But you can buy another $29 phone. There. No regulation needed. That other $29 phone is like opening a Walmart store when a Whole Foods is next door. You want “premium” you buy from Whole Foods. You want cheap, you buy from Walmart.
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
if a customer became a paying customer after downloading the iOS app, that means Apple played a role in converting that customer to a paying customer. this is a cold hard fact you can't argue against.
disagreed. Spotify didn't spend billions setting up a platform. apple did. if they think their customers would enjoy their own offering of XYZ service, they should be allowed to do it.
Apple never seem to see it that third party apps provide tremendous value to the iPhone.
Try uninstalling all third party apps from your iPhone for a week - you can use the web - and see how useful the iPhone feels.
Try uninstalling all third party apps from your iPhone for a week - you can use the web - and see how useful the iPhone feels.
exactly my point...?
no one said it's developer's fault. this is Apple's business decision.
yes.
And? That's market forces at work. If Apple demanded 30% from Amazon's razor thin margins on selling products or from Uber's-barely-making-a-profit service (are they even making a profit?), then those apps would have never existed on the App Store. No amount of competition in that "physical goods and services" space will make Apple taking 30% feasible.
So if those apps do not exist on iOS, it makes iOS less competitive against Android with the assumption that Android doesn't take 30% from those apps but iOS does. It's unlikely any competitor would be able to compete with those big names while at the same time pay 30% to Apple, and certainly Apple couldn't build their own version, so Apple has no choice but to make an exception for those apps. This is a no brainer.
However if a purely digital XYZ app/game refuses to make an iOS version of the product because they don't want to pay Apple 30%, competition allows for suitable replacements by other companies which keeps iOS competitive against Android in the app space. If Spotify left, Tidal/YouTube/Apple Music would gladly take over.
This exception makes a ton of sense which is why they came up with it since the beginning of the App Store.
Last edited:
Apple lawyers need to reposition the lawsuit. Stop calling it an ‘App Store’ Fee … The fee charged by Apple is for software development, maintenance and testing, and product awareness, distribution and fulfillment. If Spotify does not want to pay, then those services should be revoked… 1. all the software APIs, development & testing platforms, guidance on Ux design, etc. critical to making their software function. 2. Giving MILLIONS of global users visibility, and easy access to Spotify software in a secure virtual store. Creating either of these on their own would cost tens of millions.
Of course they do - but it is symbiotic, and both benefit from the relationship. Spotify can make money from their app (and ripping off artists) and Apple can make money from the dev tools and distribution it provides. Software development doesn’t ‘end’ … it’s ongoing and Apple continuously pays developers to evolve, maintain and protect. And where is the App Store? In some free cloud? No it’s hosted on thousands of servers in data centers across the globe that also need to be upgraded, maintained and protected - that costs billions. It’s unlikely Spotify would even be in business without those Apple resources, so Apple absolutely should be compensated by app creators.
This is a great point but is exactly the reason Apple has neutered PWAs, so the big platforms can't circumvent the AppStore on iOS devices. Apple are greedy, malicious and anti-competition (which in turn, plays out to be anti-consumer).
Apple cares for their customers, cares for their developers, and are only thinking with security in mind. I know they have good intentions.
Last edited:
What role did Apple play? On iOS their App Store is the only way to get apps so it’s not like users had a choice. They’re not going to Apple’s App Store to download the Spotify app because of Apple. They’re going there because there is no other option.
Apple created a world-class storefront that developers love to use, and customers love to use even more. I think it's clear that they are owed for that.
Last edited:
Apple definitely knows the value and importance of developers and third party apps.
And that's why developers keep 70% or 85% of their app's purchases. That's good, right?
I agree! Apple cares very much about their developers and it shows. It is a symbiotic relationship where both sides are happy.
Last edited:
I think you just answered your own question.
By making one place to get all of your apps, by making it easy and feel safe to purchase/download/install apps, it increases the chances of converting a user to a paying customer.
users had the choice of signing up via web. they can play music on the web too.
users also have the choice of buying an android device.
users have choices.
you're talking about a different point.
nerfing web is unrelated to whether or not Apple can use their own platform to their own advantage like how Google does.
“Strained relationship” — Who are you talking about exactly?
Your fantasies are pretty amusing! 😂😂😂
Not defending Apple at all here, but my phone is a company issued iPhone 8. Our phones are locked down. I really don't have an issue only using text and the web.
And how many of that “constant stream” have abandoned iOS development?
Where are they going?
Keep it up — comedy gold! 😂
Yes, Apple hosts the app itself. Apple also made the development tools, the iPhone and the OS.
As Carl Sagan said, “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”