The difference between a product vs platform. Spotify is a product, app store is a hosting platform.
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
Strawman. Stop trying to fool others that the IOS app store is insecure, because some apps out of the millions have figured out a way to skirt the ToS.
As far as the approval process, true there is no source code, but the automated checking does check certain things and rejects the app. (I know, I had my app rejected a number of times until I fixed the issues)
I work as an App Reviewer under Shoemaker and Morgan (who was just fired) and both managers are absolutely AWFUL! Shoemaker didn't give a **** about developers experience and Morgan only cared about how my apps we can churn out. The only people I feel bad for are my coworkers in App Review who work required 10-12 hour days, with a required 6th day.
I'm sorry but this analogy does not hold water.
A Gillette razor handle is like an iPhone. The razor blade cartridges that are compatible with the Gillette razor handle are like apps. I don't use razors anymore, but when I was in height school, I remember using third party razor cartridges with Gillette handles.
Let's elaborate this analogy. Gillette (Apple) does intend for cartridges (apps) to be installed on the handle (iPhone). So where is the cartridge retailer (App Store) in this analogy? Gillette wants to sell as many cartridges as possible. So, they allow Target, Walmart, Amazon, etc. (developers) to sell cartridges that are compatible with this wonderful razor handle. However, Gillette wants a cut because they spent a lot of money to design, manufacture, advertise and sell the handle that these cartridges take advantage of. Only if these stores pay Gillette for a license (annual $100 developer fee) to sell Gillette-compatible third party cartridges. Oh wait, not only that, but they also have to pay Gillette 30% the price of each cartridge sale. Gillette, feeling generous one day, decides that if the developer sells a cartridge every month for a year, then they will only take a 15% cut.
So, third party developers are the essence of the App Store. The App Store would not exist without developers making great apps. If developers formed a union and boycotted the App Store by removing their apps from sale, what would happen?
You misunderstood the analogy. You think the App Store as a market on its own. My argument is the the Apple App Store is not the market. It is part of the iPhone/iPad. There’s no monopoly as the App Store is not equivalent to a grocery store. The App Store is a feature, part of iOS. Gillette is not a monopoly for designing its razors to only accept replacement razors made by Gillette. Apple is not a monopoly for designing iPhones to only have Apple’s own App Store.
With the logic that being spread around, I can then ask why Spotify only allows its method of streaming DRM on its services? Why can’t it allow other forms of DRM to compete within its own service? With that logic, I can say Spotify is a monopoly since they forced their own DRM to their customers, and customers don’t have a choice. If I’m an artist, I’m forced to have my music being compressed with Spotify’s own choice of codec and DRM. What if I want my listeners to listen to my music with a different codec? Spotify is a monopoly! Makes no sense.
Spotify’s argument is weak since Netflix and Amazon don’t seem to have issues separating their payment away from their apps.
Sadly most developers know if they go this route, they run the risk of Apple terminating their developer agreement, or working against their interests in other ways (if you know what I mean). In Apple's eyes they're all replaceable.
Ok, so would you say iOS is the market for iOS apps then? What's the point of the App Store? Right now, Apple only allows distribution of iOS apps from the App Store. This is a monopoly on iOS app distribution. Maybe it's ok since Apple makes iOS and iOS devices. Not a lawyer so I'm not sure.
As Apple themselves have shown, they allow competing apps, including internet browsers, email clients, Netflix, Amazon Kindle, etc in the all store. The definition of a monopoly would disallow those apps.
The App Store itself is a feature of iOS, not a market. If you’re an artist and put your music up to Spotify, can you tell Spotify to use your choice of codec and DRM? No. Spotify made that decision for you. Same thing here, when you develop an app for iPhone users, Apple decided how to distribute it. No monopoly here.
But you do have a choice to develop apps for non Apple user, as artists have a choice to put their music on other streaming services.
Netflix and Amazon figured out a way to keep their profits while still serving iOS users. Spotify is simply a whining kid.
[doublepost=1559186384][/doublepost]
That just sounds stupid. iOS is the platform. App Store is a feature within iOS.
One develop apps for the platform, iOS, not the App Store, the App Store is not a platform.
If I am a developer supporting an iOS user by developing an iOS app, I must go through a stringent review process and get approval from Apple to be able to distribute the app. However, on Windows, Linux, macOS, and Android, I can distribute without needing to go through any sort of approval process.
But, I have to pay Apple $100 to get my app hosted and distributed on iOS. I already finance hosting and serving. Not only that, I have been forced to use Apple's in app purchase billing systems to generate iOS revenue that costs a hefty 30%.
I see now that Spotify and Netflix have removed their in app purchases and direct to browsers for payment. Not sure how this passed Apple's review process as they clearly state in the terms of agreement this is disallowed. Maybe Apple made an exception for these large service providers. Or maybe this recent scrutiny has made them more lenient.
