Why does Nintendo, Sony (PlayStation), Microsoft (XBox)?
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
I honestly doubt that. It's clear that companies like Epic and Hey are not willing to pay Apple a single cent, so they will still complain however low Apple's cut is, so long as it is a number greater than 0.
The second problem is that everything is interconnected. It was possible for Apple to subsidise free apps in the App Store with the revenue from paid apps and IAPs. Remove that (a freemium game distributed via a third party App Store won't earn Apple a single cent), and of course Apple would start thinking of alternatives to make up for the shortfall. And of they can't tax developers a percentage of their earnings, then charging them based on app downloads seems like the next best solution that doesn't entail a whole load of administrative overhead (I don't think we want Apple hiring auditors to scrutinise the earnings of every developer either).
The DMA doesn't appear to expressly prohibit Apple from monetising its IP. To the people who believe that taxing each app download 50 cents is a bad idea, what's your suggestion, apart from simply expecting Apple to absorb the costs and continue providing the same service it has always done for free? The only other solution I can think of is to increase the annual developer fee. Maybe double or even triple it?
Where I live (an EU country by a very thin margin of the popular vote of yesteryear), I read headlines way too often about EU regulations imposing costly or just plain impossible regulations for businesses and private citizens alike.
Many people here say that's what we voted for. Funny thing is, most of our politicians seeking election to the EU parliament are losers in our domestic elections – so EU gets politicians who represent the unpopular opinion in our democracy.
The result? Legislation such as DMA that certainly does not benefit the consumer or majority of developers, mostly resulting in unwanted consequences such as the one mentioned in the article.
Many people here say that's what we voted for. Funny thing is, most of our politicians seeking election to the EU parliament are losers in our domestic elections – so EU gets politicians who represent the unpopular opinion in our democracy.
The result? Legislation such as DMA that certainly does not benefit the consumer or majority of developers, mostly resulting in unwanted consequences such as the one mentioned in the article.
Nobody is asking for that. Developers already pay 99 dollars a year for the Developer Program, which according to Apple includes "all the tools, resources, and support you need to create and deliver software to over a billion customers around the world on Apple platforms"
Apple only demands a Core Technology Fee if developers want to free themselves from the stranglehold Apple has over them, and want to make use of the rights the Digital Markets Act gives them: web distribution, alternative app stores, alternative payment systems.
Instead of competing on merit in a free market, Apple is abusing its power to limit and extort developers. They could solve most of their antitrust problems by making iOS a bit more like macOS, but they're desperately trying everything they can to keep their App Store revenue as long as possible, because the services segment is the only one that's growing.
Last edited:
Probably an unpopular answer, but:
If this young developer in question was distributing on Apple's App Store, the download quantity wouldn't matter. If they are distributing on an alternative App Store, or via a direct download, it's their responsibility to limit the possible downloads and therefore limit the possibility of the fee.
Apple probably won't do this (because it would look bad to users), but they could allow for a "max install" parameter to be set when notarizing an app.
If this young developer in question was distributing on Apple's App Store, the download quantity wouldn't matter. If they are distributing on an alternative App Store, or via a direct download, it's their responsibility to limit the possible downloads and therefore limit the possibility of the fee.
Apple probably won't do this (because it would look bad to users), but they could allow for a "max install" parameter to be set when notarizing an app.
I think the CTF is Apple trying disincentivize developers from leaving the App Store. We’ll see how long it survives.
No. The entire purpose of the DMA is to allow distribution OUTSIDE the App Store.
Yes there would, they would be developing for the web or another platform.
Because the Mac existed as an open platform for more than 20 years before the iPhone was released. Different platforms are different, surprise surprise.
What if, hear me out, they didn’t force people to use their app store?
So you’re saying iPhone is a game console? OK then commission should only apply to games.
Exactly. With a lot less discoverability.
Apple has put billions in R&D to create a powerful yet easy to use platform for anyone to use. To me it only is fair that when some other company comes along and tries to make money off of that platform, they'd pay a fee for that. And that is exactly why the CTF exists. And should.
And yes, that is going to be an issue for smaller developers if they make an app that goes viral. This is about 1-2 apps in a year (max). And in those cases you should apply some custom rules. Or for example make the CTF free for open source projects.
Last edited:
It's a perfectly fine example. Emulators aren't illegal.
If Apple doesn't allow them for signing or proxy in the EU via an external store, they should be sued.
Or stay within the original App Store rules. They are certainly not broken for free apps.
That doesn't address why the two should be treated differently. Why is Apple entitled to a cut of app proceeds from its phone platform vs its desktop computing platform.
Of course they won't starve, but Apple can't and shouldn't be forced to provide incredibly valuable services for free so other companies can make more money.
There is that constant elephant in the room. Apple is being singled out for behaviour that other companies have been getting away with for way longer (Nintendo was the one who pioneered the 30% cut; Steve Jobs merely took the cue for the iOS App Store).
Context also matters. I believe the developer who asked the question had one of his apps (Clips, I think) rejected by the App Store, and he also runs an alternate App Store.
AltStore - Wikipedia
Just to be clear, I am not saying Riley has an ulterior motive, but he does have a right to raise concerns over a practice that would certainly make his current business model economically unviable.
How come they seem to be fine providing those tools without additional fees on the Mac, and have always done so? How come Android is fine without requiring fees for sideloading?
Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft shouldn't be able to exact a share in revenue of games distributed outside of their app stores either.
Apple can charge people whatever fees they want for inclusion on the App Store. They should have absolutely no say in how, or what, users install outside the App Store.
It’s a synergy. And to remain a fair synergy, Apple can’t have total control over the monetization when they already have control over the platform. That’s the aim of the DMA.
My gut feel is that if Apple thought they could get away with getting a cut of app revenue from Mac apps, or even from free, ad-supported apps like Facebook, they would. So if Apple could have their way, macOS would be more like iOS, rather than the other way around. Which is what we are seeing with the Vision Pro right now.
Cool, so Apple will just go back to being subjective with who gets things for discount/free, while others that don't have a cute upbringing story will be punished by fees?
My head hurts
My head hurts
Last edited:
Don’t want to pay our usual 15-30% commission? Then pay the Core Technology fee.
You gunna pay us one way or another
You gunna pay us one way or another