I am not aware of any such special deal either. If anything, I recall Apple Music doing a similar thing like Spotify where they didn't allow users to subscribe in-app so they didn't have to pay Google 30%. Stingy, perhaps, but all by the book.
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 Spotify Wants 'Limitless Access' to App Store Tools Without Paying
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
please put up the link about 0% fee for Apple Music (Android) subscriptions... I've looked and the only places you see this claim is by people on here
how many songs a month would you need to listen to for your subscription to be worth less than what they pay artists?
Spotify pay a very very small amount per track.
And dont songs with less than 1000 plays get nothing?
If you listen to 99% of a track is that a play or does it need to be the entire track?
Even if some users listened all day every day, most dont. they make up on light users paying...
60% market share and people are free to buy whatever phone they want.
It's almost like people like what Apple are offering... including the walled garden and builtin payments. Imagine. Market driven consumer choice. Like the EU want
Right, I don't support smoking or vaping personally, but Apple has no right to categorically decide that vaping apps are not allowed to ever grace the presence of their precious little iPhone users home screens. Ditto cloud gaming, I am personally against the concept of streaming games rendered in the cloud (for many reasons, prime of which being I play FPS games and the delay just makes it untenable, but also the fact that I don't like paying subscription fees in general) but if people like that then who are Apple to decide that that's not allowed? Porn apps? Etc.
My father didn't buy his iPhone, it was given to him by his company, no other options. Sure, that's a special case, but my point is there are lots of people running around with iPhones they didn't really choose themselves. Plus the entire concept that someone else gets to decide if a certain app category is allowed to exist or not should be revolting. And also, it's not a concept normal people think about, they just see a phone that's capable of downloading the Twitter app, they don't realise or even understand what it means that they won't be allowed to install an open source version of the Twitter app simply because it was GPL3 licensed and Apple does not allow any GPL3 software on the App Store.
There is no denying their success, but the app store success is pretty much by default. There are no other options so so long as the phone itself is successful then the AppStore has to be. No competition is part of the wider issue.
looks like you can subscribe from the Android version in app.
Just cant find any docs to support the many claims on here about special deals
if your father was given a work phone, it's not his to install whatever he likes.
i've worked at companies where IT control what goes on work phones. tightly.
and most work places have guidelines on what you can do with those phones (and cant do as well) or be sacked.
well still some apps like sports betting, casino and lottery may have issues in the law with apple takeing an % cut and takeing per bet will need an lot of tracking that other systems do not have.
other stuff like uber will need to be zero.
I don't disagree, but that doesn't put the control in Apples hands, it puts it in the IT department of said companys hands. If the company just needs their employees to be able to take/make calls and read/write emails, but lets them use the device freely otherwise, then a person has still been forced to use an iPhone, and that person then needs to be able to do what they want with the device within the scope of whats allowed at the company.
I didn't buy my iPhone either (though I did have a choice), and my company also allows me to do whatever I want with it as well (except jailbreaking, I have a separate device for that as I work in application security and occasionally need to have root access to analyse how an app behaves).
Then maybe the company purchased iPhones for their employees knowing fully well that it was locked down and therefore there would be lower risk of your dad accidentally sideloading malware onto the device and potentially compromising sensitive information?
So in this case, it would be a feature, not a drawback.
No, they buy iPhones because they have some internal apps that are developed for iOS, that's the only reason they run iOS and nothing else.
The sandbox protects against malware, apps installed from external marketplaces won't be a larger risk than App Store apps, they'll be subject to the same sandbox, they just won't be reviewed so they may make attempts to break the sandbox, which Apple needs to learn about anyway.
Yes! They can choose!! So Apple CAN change their choice to take a commission on digital content in Apps but they are acting like they cannot!
It's been 9 years since Apple Music launched.
Seems pretty obvious that Apple's entry ended this market.
I think something that would be pretty revealing to look at would be adoption of Apple Music vs Spotify on iOS vs Android. On Android, the two services are on even footing. On iOS, Spotify argues that Apple has an unfair advantage. If AM has vastly higher adoption on iOS than Android, that'd validate Spotify's claim, no? Ecosystem wouldn't be a valid defense for Apple, would it? It seems like all the ecosystem perks for Apple Music are present on both iOS and Android... the only difference between the two is it's preinstalled on iOS vs distributed via an app store on Android.
| 9 Years before Apple Music | 9 Years since Apple Music | |
| Streaming Services Started | 24, evenly spread over period | 3, most recently in 2018 |
| Streaming Services Ended | 9, evenly spread over period | 23, fairly evenly spread |
Seems pretty obvious that Apple's entry ended this market.
I think something that would be pretty revealing to look at would be adoption of Apple Music vs Spotify on iOS vs Android. On Android, the two services are on even footing. On iOS, Spotify argues that Apple has an unfair advantage. If AM has vastly higher adoption on iOS than Android, that'd validate Spotify's claim, no? Ecosystem wouldn't be a valid defense for Apple, would it? It seems like all the ecosystem perks for Apple Music are present on both iOS and Android... the only difference between the two is it's preinstalled on iOS vs distributed via an app store on Android.
Actually, they don't.
They did for awhile. But there was an enormous drop in quality and quantity of apps a decade ago as developers realized Apple is an absolutely terrible company to sell anything through. You'll note that every Apple app store after the iOS App Store has been a complete failure. It's not for lack of a user base - there's tons of Apple Watches, Apple TVs, iPads, and Macs out there.
And the Mac has a lot of good software for it. But none of it is distributed via the Mac App Store. Because literally anything else is better as an app distribution system than using an App Store run by Apple.
Nope. Spotify wants access to anything without paying Apple.
Apple has onging expenses for APIs, Applications, and servers.
Spotify is the largest music streaming app and has an unfair advantage, and so by their own logic they need to open up their app to Apple Music.
From Apple's POV. That Developer Program only pays for the Tools developer use, and not accessing the API and IP on iPhone. Which Apple collects by the 30% commission rate.
One could argue that the developer program should have included those priced in. Which is probably true.
There are some nuance in that. Many of the Kirklands are manufactured by the same competing products range in Costco. Arguably they are competing against themselves. I am not sure about Costco, but many if not all of the in house branding also dont compete for the same price range category. As far as FMCG brand owners' are concerned. That is OK.
As for AppleTV+, arguably Apple TV+ don't yet compete with Netflix or Disney. As soon as Apple does, I am sure they will.