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 Regulator Says Apple Shouldn't Force Dating Apps to Offer Separate App for Alternative Payments
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wonder how long before Apple gives ACM A huge middle finger by pulling out of Dutch market entirely?
I know Apple wouldn’t do it, but at some point, Apple will likely grow tired of it and will likely teach the regulators a lesson by pulling out of the market……..
I know Apple wouldn’t do it, but at some point, Apple will likely grow tired of it and will likely teach the regulators a lesson by pulling out of the market……..
But it’s not $99 a year for Windows development. They have tiers, and I need to pay several thousand for Visual Studio licenses for the developers.
No you don't, there are uncountable of free compilers, IDEs and UI libraries, you've chosen to pay for it.
Ah. You just misunderstood what an independent regulator is. It doesn't mean independent of the government. "Independent" in this case just means that it's decisions aren't subject to review by other parts of government. But it is still part of the government.
I found this on the website you linked to:
Board | ACM
Emphasis mine. They are government employees.
You don’t because Apple allows those apps to exist without offering in-app purchase.
Not all of them support commercial use and large dev teams. Not sure what argument you are trying to make here. In order for the visual studio developers to get paid is by charging the amount the do. Xcode is free. How do those people get paid? And no $99 a year is not enough.
I know all about Apple’s rules. I know all about their reader category that allows apps like Netflix, Spotify and Kindle to exist without IAP. Because those are popular apps from large corporations that Apple needs.Well, it does apply. Can you buy a book directly from Kindle app? Can you buy/renew subscription for Netflix from the app? (well, Netflix is pretty specific in this case, and I would say nasty. You can buy subscription from device using apple payment system if you are new customer, all existing customers must renew on netflix website)
So if you are just consuming bought things inside app, but you have no buy system in the app, you are just fine. Apple gets zero $$$.
Anyway, Apple rules are a bit complicated, and let's hope they make them simpler. But if you have a time here you go:
App Review Guidelines - Apple Developer
The App Review Guidelines provide guidance and examples across a range of development topics, including user interface design, functionality, content, and the use of specific technologies. These guidelines are designed to help you prepare your apps for the approval process.developer.apple.com
That's called contempt, pretty sure the ACM will deal with that with another fine.
Apple did something similar in the UK years ago, judges weren't amused by Apple, can't recall what it was about.
Nice find, fair enough.(excepting defeat)Ah. You just misunderstood what an independent regulator is. It doesn't mean independent of the government. "Independent" in this case just means that it's decisions aren't subject to review by other parts of government. But it is still part of the government.
I found this on the website you linked to:
The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) is an independent regulatory body. Its staff is officially employed with the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, whereas the Board is a so-called autonomous administrative authority (ZBO) under Dutch law. The Board of ACM has the final say over all decisions issued by ACM.Board | ACM
www.acm.nl
Emphasis mine. They are government employees.
I do though think that independent means much more here than for instance in the states, here there's little to no corruption/collusion/nepotism, The Netherlands is one of the least corrupt countries (NL #8, US is #37)
I bought an app in the App Store. Bought the same app in the Play Store. Same login used when logging into app in both systems. Can also access in the browser.
Now if I go to their website, log in and do an in app purchase, you are saying Apple should still get their cut?
Just to add - this is nothing new.
Apple has from the start limited their commissions to electronic consumables. Not "services (like dating)". Actually other than paying for 30 minutes with the girl in window 22 I am not sure what that even means. Not physical items. Not real-world actions such as Uber.
Apple charges fees only on iOS-based consumables - apps, skins, renewable subscriptions, in-app currency, etc. All "items" that are used within and on the phone / iPad.
No.
I signed up for DoorDash DashPass - I get free delivery. I signed up on Android but use my login on iOS also.
As far as I know Apple gets nothing out of this from me.
No. No one has ever said that. No one on this or any other site (unless they were trying to twist the truth). Not Apple.
I'd guess it's likely that some form of that thought is published in the manifesto from the Coalition for App Fairness (or whatever they are called).
Only time you'd pay Apple anything is for the initial purchase of the app. From your "...bought and app in the App Store." comment I assume you had to pay some amount of money to initially acquire the app. Most apps using this model are Freemium - no cost to download. All costs are after-the-fact micro-transactions.
As an aside, gotta love the guy who came up with that one. It is amazing to see these micro transactions resulting in billions of dollars to a few lucky (unethical?) developers.
You got out of context and quietly switched from Indie Developers to Large Dev Teams, anyway there are free solutions for both of them. Of course they do, set decent CI/CD up to overcome your large Dev Teams issues.
Indie's can even use the free Visual Studio Community Edition.
Get Visual Studio Code, Eclipse, AndroidStudio, MonoDevelop, ATOM, or VIM, just to name a few IDE/Editors.
Get a free compiler for example GCC or newer CLANG/LLVM if you need one for c++.
Depending of what you intent to build you can use e.g. QT(dynamic link it), MS .NET MAUI (soon), Flutter, just to name a few newer toolkits. If it suits your needs, you can use Electron(Web Chromium Thingy), too.
There is absolutely no obligation to pay thousands to MS to develop on/for the Windows platform.
Soon Android Apps will natively run on Windows and you will have even more choices.
Xcode is not free, you pay it with $99 + 30% fees, which probably ends with far more than thousands of dollars, depending of your app sales.
Last edited:
That sounds like an apple problem. It’s extremely easy to do with simple geofencing or just users with payment information from a local bank.
Tell apple to try that then.
How can it be abused? I thought apple curated everything that goes through the store.
Unless they can make WebApps just like a Store App … not a hard time at all.
Yep.
$1.99US initial then you can expand functionality - that is tied to your login id.
So I had to buy for both systems initially to get the app. Additional can be bought from any system as long as it is under my id.
thx!
I am sure they would have loved to have. They tried to with the Windows Phone. They just did not have a compelling product so they never grew the developer base.
Their Xbox model works along the lines of a platform that would not support millions of developers. Game platform SDKs are tens of thousands of dollars. Licensing fees are paid on all games released on the platform - regardless of how they are installed. Download from the Xbox store? You (the consumer) pay the price asked from the developer, and they pay MS their 30%. Buy a disc from a B&M store and you (the consumer) pay the retail price of the game and the developer gets whatever is left over after wholesale, distribution, packaging, and MS license fees.
The customer pays the same. And the business model is the same between games and phones - the number and profile of developers is the only real difference.
They've had time to prepare for a couple of months. And even the final verdict from ACM gave them two months.
It would have been really simply to comply with the ruling and its spirit - if Apple han't been so preoccupied with finding and inventing clever ways to skirt the ruling.
There's no "mixing". A customer can be very easily be offered choice "buy through Apple" vs. "buy directly from *dating app* outside of Apple's Store.
They can just as well submit one single app to the store that relies on some small piece of conditional code. No problem at all. It's just Apple playing cat and mouse.
That might be the case, but this is not Netherlands problem. If apple wants to do business there it must follow the law.
If apple can disable the U1 chip in some iPhone depending on where it is they can do it for an app.
It’s extremely clear. Apple is just trying to comply with the ruling as little as possible.
Also known as rule skirting. That’s just dumb.
They have broken the law in Netherlands.
And they are under anti trust investigation. So it might be they have broken the law for years.
As wary as other nations are of the USA, a 2 trillion dollar company with enormous influences that Apple has will most definitely be on their radar