As a third-party, you know full well what the rules and regulations are when you get into business with a service provider. Don't like the rules? Don't get into that business, it's pretty simple. There are plenty of other platforms to develop for.
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.
Dutch Antitrust Watchdog to Investigate Whether Apple Gives Itself Preferential Treatment in App Store [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As a third-party, you know full well what the rules and regulations are when you get into business with a service provider. Don't like the rules? Don't get into that business, it's pretty simple. There are plenty of other platforms to develop for.
The app store is a retail business, no different from any other except for what they sell. Virtually every retail business takes a cut of the sales price, and it can be much more than 30/15%.
I meant the V2, also the first man made object in space, besides that, you're mostly right, Wikipedia says most are from Europe.
Timeline of rocket and missile technology
As a business operating internationally, you know full well what the rules and regulations are when you get into business in a foreign market. Don't like the rules? Don't get into business in that country, it's pretty simple. There are plenty of other countries to open an App Store in.
Cool, that seems to work both ways!
I think this case is silly. But I'm an American. It's up to the Dutch to decide if they also find it silly. I look forward to their decision and hope that the outcome doesn't alter what I consider to be one of the best benefits of the Apple ecosystem. I have no desire to see the App Store switch to the Android model.
I note you failed to address the key point.
Does Samsung after selling you a tv have the right to to dictate which programmes you can watch? Would you be happy to not have access to certain popular channels because the owners refuse to pay Samsung a 30% kickback? Wanna watch NBC?..... fine go buy an LG TV.
Nobody is denying Apple the right to charge for the App Store its the monopolistically abusive practices it engages in that are at issue.
[doublepost=1555087643][/doublepost]
The original complaint also includes Android so I guess your kinda screwed as phone os’s are a duopoly.
That's how cable companies work. If they're having a dispute with a content provider, you might not get the channels you want because the cable company isn't getting a big enough kickback. I believe it was recently DirecTV and Viacom that were having (still having?) issues, and we got popups from Viacom about every 5 seconds over our TV screen let us know to bug DirecTV if we enjoyed having that station. It was extremely annoying. So they do dictate what programs you can watch. Wanna see a channel not offered by your provider? Fine, go find a different TV provider.
As for Samsung, they don't dictate what you can view on their TV screens, just as they don't dictate what we can view with our phone screens. So I'm not sure that's a great analogy.
The clue is is in your post.....”companies” as in plural. When it comes to Apple it isn’t plural it’s singular. You have no choice. It’s a bit like saying when you bought your house the ONLY place you could do your grocery shopping is Whole Foods. Don’t like it? Move house!
I probably wouldn't buy that house then. If a developer wants to take advantage of Apple's platform and customers for financial gain, then there is a cost and you need to play by their rules. We'll see what's decided, but I don't really see Apple in the wrong here.
here's the rub though, this mentality of "if you don't like our rules, leave" is a terrible mindset to have, especially as a consumer.
What if these app developers decide they don't like the unfair treatment and do Leave?
what if Spotify, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, Google, all say "this sucks" and leave.
What if because the big players are gone, the little players also leave?
you're left with a platform with limited 3rd party support. That means less and less apps.
Do you want iOS to go the way of Windows Phone / BBOS10? no apps so nobody buys them?
at some point, it is in both Apple's and the suppliers best interest to work together on a rate scheme that affords equal access to the customer, with some parity to the costs associated with it. Driving away one of your prime motivators of sales to your consumers is not a smart business decision.
That's a whole truckload of "what-ifs" for a scenario that doesn't seem to be playing out. App developers AREN'T leaving. Spotify, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, Google AREN'T leaving. The little players AREN'T leaving. iOS is in no immediate or long-term danger of going the way of Windows Phone and BlackBerry.
I'm not seeing the need for Apple to do any work on rates. If those things you theorized come true, that could change. But today? With nobody leaving? It would be a silly thing to do.
I did not address your TV point because it is not relevant to the app store point. Even so, the TV manaufacturer decides what Apps I can use by virtue of their selection of the OS for their TV. If I want something else I have to add an excternal hardware device.
Even with Apple I can subscribe to services outside of the app store, including Spotify, Netflix, TV channels, etc. so the provider does not have to pay Apple a cut of that revenue and they still offer the app on the App Store.
As I pointed out, the app store, as a retail outlet, is no different from any other retail outlet where the retailer gets to decide what to sell, onn what terms, and how to feature items. As for a monopoly, Apple doe snot have a monopoly in the app market.
that's why they're called "What ifs"
and any good executives worth their weight and money will have considered these. You don't get ahead in business by not analyzing potential responses to business decisions.
