I read a suggestion somewhere that prostitution is legal in the Netherlands, and some of that money may be flowing through the dating apps. That could be substantial.
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's Plan for Third-Party In-App Payments is Insufficient, Fines Apple 5 Million Euros
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Same thing if commissions were 50%. Or 67%.
Apple distributing is very convenient.
I’m not mixing anything up. You just don’t like the implications of an accurate analysis of the reality that exists with brick and mortar stores versus mobile OS platforms and stores. Walmart can generally set whatever terms they please because they aren’t part of a duopoly. Businesses with outsized market power are subject to rules and regulations that others are not.
The existence of other hardware paradigms is irrelevant. Laws regulating cars don’t cease to matter just because other forms of transportation also exist. If I have a really good idea for a smartphone app, that same app might be hampered or even useless on a different type of hardware. How useful is an app like Waze on a console compared to a smartphone?
The existence of other hardware paradigms is irrelevant?? You mean “the existence of logic which breaks down my argument is irrelevant?” Got it.
Apple distributing for 30% is convenient. At 67% ? Maybe not. Maybe I’d go develop for a different platform, which I’m free to do. Apple cannot force me to develop for them. I choose the platforms which offer terms that suit me. People get hung up like Apple has them at gunpoint to develop for the iPhone.
I always wondered if you paid all your “protection money“ to the mob and if some punk comes off the street and holds you up, will the mob “take care of it“ for the shopkeeper? Again assuming they are all “paid up”.
Have you ever researched what the mark-up percentage is for anything you buy retail? 30% is standard, if not on the low end. It's a bargain for developers to have a sales platform they don't have to maintain or promote. It just works for them, if their product is good and meets quality/security considerations.
That really doesn't sound so bad.
I’m not exactly sure what you take issue with. Perhaps my statement was too unyielding for you? How about, “the existence of other hardware paradigms can frequently be irrelevant.” Is that better? What use is Waze on a computer? Its use relies almost entirely on existing on a mobile device. What use is a piece of astronomy software that connects to a telescope if it exists only on a gaming console? The existence of many apps relies entirely on smartphone hardware and the existence of other hardware paradigms is indeed irrelevant in a great many scenarios.
Last edited:
Good! Hopefully the US will also follow suit! Keep fining them. This just proves that everyone has finally starting to catch on to Apple's smoke and mirrors! HIT THEM HARD!
We will see where this ultimately goes. My opinion is this entire conversation about monopoly/duopoly is capitalism at it's finest. The customers have spoken. Bye blackberry, bye-bye windows.
But as far as this goes, Apple is not about to give up it's commissions without a fight. We'll see where this all goes.
This shows up in EVERY....SINGLE....topic about this. Where is the financial breakdown analysis that 30% is just too much? Where is it for Steam, Playstation, Xbox, Switch, and many other digital platforms? Why is 30% too much, do you have that research available? Are we at the point where we can't allow businesses to price their own products? Should NVIDIA be able to see the 3090 at such a high cost?
Businesses exist to make money.
I've just read some of it and can only conclude that the people in the justice department have no understanding of the computing industry at all. The sound like people who come to the party late and complain that the DJ didn't play their favourite records.. because they played them all when they weren't there!
Things that we basically fought for in computing for over 40yrs.. things that have been achieved they just gloss over as if its some terrible negative. Its makes for crazy reading.
In short, competitors have not been able to break the "duopoly" (clever how they talk about the OS's rather than the manufacturers, where you see tons of handsets) because they dont give the people what they want! They have ulterior motives. FB doesnt want to make a handset that has privacy, Amazon wants to sell you stuff, MS just wants to make a handset so no one can block it.. no one actually wants to make a handset to you know.. make a good handset! Apple ties in its hardware design with its OS's to make a better product. SO thing they see as negative are actually better for the consumer. But they gloss over that stuff.
Apple has consumers first.. even google know that they have to make customers like stuff and hide all their ad fleecing in the background. Make GOOD THINGS! And you can compete.
Also, lock in isn't a bad thing! There's a reason why there are only a few OS's.. they are ridiculously hard to build and maintain! After 40 odd yrs of computing there are literally only 3 main stream fully featured OS's in the world, MacOS, Windows and Android. All paid for by various "lock-ins" (being tied to Mac Sales, tied to Enterprise Windows software or Ad sales in googles example). You cant do it any other way. Its too damn expensive.
Without building tools that link to each other you cant do it. Also, its what customers want. They want the links.
