Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Possibly even users having to pay for OS upgrades.

I personally would love to go back to that.

With many of the recent Apple OS "upgrades", we've gotten what we paid for.
(not much and a mess that takes many point releases to fix up correctly)

A benefit of paying would be that the upgrade cost would need to justified a bit more on Apple's side.
 
What? No. Developers need the noose tightened, not more freedom to come up with new ways to charge people to keep an app. Every time they are given a tool to help them serve their customers they turn it into another way to fleece people out of more money. IAP, subscriptions, and what, now we want to give them control over how the App is distributed? Give me a break.

Unless we don’t care about users at all… in which case why not destroy the platform they have built by giving the control over to the prospectors looking for increased, short-sighted returns for the lowest investment.

"Tinder owner Match Group said that Apple's in-app purchase were preventing it from directly communicating with customers about payments."

As soon as the developer is able to 'communicate directly about payments' they will also communicate with marketing.
Here is a though, Apple does not care about the users either. Apple cares about money they can extract from users by being the middleman everywhere.

The reason you can’t use Apple Pay on Steam has less to do with Apple and more to do with Microsoft and Valve.
No, its Apple. For things like KeyChain they don't even develop the software for it on Windows. So why would I use it and lose access to my passwords when I am outside of an Apple device. Third party services are better this way.

And for Apple Pay, of course nobody uses it because its a huge cut. The only time anyone ever uses Apple Pay is when Apple forces it to be the only option. When given the choice developers will reject it. Apple's wonderful services only exist due to force.
 
The ACM has ordered Apple to make changes to the rules that force developers to use in-app payment options.
Biggest flaw in the argument. You’re not forced to use in-app payment options. You only have to look at Netflix as a perfect example of this assertion being false.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjack50
Here is a though, Apple does not care about the users either. Apple cares about money they can extract from users by being the middleman everywhere.
Maybe, but out of all the companies involved they have the most motivation to restrict access to me. I have many macOS developers that repeatedly ignore my requests to be removed from their email mailing lists. I don’t want to have to deal with every company that I ever try an app from.
 
No, its Apple. For things like KeyChain they don't even develop the software for it on Windows. So why would I use it and lose access to my passwords when I am outside of an Apple device. Third party services are better this way.

And for Apple Pay, of course nobody uses it because its a huge cut. The only time anyone ever uses Apple Pay is when Apple forces it to be the only option. When given the choice developers will reject it. Apple's wonderful services only exist due to force.
The cost of something is only one factor. They could offer it and take a smaller profit. They choose not to. That's on Valve and Microsoft, not Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy and jjack50
Apple just needs to bite the bullet and allow apps to use non-Apple IAP in apps for digital goods. Apps already do it for non-digital goods so what’s the issue other than Apple being greedy? They can still require apps offer their IAP along side another option and then let the customers choose which one they want to use.
 
Ahh more great news :D Love It!
Tim Cook on fire!

giphy.gif
 
On one hand I do think Apple deserves some commission for app purchases. But on the other hand I thought that's what the $99 and $299 yearly developer fees were all about.

Don't be surprised if those prices go up after App Store changes go into effect.
Do you think Apple deserves a commission when someone orders an Uber? Because right now they get nothing. It’s kind of bizarre to me that Apple takes no commission when you order an Uber but if you pay $1.99 to remove an ad from an app Apple gets 30%.
 
Do you think Apple deserves a commission when someone orders an Uber? Because right now they get nothing. It’s kind of bizarre to me that Apple takes no commission when you order an Uber but if you pay $1.99 to remove an add from an app Apple gets 30%.
Yes, they do. The fact that they don’t is exactly why we are having a discussion about who shouldn‘t have to pay. As soon as they made one exception everyone wanted to be exempt. Apple needs to clean up the store and charge everyone the same fees.
 
Yes, they do. The fact that they don’t is exactly why we are having a discussion about who shouldn‘t have to pay. As soon as they made one exception everyone wanted to be exempt. Apple needs to clean up the store and charge everyone the same fees.
OK so if I buy clothing from Target using their iOS app Apple should get 30% of that transaction?
 
Do you think Apple deserves a commission when someone orders an Uber? Because right now they get nothing. It’s kind of bizarre to me that Apple takes no commission when you order an Uber but if you pay $1.99 to remove an add from an app Apple gets 30%.
Exactly this, Apple wants to get paid for services they did not perform. Yes they need to be compensated for running the AppStore, this is the develop fees, if they are too low Apple should raise them. Maybe even charge the developer per App download.

Yes Apple needs to be compensated for iOS security, but the user already did that when they bought a $1,000 device.

