It's for UX reasons. I as a consumer don't want this option. I goto Apple for simplicity. Either I can buy this app or I can't. There is no "if you install this store" which introduces complexity most consumers don't want.
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's US App Store Commission Revenue Down 18% This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's for UX reasons. I as a consumer don't want this option. I goto Apple for simplicity. Either I can buy this app or I can't. There is no "if you install this store" which introduces complexity most consumers don't want.
macfacts
macrumors 603
It's like child labor, no on is forcing them to work and they're getting paid.
thejadedmonkey
macrumors G3
Which is great if you use all of that.
Now think about that non-profit cat adoption agency that was in the corner of the mall. They don't need any of that infrastructure that the mall is offering, but are being forced to pay for anyway. It's essentially Apple telling an entire subset of software developers that their software isn't wanted here.
And worse, I think, is that those software developers are the ones who do it because they love writing software, not because they want to make money. So you end up missing well written gems that are on every other platform.
chrono1081
macrumors G3
That analogy holds no water. If it's not making money then it doesn't pay any fees aside from the yearly developer fee.
boswald
macrumors 68040
People are pinching pennies more than ever it seems. I guess the endless subscriptions and in-app purchases are starting to drive people nuts. I know I'm sick of them!
Not at all surprising and was very much expected as Apple is unable to charge the higher %. Think it might further reduce in the near future.
blizzerand
macrumors newbie
Another developer here, that comparison is not entirely true because apple has no reason to keep it all wall gardened. Mac still allows you to download from anywhere. This is just pure greed. Allow other apps to be downloaded without the app store, for no fee or something like 2% is fine. Anything more is greed.
GtrDude
macrumors 65816
People get fed up with endless monthly subscriptions
jdavid_rp
macrumors 6502a
Oh no! They only made 1 billion dollars on their app store instead of 1.18 billion dollars? How could they ever continue to support running an app store with only a billion dollars in profit?
SnowCrocodile
macrumors 6502a
Not necessarily.
Apple's success model so far was based on providing premium experience to the customers at premium hardware price. All of that effort in updating Apple Maps (which they are outsourcing, not that it really matters) is baked into the cost of their hardware and base services.
Google's model was providing subsidized services and (to some extent) hardware and then using these services and hardware to serve ads and collect data.
Apple is now seemingly moving closer to Google's model. On one hand I realize that the market has been stagnating for a while now (the entire smartphone market is less than 20 years old and it had experienced explosive growth for much of that time, the slow down and maturing was to be expected). On the other hand, they risk blurring the distinction between iOS and Android to the point it is hard to justify paying "Apple Premium", especially since their services, once you take away privacy advantages (which may not have all been there to begin with), honestly, suck.
Judging by the experience from many users, the data Apple Maps has so far has not resulted in a premium experience. If Apple Maps takes you to the wrong location, how can you call that a premium experience?
Your logic might not accurate. The alls that makes sense for those devices are all there and i am glad they are not saturated. Apps on watch is something i always hated since the ui is so tiny. That usecase is very small and fraction. On apple tv, as of now, there is no service that i am missing. At the same time like others said, you are free to put your app on website. What you are saying is you designed a product exclusively for apple based on the guidelines, frameworks and contracts you agreed to and now saying they are monopoloIng? Ever thought of launching as android exclusive?
Hajj.david
macrumors 6502a
Whose infrastructure were those developers FORCED to use. With a mac I can use my own infastructure to push apps to my users. On iOS I dont have a choice, I HAVE TO use Apple's app store.
chrono1081
macrumors G3
We will have to agree to disagree because I can tell you're not speaking from a point of any kind of experience, especially with that "2%" number.
BeatsByTim
macrumors 6502
red barchetta
macrumors newbie
The word "agreed" is doing a lot of work here--emphasis on greed. I think this more like extortion. The developer community is integral to apple's longterm health and positive branding. I think it would behoove the company to lower the pay-to-play fees.
Hajj.david
macrumors 6502a
When there is a duopoly there is no choice. Google is just as bad as Apple as far as gatekeeping and restrictions. And again its always the apple fans that argue with us actual developers who are telling you point blank Apple has absolutely treated developers like trash and abused us for years because we dont have a choice.
And your response is "no u" like come on.
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
Hajj.david
macrumors 6502a
Why should apple get even 1% if I am pushing apps directly to my customers outside of the app store?
Hajj.david
macrumors 6502a
...which is what he is saying people are doing based on the large drop in revenue.
Pascal Desjardins
macrumors newbie
And you have 2.5 billions visitors or persons passing by every day... I would likely pay a commissionn fee to sell to these customers. On the other side, Apple could have dropped down the commission percentage over time. I don't think the store was working at "break even".
chrono1081
macrumors G3
They did and it's insanely reasonable and you all keep glossing over it. 15% for Apple Small Business program. Even at 30% it was a huge bargain but those who never worked in software before that time forget the insane amount of cost it took to sell software before the stores existed, and that Indies were basically forced to go with a publisher who took usually around 95% of your sales if you were lucky. Some publishers took as high as 98% *and that was the norm*. "
So if you didn't have to use their store, you'd pony up and create your own store? Or would you pay someone else to be on their platform? There is a cost to distribution. it's not free. So do you have a problem with it not being free or do you think a 15% fee is too high?
turbineseaplane
macrumors Penryn
Yon can just "distribute software" without a "store".
Developers have been doing this for ages for other platforms, like the Mac.