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 Slaps Warnings on Apps Using External Purchases in the EU [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The anti-steering provisions are related to in app purchases which are after the main sale. The retail equivalent would be Best Buy banning makers from mentioning they have their own website for buying replacement parts or addons in the in-box manual.
How is it freeloading when you have to pay Apple an annual fee to be a developer?
You are completely/deliberately missing the point. Everywhere needs a credit card info to process a payment. you are more likely to get scammed in a restaurant or ATM machine. Apple is no more secure than paypal/your password & 2FA
It’s a flawed implementation. And it’s funny how they seem to think sites in the EU are beholden.Actually the EU mandated that websites couldn't collect personal data without permission from users. Websites choose to put up the cookie popup. They're annoying, its true but aim your ire in the right place
I’ve got an idea: California’s rules are MUCH more pro-consumer. Let’s require the EU to follow ours.
The annual fee doesn't come close to covering Apple's costs for the App Store, especially for a popular free app that isn't monetized via the store. For example, depending on Apple's bandwidth costs, Spotify's app is estimated to cost Apple somewhere from $400,000-$1 million just to provide downloads and updates of their app.
Next Apple Pop Up:
When opening the Apple Store app, a pop up with the phrase "We think you're going to like it" appears.
When opening the Apple Store app, a pop up with the phrase "We think you're going to like it" appears.
Given the profit margin on an iPhone ranges between 40-60% I’m sure this covers hosting costs. Operating servers for the App Store is part and parcel of the iPhone experience. I still don’t see it as freeloading. If you released a free app that became popular would you delete it out of guilt?
Hopefully, we all know it's bad to purchase from Amazon. That personal convenience comes at the high social costs of empty storefronts and previously quiet residential streets clogged with constantly circulating delivery trucks.
But what’s the difference between digital and physical? Why do consumers need to be warned when it’s digital goods and not physical? Are there no shady apps selling physical things? There isn’t a logical answer here because it’s not really about privacy and security, it’s about Apple believing it needs a be paid for use of it’s IP and a cut of IAP is the way they’ve chosen to do it.
No more secure than nearly all other point of sale systems. Euronet, FiServ, Worldpay, etc., etc. do authorizations, fraud detection, credit valuations and all kinds of things for ALL front end merchants and branded credit cards. Payment systems are even load balanced on the back end so if a primary processor is overloaded, down or cant process a transaction for some other reason, the transaction (called a STIP - standin transaction processing) is routed to secondary and tertiary processors. Apple is no different other than Goldman offloads through their own 3rd party contracts.
The Apple card does not stay within some imaginary walled Apple financial system and transaction environment. That's the point - they are point of sale and demand to be the ONLY point of sale.
Interesting how the only things that aren’t private and secure are those where Apple is/was getting a cut. Buying a physical book from Amazon no scary warning. Heck no warning at all because you don’t have to leave the app to buy it. But buying some gems in a game from a well known app developer? Ooh scary warning. That won’t be private and secure unless you use Apple’s payments system where coincidentally they get a 30% cut.
I’m sorry, but this company deserves all the litigation that keeps coming their way.
They badly need new leadership
They badly need new leadership
No, I am saying other payment methods are also secure. germanbeer seems to have drunk too much of it, and thinks that only apple is secure
Complete misdirection.
It's the creepy (largely U.S.-based) internet advertising industry that's putting tons upon tons of trackers on web sites, trying to stalk internet users everywhere and everytime.
Not the E.U.
...because Apple wants these apps on their store.
Especially the ones from the most popular video streaming platforms.
Without these apps, and without them being free-to-download, consumers would be much less inclined to buy iPhones.
So Apple derives value from these apps being on their store - even if they're offered for (nearly) free.
Whats funny is that the EU told Apple to let developers disclose whether or not they can get something for cheaper online, Apple is doing it for them.
If the EU fights this, Apple has a case that they were told to do this and that this is complying with the DMA. Apple just has smart geniuses at Apple Park.
I would say there is a clear difference in how most people consume physical goods compared to digital. Physical goods are mostly bought from places you already know, you don’t search the app store for an app for physical goods from unknown sources but you might for an app that provides a use.
The question is what is bad for the consumer about being warned that they have to do the research and vetting to make sure the payment platform in the app is safe to use? I see this as a win for us consumers as this means we can make informed decisions, it will hinder shady developers when trying to prey on uninformed consumers.
Apple has done a mesmerizingly good job at confusing people into thinking any of this is about safety security or privacy.
All of this is about defending their business interest and that’s it.
All of this is about defending their business interest and that’s it.
Apple employing FUD tactics. How low will they go? Obviously they will get slapped for this and will be humiliated one more time.