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 Says App Store 'Welcomes Competition' Following Criticism From Spotify and Others
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You probably never had a playlist with 600+ songs—it ain't fun.
If Apple Music is similar, then they too should find a way to more easily scroll through playlists.
Where do I ever claim it was different? You haven’t been keeping up with the news? Google has been fined by the EU for anti competitive behaviour:
http://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-20/google-fined-1-27bn-by-ec-for-illegal-advertising-practices/
Nope not linked to the store but still Google being fined for anti competitive behaviour with its software platforms.
And Amazon? Well they, along with google on Android by DEFAULT allow you to install apps from outside their stores, as I understand they also don’t demand a 30% cut of your earnings either forcing the app developer to push you elsewhere to pay for its service.
I’m sorry but Apple are extremely guilty of anti consumer and competitive behaviour, and as proved with Google and Microsoft, if the EU competition commission also believes this they will heavily punish Apple.
And I should also add, on Android I can change the default app for email etc, can’t do that in iOS.. yet another example of Apple being anti competitive.
The EU nearly destroyed Microsoft for including its own web browser in Windows. I don’t think Apple will come away unscathed but we will see, they are very guilty in my mind though and hypocritical when they allow some apps they aren’t competing with to have different rights to those they are.
[doublepost=1559154259][/doublepost]
Yeap, although I won’t be surprised if Uber can do this along with Just Eat etc.. different apps have different rules and that adds to the guilty verdict of Apple on this.
[doublepost=1559154569][/doublepost]
Apple allows that too, I believe it’s for 0% anyway, but only for certain apps like Uber and Just Eat.. it isn’t competing with those apps, yet Spotify it is competing with and will not allow them the same rights as those other apps. It is a clear breach of anti competitive behaviour I think and the EU will punish them heavily if they believe so too.
Sounds great! And... then there ain’t no monopoly; you have other platforms to choose from. Why not remove yourself from Apple Store and “punish” Apple instead of complain.
Yeah, go over to Windows or Android Chat sites & look. All these people there who download Apps from wherever, Immediately blame the Maker of the Computer or Phone if an app they downloaded stops making their device work properly, because apparently these Companies should test every single App ever made & adjust THEIR software so that it works.
I am no fan at all of APPL's practices regarding fees & many other things, but be grateful there IS a walled Garden regarding IOS Apps.
LOL at Apple citing competing apps. It's funny, why can't I select any of these competing apps as my default.
Oh, and why does Apple get to do customer signups in app, but nobody else can?
Oh, right, Apple has a monopoly on the app store which is what this is about.
Oh, and why does Apple get to do customer signups in app, but nobody else can?
Oh, right, Apple has a monopoly on the app store which is what this is about.
I think my way of saying it is broader. I agree that the 30% fee is a big part of the issue, but it's not the only issue. The inequitable application of the rules is similarly a problem (Apple can offer discounts that competitors cannot, Apple can use push notifications for marketing but competitors cannot, etc.).
It all stems from the fact that Apple both owns the platform and competes on that platform. There are then essentially two sets of rules: one set of rules for everyone else and one set of rules for Apple. Among that is the 30% fee issue.
In that case Apple colluded with publusher to raise prices, which is illegal becasue they are distinct economic entities and was an unreasonable restraint of trade.
In the app store case, Apple is not colluding with developrs on app prices, but merely charging a fee of certain types of sales. They also let app developrs sell subscriptions outside the app and do not take a cut. In short, I think the SATA argument falls short.
About as persuasive as you claiming someone can easily set up their own App distribution for $10 a month.
Okay, charge only 15% for the app being there, now charge a "system maintenance fee" of 15% that the users agree to when they sign up. Just like a condo development, I own the unit, but I have to pay a maintenance fee to keep the development working and clean, etc. Do you have any idea what it costs to maintain and upgrade all of that storage infrastructure that goes with it?? not to mention the electric costs of said storage and cooling of said equipment?? I maintain an Avid video server with a mere 420 terabytes and it needs to be in a climate controlled room kept at 68 degrees and the last upgrade of 200 terabytes cost $85,000.00! They have to be running in the realm of hundreds of exabytes. .33 cents of a .99 cent app most likely does not cover that.
I would equate it in a sense to a credit card company in, AmEx get 3%, Visa get1.5%, etc. if you don't like it you don't take that card.
Why don't you use Spotify's model and simply sell subscriptions through your web site, and simply require a login nad have no IAP. Problem solved.
[doublepost=1559158518][/doublepost]
Many times they are made by the same company that makes the name brand and of the same quality.
