Why would I want to type in my credit card again and again and again and again?
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.
Court Rejects Apple's Emergency Motion to Pause App Store Rule Changes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Or you could just not buy things directly from Epic if you'd prefer not to. Choice is a wonderful thing.
"Apple argued that the original order was "extraordinary" and forced it to "give away free access" to Apple products and services, including intellectual property. Apple said that it should be able to collect commission on external purchase links and control the way those links look, both of which are currently prohibited. Apple claimed that keeping the App Store rules as is will cost it "hundreds of millions to billions" of dollars annually."
Give away free access? It's a computer. The primary personal computer most people use on a daily basis. Access to them has always been free (even from Apple) until Apple decided for it not to be and acted like it was somehow normal and expected.
Even on the iPhone, they have always "given away free access" to food, delivery, shopping, ride-share apps, etc. If McDonald's can let me pay with a credit card in the app without giving Apple a commission, why not Spotify or a game app? They say because one if physical and one is digital, but then never explain why that matters besides that's what they decided.
Maybe they can complain that they shouldn't have to distrubute the apps for free through the App Store servers. Fine, then charge them the actual cost Apple incurs per download (like per megabyte) if they use Apple's servers or let them use their own servers or pay external servers to distribute, kinda like they've always done with podcasts.
I'm sure Apple doesn't like the government telling them what to do for a change, but that's how it works when you get too big and act greedily. Just call the 90s and ask Microsoft.
Give away free access? It's a computer. The primary personal computer most people use on a daily basis. Access to them has always been free (even from Apple) until Apple decided for it not to be and acted like it was somehow normal and expected.
Even on the iPhone, they have always "given away free access" to food, delivery, shopping, ride-share apps, etc. If McDonald's can let me pay with a credit card in the app without giving Apple a commission, why not Spotify or a game app? They say because one if physical and one is digital, but then never explain why that matters besides that's what they decided.
Maybe they can complain that they shouldn't have to distrubute the apps for free through the App Store servers. Fine, then charge them the actual cost Apple incurs per download (like per megabyte) if they use Apple's servers or let them use their own servers or pay external servers to distribute, kinda like they've always done with podcasts.
I'm sure Apple doesn't like the government telling them what to do for a change, but that's how it works when you get too big and act greedily. Just call the 90s and ask Microsoft.
Why would you have to? They could still use Apple Pay just like fast food and other physical goods apps.
It's about consistency which Apple doesn't practice. I'll be more inclined to be sympathetic with Apple if they treated developers correctly and we're consistent with how they ran the fees. But big or small it's all a 99$ fee. McDonald's and Uber get a pass for some oddball reason I can't understand. No fees. But Spotify gets a big FU? How does that make sense other than Apple just saying "because we say so."
Tim Sweeney himself has said that purchases within Fortnite, which includes both a link to Epic and Apple's IAP system, are currently 60/40, in favor of Apple's IAP, although trending toward 50/50. Because you're right, some people will take the choice, some people will prefer what they know, an opportunity either side should have in a functional marketplace.
So don't, if it matters to you that much. You have that choice to not do business with a developer that doesn't support IAPs as much as I long ago chose to make zero unnecessary purchases through the App Store because I don't want to support Apple taking a share of purchases that I believe it doesn't deserve.
Epic can choose not to develop for iOS. Choice is a wonderful thing.
So don't develop for iOS if handling payments yourself matters to you that much.
Perhaps they should. Somehow, people kick up a fuss over Apple keeping 30% of revenue from developers but stay oddly silent when it comes to other platforms doing the exact same thing.
If Apple’s walls are to come down, then I say - let’s tear it all down
Yup, but they chose to develop for iOS. What's your point?
Apple forces them to use their infrastructure. I'm sure they'd be happy to use their own if Apple allowed it. Also, they could charge more for the developer fee!
Point: don't make it a law to force Apple to do anything. Make it a choice for developers to develop for iOS. Understand?
And Apple can just shut down the App Store if it's so upset with the judge's ruling. See? We can have a nonsense conversation like this all night long if you like.
I guess they are paying 299usd/y.
Apple Developer Enterprise Program
The Apple Developer Enterprise Program allows large organizations to develop and deploy proprietary, internal-use apps to their employees.
But that would be due to a law, not due to market dynamics. That's the problem.
Right, and the card processors that work with these third-party stores all take Apple Pay.
For example, Stripe published a document on how to integrate their APIs to take advantage of Apple Pay for external payments. With that comes the benefit of preauth tokens being stored in Wallet and shipping notifications in Wallet (applicable to selling merchandise but it’s just an example of the available integrations).
Your realise that Epic didn't make this ruling, right? Nor is it applicable everywhere. It seems that the thing you're mad at is the American legal system.
One could argue that the law affecting Apple in this way is a result of it's behavior in relation to market dynamics. Organizations who engage in business with the public are not able to arbitrarily set any and all rules or restrictions they want without oversight.
The market dynamics are: Apple made a mess of the sweetheart deal they had. And people like the good dudes on ATP have complained about it for over a decade. Apple could have got in front of ALL OF this both domestically and abroad. But their selfishness tripped them up. Apple has themselves and only themselves to blame. Well. oK. Their lawyers too, because Sweeney was playing chess while they played checkers. He just downright out- manouvered them because he lost the first trial but banked on the fact they would be malicious with their compliance. Love or hate him, that was stroke of genius on his part.
The cause of the shutdown would still be due to the law, not due to market dynamics.
No. Apple made the rules of their own platform and one complained.
I mean, if that's not what you meant then your comments make even less sense. You're mad at the American legal system for upholding the law, and somehow that means Epic shouldn't develop for iOS? Make it make sense.