IAP = you pay to unlock content. No content is being unlocked here...it's free to everyone. No one is forcing people to tip.
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 Takes Risk By Telling Chinese Chat Apps to Disable 'Tip' Functions
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
IAP = you pay to unlock content. No content is being unlocked here...it's free to everyone. No one is forcing people to tip.
Nickle and dime tactics Apple. This might not turn out so well for you Apple. China plays by its own rules.
Free? That doesn't mean what you think it does... unless you think free means a yearly dev fee. If that's the case, then yes, seems fair lol
Nonsense. When I buy a clothes directly from Amazon in the Amazon app, Amazon the app developer gets revenue. When I buy a computer on eBay the app, both the seller and eBay the app developer get revenue. Apple doesn't categorize these as In-App Purchase.
Oh, by the way, I guess you also believe that Apple should ask for a cut of every transaction Uber registers, correct?
Last edited:
It's not an IAP, Apple isn't entitled to diddly squat.
Beyond the initial app installation it uses all WeChat infrastructure. At least with Android there's an option to side load when a company gets too greedy.
The exact same argument can be made for Amazon ebook purchases, Office 365 subscriptions, Netflix subscriptions, Spotify subscriptions, or any other number of digital content purchases that are currently subject to the "Apple Tax". All the resources for the content creation and delivery beyond the initial app installation for those products are maintained by the originating company, not Apple.
Maybe this will finally bring Apple's in-app surcharge into the spotlight and force a serious discussion over what content deserves to be assessed a 30% fee. Content that is hosted by Apple or is paid through the users Apple account would be an obvious place to start since Apple is providing the entire infrastructure for monetizing the application. Others, such as those mentioned above, should likely be exempt since Apple provides nothing but the bandwidth to distribute the apps. Once the apps are installed everything runs through the developers resources with Apple providing no additional benefit.
Of course Apple will fight it tooth and nail since it would tend to level the playing field between itself and competitors for services it offers directly like music, movies, or ebooks.
$99 dollars a year doesn't come close to covering CDN fees of the App Store. Especially given how popular WeChat is.
[doublepost=1495139495][/doublepost]
Apple policies dictate they are. And it's not unreasonable given the cost of app distribution.
I hope gets bitten on this. I can not stand the idea of apps having features designed to be user to user falling under IAP. This is a straight up money grab not worthy of consideration and will go down like a lead balloon. WeChat uses will jump off ios so quick. Also how does apple think they can enforce this as it basically goes down the risky route of anti competition rules. I find it sickening to suggest personal transactions of any kind should be IAP classified.
Can you point to where I claimed the dev fee covered... well... anything? Prolly not. I however, can point to where you claimed it was free. Which definitely isn't true, and is my entire point of contention with your post.
I was thinking of the Amazon Prime app, but seemed to imply I was thinking off the shopping app hmm... You are right about the shopping app but that again is stupid as it is buying goods in an app which Apples rules would imply 30% cut is taken, even though it isn't.
[doublepost=1495140074][/doublepost]
I'm curious, what bandwidth do you actually believe Apple personally provide when a tip is made in this app from one person to another?
Last edited:
I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyways, Apple has more to lose than gain if they really are serious about forcing this issue. You're not gonna gain market share by alienating the #1 message app in China.
No, tips are not taxed by the restaurant (though the restaurant may collect them on behalf of the IRS, state).
That said the restaurant may have a policy that x% of server tips are to go to other staff, such as bussers, etc.
Mike
Greedy bastards. Same as not wanting to pay Qualcomm what they agreed to.
No, they have big differences.
Most importantly, all of those "purchases" you referred above that generates Apple a cut, the transaction go through Apple Store's payment system. If you bought an Amazon eBook via other venues, like on Amazon's website, Apple doesn't get a cut and you can still re-download the same eBook on your iOS Kindle app. Similarly, if you signed up with Netflix on a place other than directly from within the iOS/tvOS Netflix app, Apple doesn't get the cut and you are still entitled to watch Netflix contents on your iOS/tvOS devices.