You're right that Apple does not have a monopoly in the definition of the word. However, we have to pay (a lot) to play on iOS, with great restriction on how we can collect payment, when nowhere else do we have to, and it is justly something to "whine" about. But it would be stupid to not outreach to the hundreds of millions of iOS users by developing an app for them. And in today's society, many people only have a phone, no desktop or laptop, so that's the only medium for outreach for some.
Yeah.....but it worked for Amazon.
[doublepost=1559192309][/doublepost]
1000% exactly
I don’t think you can compare the sheer scale of Amazon/Netflix to Spotify equally. Even Apple itself is much bigger than Spotify when it comes to its portfolio of products
The answer is and has been spelled out by Apple since in app purchases were there in Apple’s frameworks. The Uber ride is not a digital good it’s in the ‘real world’. The kindle book is a digital item.
You're right, if these were physical magazines and you were trying to renew your subscription, you wouldn't have a middleman tacking on a 30% renewal surcharge.
Agreed. iOS has 10% marketshare. That alone should be reason enough to leave it be. I'm not saying Apple's system is perfect, but people have choices, so who cares. I choose Apple's ecosystem, devs choose it too, and I don't want regulations crappifying it.
Anyway, I think this is a foolish move. All Apple does here is draw more attention to the dispute. Better to stay quiet.
[doublepost=1559194903][/doublepost]
They explain in the App Store guidelines. Has to do with whether the service is part of the app or external, not based on which particular company is providing it.
Last edited:
It is fine because the iPhone is a closed system. You don’t have the right to run anything from anywhere on your PlayStation, or your Xbox, you buy everything from Sony or Microsoft (they may have physical copies in stores but everything is sourced from them) they have a complete monopoly on distribution and give it 5 years and retail distribution will be entirely gone.
Part of the implicit agreement when buying an iPhone is you can only use the App Store to install apps on your iOS device. If you want to install anything you want you need to buy an android phone.
Sounds fine to me, you still find it worthwhile to develop for iOS. You can complain about it, but there's no need for a law to force Apple to do what you want. I'm an iOS dev too, but I admit it's not my main job.
Sure you do, lots of smaller magazines (now defunct as people buy fewer magazines) relied on distributors who printed and arranged the sale of the magazine, they took a cut of the subscription. Depending on the size of the magazine that figure was negotiable, smaller got hit harder than larger.
Last edited:
Of Course apps outside Apple's own are wanted / needed. And many of those Apps are available in the iOS app store. Apple is not fault-free. The theory is that these apps are being checked for true compatibility. However, I detest that Apple thinks 30% is an "OK" fee, but don't always do a good job at checking out new apps, or change their mind AFTER it has been allowed into the store. The idea of the walled garden store is good because it should provide peace of mind to the app user, but Apple seem to be becoming worse at looking after their store properly.
Not saying that people should NOT be allowed to go elsewhere, just pointing out the consequences - as I wrote, people download Apps from wherever, but if it causes problems, somehow it is always the fault of the OS makers
Terrible analogy. No one ever buys a Gillette razor. The razor blade industry is built on the model that you give the razor for free to sell the blades.
[doublepost=1559216408][/doublepost]
This looks like the external link just leads you to a page with information about subscriptions. You would then have to initiate the purchase yourself. So it's not breaking the requirement of not linking to a purchase mechanism.
(BTW the digital chin in iOS is disgusting and probably even worse design than the notch, surprised no one else seems bothered by it.)
Last edited:
I agree with this. I think one of the biggest reasons people are so riled about this is because Apple is throwing fuel to the fire by continually respond in a somewhat arrogant and somewhat erroneous manner.
There are several things wrong with their statement such that it’s hard to look past even as a neutral outsider.
But hey this is iconic Apple PR behavior, and they put themselves in this spot.
[doublepost=1559220585][/doublepost]
It’s bigger domestically.
The point is that the iOS App Store model has been as successful as it has in promoting the popularity of apps precisely because users have no choice.
When I can get my apps from only one place, that gets rid of a lot of indecision over where to get my apps from. Do I download from the App Store which might cost more, but is supposedly safer, or from some third party App Store or even directly from the developer, who might offer it cheaper (because they don't have to pay Apple their cut), but security is more dubious?
When my apps are sold via a trusted source who has taken the effort to screen them beforehand, I am more likely to spend on apps, because there is less fear of downloading malware.
The reality is that security and competition will always be at loggerheads. I believe that a centralised App Store model is what results in the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of users. That said, as with any other alternative, there will always be winners and losers. This doesn't make the App Store perfect, but I maintain it's still the best of all the options available.
Does anyone know what the current percentage of subscribed Spotify users are iOS, as opposed to android? The figures I've seen it's only 16% iOS in 2017.
With Spotify's 96+ million subscribers, with (lets say 80%) of them android users, losing 30% of a 20% revenue seems a bit petty. Are Spotify's margins so slim?
With Spotify's 96+ million subscribers, with (lets say 80%) of them android users, losing 30% of a 20% revenue seems a bit petty. Are Spotify's margins so slim?