No, Apple should NOT be compensated when a developer wrote an App that has two tiers of service and I paid them to unlock new features. Nor do they deserve anything because I bought 3000 gems somewhere. If Apple handled the payment than they need to be compensated for payment processing, which is around 1-5%, but nothing above that. And if a third party handled the payment than Apple deserves nothing.
 
Do you think Apple deserves a commission when someone orders an Uber?

Hell.
No.

Apple needs to start charging for development tools for firms being on their platform and stop trying to take a "road tax" for everything.

Apple wants to get paid for services they did not perform. Yet they need to be compensated for running the AppStore, this is the develop fees, if they are too low Apple should raise them. Maybe even charge the developer per App download.

This! ^^ Beautifully said and spot on.
 
I suspect that developers will stay with in app purchases via apple for a while. Trust issues will prevent a significant percentage from using their card details elsewhere. If this was 15% all advantage list
Isn’t that then an issue with Apple and it’s curation of the App Store? You’re basically saying Apple allows non trustworthy apps in the store. Also what about all the non-digital goods people purchase via apps. Doesn’t seem to be a trust issue there.
 
Exactly this, Apple wants to get paid for services they did not perform. Yet they need to be compensated for running the AppStore, this is the develop fees, if they are too low Apple should raise them. Maybe even charge the developer per App download.

Yes Apple needs to be compensated for iOS security, but the user already did that when they bought a $1,000 device.

No, Apple should NOT be compensated when a developer wrote an App that has two tiers of service and I paid them to unlock new features. Nor do they deserve anything because I bought 3000 gems somewhere. If Apple handled the payment than they need to be compensated for payment processing, which is around 1-5%, but nothing above that. And if a third party handled the payment than Apple deserves nothing.
But they did provide a service. They provided Uber with a platform of people who can all be reached with a single application. Either they need to pay for access per transaction or they need to pay an annual fee based on the number of users who have access to downloading their app.
 
But they did provide a service. They provided Uber with a platform of people who can all be reached with a single application. Either they need to pay for access per transaction or they need to pay an annual fee based on the number of users who have access to downloading their app.
The service Apple provided is securely sending an App from their servers to a user's device. Everything after that Uber provided. I believe the cost to Apple to store an App on their servers is like 1 cent per month, and the cost to transmit the app to the user's phone is another cent. Round it up a few times and say maybe Apple spent ten cents to get Uber installed on an iPhone.

I am okay with Uber paying Apple a few cents per App download/update.

The user already paid for iOS security when they bought the iPhone for $1000
 
Here is a though, Apple does not care about the users either. Apple cares about money they can extract from users by being the middleman everywhere.
Exactly. Rather than innovate with new products Apple would rather grow their business by taking 15% from this transaction, 30% from that transaction, and 0.15% from yet another transaction. Apple's basically turned iOS into one giant bundle of microtransactions. Only we consumers pay for it in the form of higher prices from the vendors we're buying from, rather than directly to Apple themselves. Apple just collects it on the backend.
 
Why? Why does Target owe Apple anything? Target certainly isn’t acquiring customers from Apple. In fact I’d argue Apple provides very little customer acquisition outside of games and maybe some creative apps.
Because Apple built the mall they placed their store in. Target is acquiring customers from Apple. Without Apple target would have had to build dozens of apps for every device that might possibly have wanted to access their content. You can’t say, no android is the other option because had Apple not built the iPhone we wouldn’t have android like it exists today.

The service Apple provided is securely sending an App from their servers to a user's device. Everything after that Uber provided. I believe the cost to Apple to store an App on their servers is like 1 cent per month, and the cost to transmit the app to the user's phone is another cent. Round it up a few times and say maybe Apple spent ten cents to get Uber installed on an iPhone.

I am okay with Uber paying Apple a few cents per App download/update.

The user already paid for iOS security when they bought the iPhone for $1000
Apple is providing a curation of users that Uber can access. That's the most valuable thing about iPhone. Every user regardless of device generation can run the same app. Apple should be compensated for that access. Just like we pay for the access to music on Spotify or movies on Netflix, and not just the content we watch.
 
What about a user who purchases an iPhone from Target?

Using this logic, Target would be eligible for commission payments on Apple services as well as in app purchases and potentially much more.
I am pretty sure that Target gets paid when someone buys an iPhone from them. Do you think they don’t make money off the sale of iPhones?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ss2cire
Apple is providing a curation of users that Uber can access. That's the most valuable thing about iPhone. Every user regardless of device generation can run the same app. Apple should be compensated for that access. Just like we pay for the access to music on Spotify or movies on Netflix, and not just the content we watch.
Spotify pays for the rights to the music. In your example Apple should be paying Uber for the right to have Uber on the AppStore and charging users a monthly fee to download apps. You want that?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.