Furthermore, you cant just be compatible with everything because you end up with things that dont work well (Windows..).
This is all computing 101.
The legislators are being gamed by various lobbyists and organisations. I wish they took the same angles with net neutrality and cable companies... but oh .. it really depends who's paying there lobbyist doesnt it?
And actually thats the point, the narrative is written by the one who pays the most to get govt to change the rules. Everything they say in the document can easily be argued against if you understand the history of computing.
Apple and googles dominance is because they actually put the hard work in to make things people want to buy! Apple are ahead of the game because they actively try and make the best products. Thats not how other businesses operate. It really is more simple than some nefarious unfair activity. People are just good at making things and want to be better at it.
Fine, make it 60%. Apple being worth nearly 3 trillion dollars is pathetic, obviously!
Actually that sounds terrible. I’m surprised they are able to get so many developers to work with 30% of the cut right off the top. Typically in retail a manufacturer sells their products in bulk to the store. So their wholesale price might be much lower than the retail price but they are selling a thousand units at a time. Once they sell that lot their profits are locked in and there is no more risk. The retailer on the other hand has assumed all the risk at this point and it is reasonable for them to add a large markup for the retail price because they might end up with a large number of unsold units that they will have to write off or sell at prices below cost. That’s Finance 101. The returns and the risks need to go together. Apple isn’t buying a 1000 licenses of an app upfront from the developer and then taking the risk of selling the licences themselves. They aren’t taking any risk at all and a 30% cut right off the top is excessive. I’m a free market guy so I would side with Apple on the legal aspect of this but at the same time paying some other party that much right off the top is nuts given that the developer has all the risk. I’m surprised developers are so willing to continue to develop on those terms.
What kind of ******** is that? Apple is the one who creates the Products and it offers developer a platform to sell thair poroducts so it’s only fair that apple gets a cut of what devs make of thair apps. You want to use a Company’s Platform and services so u have to pay for it.
Do you complain about buying clothing from a shop?
I remember a friend worked in retail and had to wear only their clothes.
She bought them for 10% of retail price and said that was less than store price.
Software sales in store were often well above 30% markup.
And wasteful on sending out stock, losses, old versions getting binned.
15% and 30% are actually pretty good for most devs. Just not the greedy ones.
Devs are willing to go in, because there is no risk for them except sweat equity, $99 and a computer. Or just develop a website and then the risk becomes: a computer and sweat equity.
The reason why apple gets targeted with such nonsense law is because pipo can’t live with a company being successfull and they also don’t want to pay for the services they get offered. Why don’t anyone fine other stores like steam etc for there fees? Because no one cares about them
And pipo like to troll and sue apple cause they have nothing else in thair life they can only be happy when that make life hard for others. That’s the reason and nothing else
And pipo like to troll and sue apple cause they have nothing else in thair life they can only be happy when that make life hard for others. That’s the reason and nothing else
I mean the ones who are complaining and want apple to offer everything for free. Obviously they not happy to share a cut of thair revenue with apple but they expect apple to continue offering them the platform of the AppStore for free. Now let me ask u, let’s say u have a store and pipo sell thair products over your store, wouldn’t you also charge them a fee for selling thair products on your store? Think about it
If you eat out and decide to "go Dutch" isnt it both of you paying half?
So why the resistance for the Dutch users of apps to pay their fair share for infrastructure of the app store?
pull the apps and see how users respond.
does anyone really care about Epic being pulled? you can play their game elsewhere. same with this app/service.
Facebook app/Facebook web page.
Same content, same device.
No security issues.
So why the resistance for the Dutch users of apps to pay their fair share for infrastructure of the app store?
pull the apps and see how users respond.
does anyone really care about Epic being pulled? you can play their game elsewhere. same with this app/service.
Facebook app/Facebook web page.
Same content, same device.
No security issues.
Pipo usaly think server infrastructure and so on just pays for it
Self they don’t know that a lot money which apple makes from the AppStore is flowing back into servicing and upgrading thair infrastructure and keeping that services running and working improving
Thank you for pointing this out. A lot of people just throw out the Microsoft card thinking its the same when it is not. Microsoft also tried to "advise" Netscape Navigator to no longer be in development to prevent competition for Internet Explorer. And they tried to make Sun Java suffer to prevent competition as well. So they were not hit with just the OEM issue.
Apple has a dominant position for Apple iOS App Store services on the mobile operating system, Apple’s iOS operating system. I’m imagining they will next be taking on the dominant position MacDonald’s has on MacDonald’s Single Big Tasty.
