Every app running on iOS will use Apple’s technology, and they want to charge for it. Im not sure where this idea comes from that the method of app distribution should determine whether Apple can charge a fee or not.
They want to charge for it, sure. That doesn’t mean they will be allowed to. I am quite confident that this core technology nonsense will be axed by the regulator.
They already do. It’s the $99 per year developer fee.
I’m not sure it will because then the regulation becomes a prohibition on being able to charge for IP, and I don’t think the DMA is designed to prevent companies from being able to charge money for their technology products.
Yikes. How can someone be smart enough to post in an internet forum but dumb enough for a take this bad?
The Note 7 was taken off the market by government rules, not by the market itself. If the market had the kind of power you seem to think it did, the Note 8 never would have gotten off the ground and Samsung would not be a Smartphone player.
Because Boeing has to fix all the planes they already sold. Not because the market is demanding they do, because government regulations are forcing them to.
I wouldn't say the US airlines are any better, considering how easy it is to get dumped from a flight. You know, because that's how "markets" work.
Not when changing the way things work means that big players leverage their dominant position in the market to further their own monopolistic position and keep competitors from entering that market.
Apple charges money for its IP. Apple products cost significantly more than similarly specced competition products. In addition to that they charge developers a yearly fee to use the SKD, APIs etc. The core developer fee doesn’t have this purpose, it’s meant to discourage developers from publishing outside of the App Store, which is clearly against the spirit and the intent of the DMA. Apple can, if it wants, raise the cost of its products or the fee it charges developers… if it thinks it can convince customers to still buy its products and developers to still develop for them, but it can’t charge only the developers who publish on alternative app stores. This won’t go down well with the EU (or the various other governments considering similar regulations).
I mean thats what Apple cleary wants. I'm not sure why people are disagreeing with you. Apple clearly can't afford to host a file in a datacenter somewhere for free, just look at their quarterly results! (That last bit is sarcasm)
What if that also makes things better for consumers? Is that not a consideration?
It has been considered and the (obvious) conclusion was that it does not make things better for consumers.
I believe Apple offers developers the ability to pay the CTF and a reduced commission in the App Store, or stay on the current commission terms, as well as charging no commission and a CTF outside of the App Store. So developers will have 3 different payment/cost profiles to pick from for their apps.
I don’t think it has been considered, because i think the (obvious, as you say) opposite conclusion would be reached if it had been.
I agree with you in principle, but it's irrelevant to this particular discussion.
The EU conducted a very detailed impact assessment, that includes also impact on consumers. The conclusion was that this will make things better for consumers. So I repeat it: it has been considered and the conclusion was that it was good for consumers. And frankly I’ll trust a detailed assessment done by experts over a random joe on the internet.
An independent trustworthy committee, let’a call it a „Committee for App Fairness“, could be formed that includes
Technically developers have options, but in practice most developers don't, which is the entire goal of this new fee. Those developers are forced to stay on Apple's old terms and only use the App Store and Apple's payment system, or else they will have to pay Apple hundreds of thousands or even tens of millions of dollars each year.
I don’t think Apple thinks they are doing anything wrong, so I don’t think they’d recognise that there was anything that needed changing (they still disagree with the DMA).
I agree that would be great, but the problem would be getting Spotify, epic and match group to agree to it (especially as they would have to pay for the running of it).
Your conclusion seems to be the opposite of what Apple has said would happen. I understand Apple wants to paint a rosey picture but I prefer to deal in facts and I haven’t seen any to the contrary. I presume these are the figures that the EU will be pouring over.
Us protects us from us