And we are already starting tos see friction between the vendors and 3rd parties and Apple. Netflix has already pulled using iTunes for payment for subscriptions. Same with Spotify.
you don't ignore moves like that as a business operator. Because if Netflix/Spotify showcase to others that they can go without certain services from Apple, they may very well follow suit.
I think the 30% cut is the biggest thing that is rubbing developers the wrong way. They should drop to 15% the first year and 10% after, something like that.
The one which feels superior is the one which started this joke.
The Phillips screw was not invented by philips nor in Europe, it was invented by John P. Thompson an American, do your homework.
As I pointed out before, the internet as it is now is not invented by Americans.
As for Google, Yahoo and certainly Facebook, they are the scorch of this world.
The first Computer was made by a German. (Konrad Zuse)
The first Cellular phone was invented in Finland, a long time ago.
Beside the point: I do not own a part of Wallmart. If I did, shouldn’t I have a say which products and where to buy then? And should I then pay tax to Wallmart for these products too? I own an iphone and pay 30% surplus tax to Apple over every app. No chance of buying am app elsewhere than then appstore. That’s monopoly for you.. why isn’t this implemented on Osx? At least there you have a choice and therefore competition and innovation!
It's an interesting point, developers leaving. I am trying to think what I would do and I would likely just stop using that app/service and choose another that's comparable. I don't think everyone would do the same, but I am not sure it's a risk they would be willing to take.
Most Apple apps are already preinstalled. The only ones not preinstalled are the ones related to products, stores, support, stickers and memos.
If I type in “Files”, I get the Files app at the top. If I type in “File Storage”, I get all apps with name “File Storage” at the top, which is how you expect the search feature to work.
I wonder who filed the complaint..
If I type in “Files”, I get the Files app at the top. If I type in “File Storage”, I get all apps with name “File Storage” at the top, which is how you expect the search feature to work.
I wonder who filed the complaint..
That's absolutely true for some. Netflix and Spotify can certainly afford to stand up their own payment processing systems and deal with fraud, returns, discounts, whatever. They choose not to have Apple process their payments, so Apple doesn't take a cut.
For a smaller developer, those costs may be too much for them to deal with. I'm a developer. If I put a subscription based app in the store, I'd gladly pay the prices because I wouldn't want the hassle of processing payments. That would be too much for one person to take on in their spare time. Or at least too much for this person to take on. I would happily pay the fee and let Apple deal with the money.
So there are certainly others who could follow Netflix and the like. But I'm thinking there could also be those out there that are happy to not have to touch the money. I don't think a few bigger companies striking out on their own will cause everyone to follow suit.
Also, none of these companies are "leaving" Apple. They're just choosing not to use Apple's payment services and the costs associated with that service. Netflix is still in the App Store. Spotify is still in the App Store.
I didn't consider that, but I don't see why there should be a distinction. I also can't find them stating this anywhere but haven't looked thoroughly. Also, you can buy insurance through apps, which sounds digital enough.
Here you are: https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/in-app-purchase/overview/
In the Tip box under the photo:
"It’s important for app developers to understand the difference between in-app purchase and Apple Pay. Use in-app purchase to sell virtual goods in your app, such as premium content for your app and subscriptions for digital content. Use Apple Pay in your app to sell physical goods like groceries, clothing, and appliances; for services such as club memberships, hotel reservations, and event tickets; and for donations."
You don't own part of Apple either by buying an iPhone
No. You know the deal when you buy an iPhone or shop at a store; your choice is to buy or not buy.
When you buy something at retail the retailer get sa markup, just like Apple does. It's called making a profit and staying in business.
Hardly. Their are plenty of other phones that do the same thing that compete with Apple.
Very different history. Pcs didn't have the option of an App store when they first came out, and a massive industry developed around the current model so now app stores and independent distribution channels coexist.
I think it goes back to what I said earlier. If you want to make it as an app, you need to be in the Apple App Store. Apple apps make twice the revenue of android and that’s the whole mobile market basically.
My only issue is whether Apple is entitled to a percentage of sales of digital goods (and many use subs for this such as Spotify). I think its reasonable but only if Apple doesn’t force subs to use iTunes payments.
For example I can’t use amazon app to buy kindle books. These are digital goods. Apple won’t allow amazon to do this. Amazon sure as heck doesn’t want Apple getting a percentage of that. And so you must use a browser to use amazon for that type of thing.
My only issue is whether Apple is entitled to a percentage of sales of digital goods (and many use subs for this such as Spotify). I think its reasonable but only if Apple doesn’t force subs to use iTunes payments.
For example I can’t use amazon app to buy kindle books. These are digital goods. Apple won’t allow amazon to do this. Amazon sure as heck doesn’t want Apple getting a percentage of that. And so you must use a browser to use amazon for that type of thing.