As a customer you can shop for sunglasses in different shops which compete with each other. This keeps markups in check. The DMA does not regulate the fees. It tries to make competition possible, which might drive down fees in the future.
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 Responds to Meta's Plan to Charge 30% Fee on Boosted Posts Purchased Through App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I‘m all for sunglasses makers to charge what they want and try to set their margins as they please.
Just as I’m all for app developers to price their apps and try try to set their margins as they please.
But not for monopolist middlemen to force them to sell all their sunglasses/apps through and impose a tax through them.
Meta will have its own App Store in the EU where the cost for boosted posts will be 30% lower; it will also happen in additional regions as they also mandate side-loading. I'm surprised that small businesses aren't setting up automatic payments for boosted posts on their computers which would bypass the 30% iOS fee just like paying for other things like streaming music and video does.
Last edited:
I’m for monopolistic middleman who manufacture and sell premium lifestyle products that are totally optional in one’s life to charge what they want and for the buying public to vote with their $$$.
As a customer of smartphones there are hundreds of choices….and some of them have their own app repository.
It's not about the hardware. We are talking about App Store and Play Store. Those two are the dominant ways how apps and in-app-payments are sold. The legislation is not concerned with the hardware.
That’s the issue, there are hundreds of competitors, pick your market definition. It almost can be anything.
They are not optional, given how my banking apps or travel/transport apps and messengers are running on it.
There‘s not hundreds of mobile operating systems to choose from.
I7guy will never acknowledge that it’s not about hardware but software.
He‘ll always refer to so many phone manufacturers as competition in this context.
They are totally optional. Don’t tell me if your iPhone breaks and has to go without it for a while your life would end. You couldn’t eat, attend to your finances, etc. that is totally different from a smartphone being convenient. Everything that can be done on an iPhone can be done on another form factor.
There are hundreds of competitors. That’s a fact.
And appliedmicro will never acknowledge that sometimes governments create bad laws.
Last edited:
Do you think MacRumors should give 30% of their ad revenue to Apple because people are reading this website on an iPhone? If they don’t want to pay, I guess every website should just make their own phone, right?
There are plenty of instances where Apple completely deserves the 30% cut, like selling a game or an app. But this is an advertising service fee in which Apple plays no part in delivering what is actually being paid for.
What you are proposing, and has been said before, has not been an historical precedent.
Now imagine there were only two grocery store chains in the country, and they colluded on fees to charge suppliers.
That’s exactly what Apple and Google do. It’s a classic duopoly exploiting their monopoly power, not only to charge higher prices but to also capture market share from competitors by selling their own “store brand” version of popular apps.
It's fair for component suppliers to charge Apple an extra 30% for each part sold!
I would turn this argument around. How useful would your iGadget be, if Apple closed the App Store tomorrow and would delete all third-party apps from it. This would, by the way, also solve Apple's disagreement with the EU Commission. People would cue up the next day to buy Android phones in droves, me included. Is it possible to live without a Smartphone? Technically, yes. But it would be very inconvenient and you would miss out on many opportunties.
Last edited:
Glad I am not on Facebook or Instagram or like anywhere else. WhatsApp is more than enough for external communication and the public real profile would be too much of a privacy invasion for me. Maybe I am too paranoid but still I don’t have intention to be on Facebook or anywhere else again.
Especially considering how much advertisements are on Meta platforms. It feels so dreading to see what you didn’t intend to each time you log in. Also the quality of pictures and content is lowest bar possible there with lots of useless blocks like stories, live camera and so on
Especially considering how much advertisements are on Meta platforms. It feels so dreading to see what you didn’t intend to each time you log in. Also the quality of pictures and content is lowest bar possible there with lots of useless blocks like stories, live camera and so on
I don't like Apple's policy. I don't like Facebook. I've got no dog in this fight so...
If apple closed their store I think we would start to see a dearth of apple inspired apps, which could be better than third party apps. Of course it’s all hypotheticals. Rather than focusing on the App Store, let’s say apple threw in the towel, how would that affect you?
Would you be able to live, eat and breathe?
As I said. I would would go to a shop the next day and buy another phone with Android. That's the point I'm making. An iPhone without the work of countless third-party developers is far less useful.
Try to explain a teenager they can't have Tik Tok, or their favorite game 😂.
You know What'scrapp is still a F*c*book app, right?
Because it is. I don't allow F*c*book apps on my phone or computer.
Ah I understand and thanks for the comparison with Apple and Amazon.
But my question is still the same. Apple allows free apps to run and the developers make money from services outside of the App Store and they don’t deserve a cut?
Humor me. What if all the apps on the App Store were free, then Apple wouldn’t see a penny from developers even tho many of them making bank with their services ran by them on their own servers?
Well that doesn’t sound fair to me. Apple does deserve some sort of compensation for running software on their phones if that software is making the developers tons of profit. Apple does put a lot into innovating hardware and software for the phones which in turn allows the developers to do more with their apps and make more profit.
Currently, the App Store is run in a manner that allows for a certain equilibrium. Paid apps give Apple 15/30%, which is what subsidises the App Store for all the small developers who generate zero revenue for Apple. Upset that equilibrium, and Apple would likely just find some other way of making up for the shortfall, such as increasing the annual developer fee (which is not ideal, because it then raises the barrier to entry for small developers, who contribute much to the vitality and vibrancy of the App Store).
I don't disagree with you here. At the end of the day, though, Apple’s intellectual property is their property, and they should get to charge whatever fee they like. That they will jump through whatever hoops are necessary to collect said fee should not be a surprise to anyone at this point. It doesn't mean that competitors or legislators have to like it, and it won't stop some of them from trying to work their way around this, and so here we are.
Apple is so incredibly greedy. This is why I have zero issues with "sampling" a vision pro headset and then sending it back on the 14th day.
Apple charges developers a yearly developer fee, so they make money off everyone, even if the app is free. It’s cheap right now, but they could always increase the price of the fee or use a sliding scale like theY’re about to do in the EU.
I’m not saying Apple shouldn’t get a cut from anything, just the things they don’t have anything to do with.
When you browse the web in Safari on your iPhone, Apple doesn’t get a cut of website ad revenue, because they aren’t involved in that.
Apple has historically tried to force developers to use in-app purchases in order to take a 30% cut, but there are genuine instances where they don’t deserve it and should just let the developer use their own payment system. I should be able to buy a Kindle book from the Kindle app using my Amazon account. Apple won’t allow that, but I can buy an actual Kindle from the Amazon app paying Amazon directly.
The in-app purchase system is great for small developers who don’t have the ability, size or desire to setup their own payment systems. But it shouldn’t apply to Netflix, Spotify, Disney+, Facebook advertising, etc, because Apple has absolutely nothing to do with delivering those services. And no, people aren’t signing up for those services just because they have an iPhone.