Apple made a platform that everyone could flourish on and they want their cut if you use their platform. How is that a bad thing at all? If you don't like it, you can take your ball and go to the Google Play store, make your own platform, or make your app free in the App Store and entice users to sign up for subscriptions via website like Netflix.
Dropbox allows 250GB/day for $9.99/month. You have yet to provide any contrary evidence to that fact. Only groundless speculation on how Dropbox won't deliver on that cap.
Problem not solved. What if a user finds the app organically through the App Store? They download it, make an account, and try to use a paid feature of the app. What do I do? According to Apple, I can't have my own billing service. I can't message the user to go to the website to purchase a subscription. I can't link to a browser with a payment form.
Maybe an option would be to have an account confirmation email after signup. The user can't use the app until they confirm their email address. In the confirmation email, maybe link to the subscription? Although I'm not sure how Apple would handle it in the app review process.
Good point. If you can't play by your own rules you can't expect anyone else to play by them either.
Problem is Apple doesn’t let me shop in other stores
Honestly I struggle with the logic behind this.
The iPhone has been set up as a fully closed eco system, exactly like say an Xbox or a PS4, to publish into that closed system you play by Apple’s rules. You don’t see companies whinging they are giving too much money to Sony for publishing in the PlayStation, or that they have to compete with Sony’s own products, it’s just seen as part of the cost of doing business.
If Spotify win then does this somehow classify mobile hardware as fundamentally different to other hardware along arbitrary lines, as I’m not seeing a big difference here, except one sits under your tv and the other lives in your pocket.
This, to me, feels like an app maker with a business model it’s suddenly finding hard to maintain doing something a bit desperate, rather than it being an issue with Apple. Apple don’t have to have competition on their own devices if they don’t want to, originally they weren’t going to allow non-Apple software to run on the iPhone at all.
The iPhone has been set up as a fully closed eco system, exactly like say an Xbox or a PS4, to publish into that closed system you play by Apple’s rules. You don’t see companies whinging they are giving too much money to Sony for publishing in the PlayStation, or that they have to compete with Sony’s own products, it’s just seen as part of the cost of doing business.
If Spotify win then does this somehow classify mobile hardware as fundamentally different to other hardware along arbitrary lines, as I’m not seeing a big difference here, except one sits under your tv and the other lives in your pocket.
This, to me, feels like an app maker with a business model it’s suddenly finding hard to maintain doing something a bit desperate, rather than it being an issue with Apple. Apple don’t have to have competition on their own devices if they don’t want to, originally they weren’t going to allow non-Apple software to run on the iPhone at all.
Walmart doesn't let you shop at Costco inside a Walmart store. *shrug*
Yea. Even stronger: If you're the referee, you per se will not play by your own rules. So pick a role: either be the referee, or join a team. You can't be both at the same time.
[doublepost=1559162345][/doublepost]
There are literally over a hundred of grocery store chains in the US alone, probably many hundreds world-wide. Food companies can sell at all of them, or any of them, depending on the deal they make - food companies can make the grocery stores compete against each other for favorable terms. Consumers can easily switch from one grocery store to another every other day - there is almost zero cost to switching and price-comparison shopping.
There are only two app stores. Mobile software companies have to sell in both of them to reach their audience - they can't make the app stores compete each other on terms because they're both necessary and there is no overlap in audience. Consumers can't switch from one to the other - the cost of switching is very high.
Last edited:
That’s unfortunately the restriction you place on yourself by buying an iPhone. There are plenty of other devices that do the same thing (nearly every game console), when you buy it your locked into their eco system.
If you want to be able to install from anywhere you can’t use an iPhone. The iOS eco system is, and always has been, a walled garden, app makers pay for access, and customers implicitly agree to that by buying the devices. If you don’t like it, don’t buy an iPhone.
Consumers can easily switch between Samsung TVs and Sony TVs and the cost of switching is very high. I can switch from Apple to Android and the cost is not similarly high but less so because you can get free phones here in the US simply for signing a contract with a carrier. They have $49 phones you can even buy outright here in the US. Sure it's the older model but the point is that if you want to switch you have plenty of options at all kinds of price points.
IMO Spotify is abusing the court system...by trying to inject ambiguity where there previously was no ambiguity. If anything Apple has been more than kind to Spotify, the truth is the business model doesn't work if music is priced at loss leader rates by Spotify. They complain they can't make enough money from tracking and their ads business. They pay music creators among the lowest rates in the streaming industry. Then the punish musicians by not playlisting those who choose to strike up alternative deals with Apple, Google, Amazon and other players.
Last edited: