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 to Comply With New Court Ordered App Store Rules, But Will Appeal
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Be a hoot if whatever Apple is planning legally succeeds. (But I doubt it)
They're letting Apple off way too easy. The only thing Apple has to pay for is Epic's lawyers? In what universe does that motivate an immoral for-profit business to follow the law?
Apple should be fined at 3x their ill-gotten gains, as is standard in most cases. Helpfully, that's actually not too difficult to calculate as 3 x 30% is roughly 100%, and Apple already breaks down their revenue by category, so just fine them for every cent in the Service category from the past 5 years. Distribute the money to the developers and other creators - you know, the people who actually made the good that was sold and not the rent-seeking parasite.
Apple should be fined at 3x their ill-gotten gains, as is standard in most cases. Helpfully, that's actually not too difficult to calculate as 3 x 30% is roughly 100%, and Apple already breaks down their revenue by category, so just fine them for every cent in the Service category from the past 5 years. Distribute the money to the developers and other creators - you know, the people who actually made the good that was sold and not the rent-seeking parasite.
I wouldn't assume all developers will choose this path (not even close).
Convenience of IAP still has many merits.
What this could and should do is make Apple compete more on terms of IAP
That is a win
I honestly don't see an issue with any of these new rules they have to follow.
While I agree in general, I think what Apple is worried about is every paid app becoming “free” and requiring an out-of-app subscription, which is significantly worse for Apple and (I’d argue) worse for Apple’s customers.
Imagine if you had to give your credit card info to every single paid app, you’re not able to easily cancel subscriptions, no remedy in cases of misrepresentations of functions, etc. and that’s before the scam apps, fraud etc that Apple will have no way of preventing, which will tarnish their brand image (especially if they’re not allowed to mention buying off the app store is riskier, which it absolutely is).
Again, I agree with most of this ruling; I just don’t think app steering is as black and white as most MacRumors “argh greedy Tim Cook” make it out to be. (Not saying that’s you - to be clear).
They had to take the spirit of the court order and make it the black and white text
I just don't think Devs will necessarily choose all that extra hassle unless the delta is pretty big.
That's on Apple
Compete on Terms
That's the thing they never want to do.
Win customers for your IAP program by competing
Could be fun to watch and better for us end users to have options and lower prices and competition
My last point on this (because we actually agree on 95% of this ruling) is that some of the terms are beater for Apple’s customers, but worse for Apple’s developers. Easily canceling subscriptions is the big one, refunding purchases from scammy games is another. And those customer-friendly terms are the ones Epic doesn’t like.
Would be nice, but I suspect prices don’t go down, big developers just keep more money while the little guys stay in the App Store. But obviously that’s just speculation
This is different. Their 30% tax is basically free money. Which is why they are willing to lose face fighting tooth and nail to keep it.
Tiered based on what though?
I can't think of a mechanism that would sustain current revenue (or in the same ballpark) but not completely blow up the ecosystem. I've heard folks talk about raising the developer fee from $99 per year; but they'd have to raise it so high that it'd lock out the small (or even some medium) players.
They can't do it based on number of app downloads/installs either as that'd make it unfeasible for your a bank/utility company/more categories surely, to build an app for users use to interface with their accounts (a place where an app is incredibly handy, but doesn't generate much if any revenue).
Many developers/companies have built the entire/big majority of their income stream off of Apple's intellectual property and platform, and $99/year is definitely not what Apple views as a fair trade for that.
There's Android. A far bigger ecosystem with far bigger market share. Why force homogenization?
We are not talking about a monopoly. This is about choice. Let customers decide. Let Apple be Apple and let the free market decide. Android is right there waiting with open arms for anyone wanting to leave the Apple ecosystem.
We are not talking about a monopoly. This is about choice. Let customers decide. Let Apple be Apple and let the free market decide. Android is right there waiting with open arms for anyone wanting to leave the Apple ecosystem.
Thank you Epic! I can’t thank you enough! I now can keep my 30% and only pay 2 to 3% for transaction fees. Apple does not deserve any commission when I buy something off a website on their devices it’s the same thing with an app!!! And even though the app is downloaded from the App Store this is a self created sole distribution mechanism which is slowly breaking apart and I love it!
Developer fee is tiered based on company revenue is the first thought that comes to mind. Or maybe per seat licensing? First seat in a company account is $99, 2-10 is $200 each, 10-25 is $1000, works its way up? Maybe exceptions for certain app categories? Maybe they raise prices on devices to compensate, or maybe most apps don’t leave? Or they do a EU and say “we allow alternative stores but if you want to be the App Store you have to play by our rules”. I’m sure they’ll think of something, (and I’m sure whatever it is will be worse for Apple than what they have now, which is why they should have done a better job of complying.)
I’d argue it absolutely isn’t. And blowing this up has the risk of making things worse for everyone. Hopefully we don’t realize that risk.
The thing is you’re just wrong. When you buy an iPhone you buy the hardware & and you can do anything you like with, like putting into a blender as some have. But when you set up your new iPhone you don’t own the software running on it. That software is Apple’s intellectual property. You have to click “agree” to the terms of service which most people never read. That 3rd party app you own needs Apple’s software to work at all. The touchscreen wouldn’t work without it, nothing would. Without Apple’s software working behind the scenes at all times your iPhone would be a brick. 📲
That’s different than whether I’m their financial customer for a specific third party app, and whatever that 3rd party may provide to me within their App.
That’s a lot of what all the arguing is about.
I think this one is a no-brainer. Anyways it's hard to buy apps these days the app store is plagued by in-app subscriptions. Even when you buy an app upfront a year or two later included features are taken away and put under in-app subscription Apple doesn't do a thing about it.
Not only do they not do anything about it, they love it!
Not talking about the merits of the case, but I’ve got a feeling if this goes to SCOTUS… the contempt ruling will be tossed.
It’s nice that one state has the guts to support consumers. It’s sad that it’s only one though
Doesn’t all of this apply to macOS? You either have to enter payment info on a website, or download a free trial for a period after giving your email. Left to their terms regarding refunds, subscription cancellation, etc? Plus the ridiculously unnecessary procedure of manually allowing unsigned apps…
A scam app pretending to be a virus scanner was in the top ten for months and Apple either had no idea or chose to do nothing