Public opinion of the ACM also drops lower and lower….imo.
Last edited:
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 Would Rather Pay Up to €50 Million in Fines Than Address 'Gatekeeper' App Store Behavior, Says EU Chief
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
whenever a country puts in place laws to dictate how apple and google will and will not run their platform or design their hardware, they should just say "ok, we're outta here" and shut down operations in that country ENTIRELY. You watch -- Law would be repealed in hours.
Yes, because the SKU part has nothing to do with Tinder's complaint. Nobody has tried to get the ACM or EU to outlaw multiple SKUs.
Don’t blame apple for acting stupidly to stupid governments.
My thought exactly. Just strongarm those rat politicians, because once again, I have no complaints about Apple.
And those unnecessary cookies notifications in the EU, what a ****ing waste of web space. Reinventing the wheel.
We were talking about it being a burden, not whether it was in a complaint or not.
In dutch terms:
A guy runs a brothel. He charges prostitutes 30% commission which includes electricity, running water, regular STD tests, costumes, bedding, advertising, security and big burly men who handle payments.
It's known as the safest brothel in town for prostitutes and clients.
Some of the prostitutes say they don't need the big burly men and complain to politicians they are getting charged 30% commission for billing.
regulator says: You can't do that, they need to be able to collect payments themself.
The brothel owner says "Ok" you can bring in your own guys to collect payments. They only charge us 3% anyhow, so now the rent is 27% including everything else we provide you.
regulator says: Not good enough - pay fine.
Way things are going I think Apple wants a full blown court case on this matter.
A guy runs a brothel. He charges prostitutes 30% commission which includes electricity, running water, regular STD tests, costumes, bedding, advertising, security and big burly men who handle payments.
It's known as the safest brothel in town for prostitutes and clients.
Some of the prostitutes say they don't need the big burly men and complain to politicians they are getting charged 30% commission for billing.
regulator says: You can't do that, they need to be able to collect payments themself.
The brothel owner says "Ok" you can bring in your own guys to collect payments. They only charge us 3% anyhow, so now the rent is 27% including everything else we provide you.
regulator says: Not good enough - pay fine.
Way things are going I think Apple wants a full blown court case on this matter.
Because if Apple says "dating apps now have no IAP fees", every other app developer will use that as grounds to argue why their app should also not have any IAP fees.
But the government pressure here isn’t about Apples commission. It’s about transaction fee.
Basically I view this as governments trying to force Apple to open its system to third party stores using the only pressure it can to reduce Apples market position. They can’t tell Apple what commission it can take but EFT fee’s are government regulated. So if they keep taking small bites from Apple eventually Apple will fit into what ever the government’s agenda is for this administration.
All of this seems to be an emotional agenda against Apple. Out of all the friends, family and coworkers in the Aerospace industry that I know that use Android, I can count one one hand that side load apps. And the Play Store has essentially identical policies. This isn’t about commission or Fee’s, it’s about control.
But to the point of this case. Apple complied with the ruling. Then came the idea that different SKU’s harms developers, and now Apple is fined. It’s about control.
Why is it just dating apps? Who decided that ONLY dating apps require this? Once apple does it for just dating apps, wont there be a precedent set? Wont they then insist it be done to the whole platform?
The additional SKU is just an additional submission to the App Store. Adding the 3rd party payment processing is where the work would be for Tinder and that's what they wanted. You can't claim submitting the app again is more difficult than actually changing the payment processing part of it.
Things like this should be handled on EU level, it's just stupid that Duchland wants to regulate a big part of Apple's international trade on its own.
Because who doesn't love bureaucrats writing technical requirements for applications
Yep. This war has always been about which company can get away with a bigger piece of the pie. “Benefiting consumers” ? Just PR sleight of hand.
Isn't all Apple needs to do to comply is allow the special entitlement for Dutch dating apps to accept both IAP and third-party payment processing while still charging 27% for use of a third-party processor?
I can, because it's not just submitting an app and walking away. It's now maintaining two apps instead of one. There's no reason it couldn't all be in a single app.
Keeping it as a single app would even make things easier on Apple's own (apparently strained) App Store review team.
Last edited:
True.
And Apple appears to feel they have addressed that in allowing third-party payment processing, however they have imposed a number of conditions to do so and it seems the ACM does not like those conditions and therefore continues to feel Apple is in breach of the ACM's demands.
I expect Apple's game-plan is to force the ACM to take Apple to court and Apple believes they will prevail by showing that they have met the ACM's original demands by offering an alternate payment program and that the ACM should not be allowed to dictate to Apple how said APP is implemented.
Towards open and fair world-wide trade
The European Union is one of the most outward-oriented economies in the world. It is also the world’s largest single market area. Free trade among its members was one of the EU's founding principles, and it is committed to opening up world trade as well.Wow
Really?
I wish I could respond with the first thought that came across my mind.
So, a DEVELOPER needs the burden of submitting two nearly identical apps.
The CUSTOMER needs the burden of selecting and installing one of two apps that matches how they want to pay.
For an artificial constraint.
The whole point is Apple is trying to make it so difficult that no developer does it, and if they do, no customer uses it.
Whereas the spirit of the ACM ruling was that a CUSTOMER has the CHOICE for how they want to pay in a single app, and that the DEVELOPER can offer a payment method (and if they want, a lower price) that doesn't pay Apple 30% for services Apple spends $0 in providing on behalf of the developer.
Plenty of software has has different versions for different regions.