It's amazing how many people don't understand that "markets are made" .. they don't just spontaneously pop up and exist in any useful way.
There literally is no such thing as a 100% "free market"
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 Working on Solution for EU Core Technology Fee Possibly Bankrupting Apps That Go Unexpectedly Viral
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's amazing how many people don't understand that "markets are made" .. they don't just spontaneously pop up and exist in any useful way.
There literally is no such thing as a 100% "free market"
Nobody ignores it, it’s just irrelevant. If apples service is superior then developers will stay, if not then they won’t.
You simply don’t know the point of the DMA
The rules Apple have posted in my opinion:
1: illegal
2: will be forced to change
3: anti competitive
4: incentivize developers to stay only with the AppStore.
And we will see what the EU commission rules in a few month or so.
So why would a developer agree to a terms that sucks?
Booking dot com is an EU company designated as a gatekeeper.
The definition the DMA works by, aka a dominant company is yes the gatekeeper.
The DMA is just a post anti rule
In the DMA it's pretty clear that the "Gatekeeper" is allowed to enact measures that are "strictly necessary and proportionate" to ensure the safety of the platform in respects to third-party applications and app stores, but makes also pretty clear that the Gatekeeper needs to be able to justify those measures.
I can imagine the regulators might have a disagreement with Apple about the notarization and whether it's justified in all its aspects as "strictly necessary and proportionate". If they disagree, the notarization might be challenged.
Also note that even if the EU regulators were to determine that the notarization or parts of it are not justified for third-party apps or app stores, it would not mean Apple would have to modify or forfeit the notarization for its own app store: only that Apple would have to implement less intrusive measures for third-party stores or third-party apps sold outside of the Apple App Store.
No, they don't want Apple to force notarization upon developers. Apple has been designated as a gatekeeper, and the whole point of competition law is to make companies like Apple stop gatekeeping.
Just make iOS more like macOS, where users have the final say over whether or not they can install apps.
Maybe if Apple stops behaving like a mobster and starts complying in good faith, they can convince most developers that want to use web distribution or alternative stores to voluntarily notarize their apps.
It means that’s as can be inferred from all their information, the 99$ developer membership fee is all that’s needed to access all the tools and services as clearly listed. If Apple intends something else they should have been more careful how they word things.
Apple states the commission is for sales of goods and services through the AppStore, and nothing else.
What’s Included - Apple Developer Program
The Apple Developer Program provides resources for developing and distributing software for Apple platforms.
It means that’s as can be inferred from all their information, the 99$ developer membership fee is all that’s needed to access all the tools and services as clearly listed. If Apple intends something else they should have been more careful how they word things.
View attachment 2360841
Apple states the commission is for sales of goods and services through the AppStore, and nothing else.
View attachment 2360842
What’s Included - Apple Developer Program
The Apple Developer Program provides resources for developing and distributing software for Apple platforms.developer.apple.com
Legitimately asking—is English your first language? Because you've repeatedly posted screenshots that say one thing but claimed they say something entirely different.
While this would stand to reason in a simplistic way, in this case Apple might be subsidizing some parts of what they make available through the fee with a different source of revenue that the flat fee. Unless we have a detailed accounting of Apple's business we don't really know what is paying for what and we can only guess. Those guesses might be well founded and reasonable, but are still guesses.
This is true in general for Apple's operations and makes sense in the context of Apple's own strategy as part of this strategy is having some developers being basically subsidized by other developers, so the costs incurred by Apple are not always proportionate to what a specific developer is paying.
Have they? Did they win the browser engine market on iOS? The payment system? The AppStore? All the things Apple have mandated as mandatory for the iOS market?
Seems like they haven’t won anything yet if they have to force its use instead of competing on the merits.
why wouldn’t they? Ever heard of personal responsibility? And these issues are legal issues that the member states have the responsibility to deal with.
If you want Apple to be your parent you are free to stay in the existing appstore where it’s safe and the walls are fluffy.
So there is a $99 fee and the commission on digital goods.It means that’s as can be inferred from all their information, the 99$ developer membership fee is all that’s needed to access all the tools and services as clearly listed. If Apple intends something else they should have been more careful how they word things.
View attachment 2360841
Apple states the commission is for sales of goods and services through the AppStore, and nothing else.
View attachment 2360842
What’s Included - Apple Developer Program
The Apple Developer Program provides resources for developing and distributing software for Apple platforms.
Exactly what the writing says — I don’t know why you ignore the commission 🤔
Very strange!
English isn’t my native tongue no.
So what are the text saying?
I have referenced the legal term for the terms👇
I’m not ignoring the commission, as stated on their website it’s for providing the sale of their application.
The fact Apple differentiate between physical and digital goods is an arbitrary rule they have based on nothing concrete.
Hey enjoy your clusterf***k.