The second big difference lies in that "tips" are fully voluntary, while all of the examples you referred above are required payments BEFORE you can start enjoying the contents.
[doublepost=1495143899][/doublepost]
Two different things.
On the Apple vs. Qualcomm case, Qualcomm started the whole thing, by not giving Apple the 1 billion discount / kickback that it agreed to. As to a more favorable rate / payment calculation method, it's a separate issue, Apple simply grouped the two things together into one suit.
Last edited:
Because Apple does not handle your money in these situations. Amazon and eBay do. In IAP, and tipping in this case, Apple does handle your money. Every time Apple provides a market place and handles a transaction, they have to take a cut.
Amazon and eBay apps are just a user interface access to Amazon and eBay's market place.
I have a banking app that lets me transfer money (up to $AUD1000 per day) to any other bank in the world. I wouldn't want to have either myself, or the recipient to have to pay apple 30% because Apple decides one day that these are in app purchases.
Apple is destroying their Mac lineup because they don't control the money, and now they're trying to control all the money that happens to flow due to apps running on their devices. Apple's logo was once "Think Different" now it should be "Think Money"
Apple is destroying their Mac lineup because they don't control the money, and now they're trying to control all the money that happens to flow due to apps running on their devices. Apple's logo was once "Think Different" now it should be "Think Money"
TOTALLY wrong! None of the money involved in the “tip” are processed by Apple, they are processed either directly by the banks, or Visa, or MasterCard, or AliPay, or Union Pay, or WeChat Pay, exactly the same as how you buy stuff in Amazon or eBay, except that there are more commonly accepted payment methods in China than in the US.
This article is not clearly written and seems to be causing some confusion. The truth of the situation would seem to be one of two senariois:
A) Are Chinese users downloading movies, books, music or apps via the App Store or iTunes for free or a small fee, then tipping them additional $ via the chat apps? or
B) Are Chinese users downloading music, movies and apps to their phone via their computer (or something else) and then tipping via the chat app?
If it's A, then I can see how Apple might feel entitled to their cut, since they are providing the distribution and that would seem to be a clear attempt to skirt full payment via Apple's official marketplaces. If it's B, and users are essentially performing all aspects of the transaction OUTSIDE the Apple marketplace (which still might be a way for content creators to skirt Apple's fee, albeit more elaborate) then it will be much trickier for Apple to justify their take.
If anyone has actual insight on the situation I'd appreciate the 411.
A) Are Chinese users downloading movies, books, music or apps via the App Store or iTunes for free or a small fee, then tipping them additional $ via the chat apps? or
B) Are Chinese users downloading music, movies and apps to their phone via their computer (or something else) and then tipping via the chat app?
If it's A, then I can see how Apple might feel entitled to their cut, since they are providing the distribution and that would seem to be a clear attempt to skirt full payment via Apple's official marketplaces. If it's B, and users are essentially performing all aspects of the transaction OUTSIDE the Apple marketplace (which still might be a way for content creators to skirt Apple's fee, albeit more elaborate) then it will be much trickier for Apple to justify their take.
If anyone has actual insight on the situation I'd appreciate the 411.
Last edited:
This is one of those cases where brevity is not the soul of wit. I literally, figuratively, metaphorically, philosophically, existentially, and 100 other -ly words, have no idea what you're trying to say... Seriously.
Why do you and I seem to be the only people who see it this way? Seems to me an obvious attempt to skirt the App Store/iTunes.
My only question is, are all these tips for content that was downloaded originally via App Store/iTunes/iBooks, or content downloaded in other ways?
Absolutely they do. My step daughter is a waitress, every year, her TIPS are on her W2 and they are taxed.[/QUOTE]
That's taxed by IRS, not by the restaurants. Apple is not IRS. China has its own IRS.
That's taxed by IRS, not by the restaurants. Apple is not IRS. China has its own IRS.
I would imagine the people of that corporation use the app.. I would also imagine they would walk with their wallets. It could strain business relations as this form of money seems to be part of Chinese culture, and Apple has shown no respect for that.