanted apps, like the vaping app, on your phone without Apple being a moral regulator. Lawyers probably determine what apps stay to some degree., not Apple.
And you brought it up so it is on topic...
The functionality could be bananas or pointless and completely irrelevant to the discussion or legitimacy to banning its existence. Obviously users had a better experience otherwise they wouldn’t exist
well as someone else pointed out there was a lot of medical data coming out about harm.
so perhaps Apple just got ahead of the gun and went "yeah, we put a lot of effort in our Health and fitness apps and devices. maybe we pull this now before it becomes an issue".
there's nothing nasty about it. they killed off something that was probably making them money as well if bought on the store.
The store/developer split isn't the only reason to have alternate app stores.
Microsoft wanted me to download their authenticator app recently, so I got out my Pixel phone and searched the Google Play store for "microsoft authenticator" and clicked the first result, which was "authenticator". As I was about to open the app, I realized that I had downloaded an app from an ad that got placement over the app I obviously wanted.
The Apple App Store on my iPad also has an ad for "Authenticator App" as the first search result for "microsoft authenticator".
When I search for a game on the Steam store, I actually get the game/app I search for as the first result, because Steam doesn't have paid ad slots.
Do any of the Apple defenders here dare claim that Apple is putting their users first with paid placement in search results?
Some other reasons:
Cross-platform purchases: get a Windows, Mac, and iOS and Android app with one purchase.
Kickstarter rewards: Give an app to your campaign backers.
Multi-publisher/developer app bundles.
Microsoft wanted me to download their authenticator app recently, so I got out my Pixel phone and searched the Google Play store for "microsoft authenticator" and clicked the first result, which was "authenticator". As I was about to open the app, I realized that I had downloaded an app from an ad that got placement over the app I obviously wanted.
The Apple App Store on my iPad also has an ad for "Authenticator App" as the first search result for "microsoft authenticator".
When I search for a game on the Steam store, I actually get the game/app I search for as the first result, because Steam doesn't have paid ad slots.
Do any of the Apple defenders here dare claim that Apple is putting their users first with paid placement in search results?
Some other reasons:
Cross-platform purchases: get a Windows, Mac, and iOS and Android app with one purchase.
Kickstarter rewards: Give an app to your campaign backers.
Multi-publisher/developer app bundles.
I have no doubt that something like that is what happened.
The question is though: with Apple morally curating their AppStore for you, is it acceptable that that is the only place to get apps on the iPhone?
It’s super sad for the children and not apples business to care for. They can implement an 18+ section so children can’t access content deemed to sensitive for US sensibilities to handle
We understand it, hence the legal actions needed to prevent Apple from acting harmfully. Or Apple can leave if they can’t get their behavior under control and understand Us jurisdiction ends on the U.S. border
As long as the things are legal it’s 100% moral grandstanding. And banning legal things isn’t very easy to defend
That’s a good argument why alternative stories must be allowed as the customers in other legal jurisdictions to ag access to legal content.
And you should follow your own advice and researched in why The EU thinks and does what it does.
Plenty of mixology apps showing anyone who wants to know how to create sweet and tasty hard liquor cocktails. Of course, no governments or health organisations have ever mentioned the dangers of alcohol and children.
Thanks for the insults, but with a user name like yours I can only imagine that you may well be the pot calling the kettle black with your assumption of my apparent credibility levels, and your own particular flavour of extra curricula activities.
One consideration of mine: Even though I don't personally have many issues with the current app rejections in the country I live it, I don't think it it's good that Apple is the curator in countries with more oppressive governments where the App Store is legally required to remove apps that would be legal in most other countries.
100% agree. That’s why it’s vital do be able to download something like Briar or Tor from GitHub.
The law is currently banning gambling apps so… eu is implementing the moral values in to law. https://www.akd.eu/insights/underst...all-lootboxes-now-illegal-in-the-netherlands-
What about users who own legal copies of the ROMs? You have the legal right to make a private copy of any ROM and use it
Dutch law, more in particular the Betting and Gaming Act [Wet op de kansspelen], prohibits the provision of ‘games of chance in which you can win a prize’ without a permit. A game of chance is legally defined to be a ‘game in which the winner is defined by some form of chance and wherein the players generally do not control the result for the most part’
So… no apple is doing the moral grandstanding only when it’s not a threat to their bottom line.
How many times do I have to say it… it’s not moral it’s legal. Simple as that. Why risk a company being sued because of questionable health info or pirated games?
There’s a million apps there. Of varying quality and use. They aren’t stopping competition or limiting apps that don’t violate clear rules.
You can say but as many times as you like, it doesn’t mean you’re right.
Adult content is legal, why are those apps missing from the store if not for moral reasons?
Just stating the obvious.
There's nothing behind that hate, no real arguments, no nothing, it's empty just like I suspected and you made it very clear.
And make no mistake it's clear for anybody here.
So yeah there's no point for me to reply, have your last word, it looks like you are "fanatical" about that 🤣
and how do you section off adult content? kids will and do find ways around it.
some could argue that violent games are adult content already.
do you force Disney to add adult content?
sometimes a service can decide what they want to offer. you dont get to choose the shows on video streaming. someone else does based on data to sell subs.
how about alcohol? it's legal.
marijuana is legal some places. should the app store allow that too?
sometimes it is just easier for companies to say no... without judgement on you.
there are hardline countries where being gay or having sex before marriage is outlawed.
best not to let dating apps be used against the phone owner as evidence...
its another case of move to Android if thats what you want... you have the answer. vote with your wallets and move. its not that different to use. so no learning curve to operate.
show me proof that Apple is banning apps for moral reasons and not legal...
oh look, Macrumours.com reported this...
no mention of moral objections but following health advice after deaths:
After Apple Bans Vape Apps From App Store, PAX Creates Website for Vape Management
Apple in November removed all vaping-related apps from the App Store, leaving people with app-connected vapes without a way to control their devices...
www.macrumors.com