Good luck — you’re gonna need it (not YOU of course, because you’re far too smart to get infected by malware).
EU member states got your back with some rules that will stop bad actors for sure — and you have “personal responsibility 😂
As for your litany of iOS features — ya, Apple won big time as voted on by their billions of customers on the FREE MARKET
Take the “L” and enjoy your rules 😉
Yes but they can do that - if they have fair competition. The market would then decide whether it's a good deal or not.
The issue is that the fees cover a multitude of different costs incurred by Apple and only some of those costs should be relevant for third-party apps delivered through alternative stores.
The Core Fee is an attempt to have these third-parties "pay their due", but it's implemented in a way that is problematic, especially since it treats similar apps very differently depending on whether they are delivered through Apple's own App Store or a third-party.
Okay sure. But what else do you need to actually run an emulator? Those typically are.
Android has:
1. Alt App Stores
2. Side loading
3. 3x more users than iOS
Yet, developers made 2X more on iOS.
WHY IS THIS?
Could it be that Apple’s “walled garden” is better for developers? 🤔
Edit:
Might that “walled garden” be better for consumers? If 1/3 the users buy 2X on your platform, *something* must be different to make purchases more trustworthy & valuable.
I WONDER IF APPLE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DIFFERENCE?
1. Alt App Stores
2. Side loading
3. 3x more users than iOS
Yet, developers made 2X more on iOS.
WHY IS THIS?
Could it be that Apple’s “walled garden” is better for developers? 🤔
Edit:
Might that “walled garden” be better for consumers? If 1/3 the users buy 2X on your platform, *something* must be different to make purchases more trustworthy & valuable.
I WONDER IF APPLE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DIFFERENCE?
Just because YOU think the rule is “arbitrary” and not “concrete” doesn’t really matter.
It’s the business agreement. Developers have the choice to agree and distribute apps or not.
I know you really want to run Apple, but alas it isn’t to be.
Also, are the DMA rules not “arbitrary” as well?
It depends on whether the emulator requires files from the original console, e.g. a BIOS file or some other ROM data. It's not always the case and might depend on which system is being emulated or even on the same system it might be a game-by-game basis.
Of course delivering a BIOS file that is copyrighted by Nintendo or any other console manufacturer is a pretty big no, but I don't know whether that is required for emulating a GBA or whether it was provided in the App mentioned. I doubt it as it would be very difficult to justify from a legal point of view.
“Apple should not get between these two groups of people and prevent the ability of these groups to connect.“
I should have been clearer - not only freeware, both paid and unpaid software. If an iPhone or iPad owner wants to take the risk of stepping outside of the Apple App store ecosystem, they should have that freedom without resorting to jail breaking their device.
A digital good, bought and consumed on an iPhone, uses Apples IP to "come alive".
A physical good, like a hamburger, does not.
Yes, they own 65% of the hotel booking market and this year may fall under the number of users provision of the “gatekeeper” rule.
What will the EU regulators do to them I wonder? 🤔
My prediction: NOTHING THAT WILL CHANGE ANYTHING IN A MEANINGFUL WAY
Can you think of “rule” that will help other booking sites compete?
Force them to charge more?
Make their features worse?
Show fewer commercials on TV!
What a joke.
google lets people sideload... mac os lets you install out of the app store. I fail to see a valid argument from Apple
1. Different company
2. Different platform
Open your eyes to the iOS App economy and you can see the “argument” plain as day.
iPhone is an app appliance that makes it dead simple to find and install millions of apps.
The App Store delivers 2X revenue to developers compared to Android with only 1/3 the users.
This is how iOS was designed and why it has flourished.
EU is looking to destroy this with its rules whose only effect will be a worse user experience and a higher likelihood of malware.
Enjoy!
Considering We are completely fine on the Mac and windows I will say we will be fine.
I’m an adult, if someone wants to stay in the AppStore they can do that. It isn’t a binary choice.
Yes as with everything else when a crime is committed.
Personal responsibility is something adults have, no need to babysit them.
Oh that’s interesting I didn’t know other browsers than WebKit was allowed before on iOS devices 🤔. Or that we could use alternative Apple Pay wallets. Etc.
Well not so fast, these things are already legally defined. The issue is the implications of a dominant company and their responsibility to not
I agree, as the fees seems to be unrelated with any costs incurred
That includes EU thinking it’s arbitrary. Legally speaking there no difference between a digital and “physical” goods that is payed through the AppStore.
The rules for selling a program on a disk or as a download is the same.
such As? The DMA rules was negotiated between 27 countries, EU parliament and the commission.
The rules are built upon legal precedent from the EUs equivalent to the Supreme Court rulings.
Hmm — like the arbitrary “financial thresholds” or the arbitrary number of users.
Just because a lot of regulators join in the fun doesn’t make their decisions any less arbitrary.
More like carefully crafted to target exactly who they wanted to 😉
We see you.