By the same token if devs don’t want to pay the 30% then maybe they shouldn’t use apples platform.
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.
Epic Games Setting Up Webshops for iOS Developers to Offer Users Out-of-App Purchases
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Just like Apple does it with Macs.
This has been explained many times. People are bound to have one phone. To sell their apps to iPhone owners, the devs have to offer their apps on iOS. Hence special treatment for mobile platforms from the regulators.
That’s not an explanation. This case from epic could have gone further south than it already has. And who knows what it will happen with the appeal.
Just because people state it multiple times doesn’t mean others agree with it.
Just because I “have” to be in the mall to get enough foot traffic to make my store viable doesn’t mean the mall is required to let me have a store without paying rent, particularly when there is a mall across the street where they let anyone set up for free.
I’d also argue that if you can’t make your business viable without iPhone customers, paying 15-30% of that portion of your revenue to use someone else’s intellectual property that allows your business to exist seems like it might be worth it.
Last edited:
Another bad analogy. You don’t need to be in the mall in the first place. You can open the store next to it and customers would have access to your business. With mobile phones, without iOS app you lose access to all iPhone owners. Releasin Android app does not give you access to iPhone owners.
That would only be a valid argument if everyone was guaranteed to always shop at both malls whenever they went out looking for goods and services. As it stands, there are really two groups of people and they each only shop in one of the malls, so if you want to sell goods to everyone you have to be in both malls.
Again, in my opinion you don’t have the right to use someone’s property to sell your product without paying them just because you want to.
I know plenty of people who won’t go to a certain mall in my area because it’s (unjustly, in my opinion) perceived as “dangerous.” Do the stores in that mall “deserve” to get free rent in the “nicer” mall because a lot of potential customers won’t set foot in the “dangerous” mall? No. They have to make their business work regardless of whether or not they’re in the nicer mall too.
The ultimate issue here is some of us see the market that should be regulated as “mobile applications”, many (most?) on here see it as “iPhone applications”. The reason we’ll never agree on the appropriate level of regulation is we fundamentally don’t agree on how the market should be defined.
I absolutely disagree with the premise that there isn’t competition to the App Store. I completely understand why many of you think I’m crazy for saying that, but it doesn’t change my opinion on the fact.
The phone is my property, not Apple’s. Nobody needs App Store to sell their apps either. The devs would be happy to use other stores which is, ultimately, the best solution and many countries already legislated it.
You are changing the argument, you claimed that you could just sell in the other mall across the street. The point is that if you want to sell to all possible customers then no, you cannot just sell in the other mall across the street.
people don’t have to buy a new car (phone) to switch shopping malls.
If a software developer wants it sell to all customers they have to be in both stores, there is no way in which iPhone users can buy an app that is only in the Play Store. This is why apple is a gatekeeper and why they are loosing control over their platform.
IOS is Apple’s property. The APIs that allow those apps to function are apples property. It’s literally impossible to make a native app without using Apple’s property.
Do I personally wish Apple took a less strict view on this? Absolutely. But I have a philosophical issue with forcing a company to allow their property to be used without compensation unless there there is a really good reason. And “I want to be on the App Store and not pay Apple, AND be able to link to my alternate payment method without being required to pay Apple for helping make that sale by hosting my software for free” is not a really good reason.
I honestly think it’d be best for Apple to open up and allow alternative stores for whoever wants them, but then require abiding by Apple’s desired rules to be in the official App Store. I suspect most developers would quickly find Apple’s fees are worth it.
Anyways I’m going to stop engaging on this because we fundamentally disagree and aren’t going to change anyone’s minds at this point.
Have a good evening!
Last edited:
Nobody prevents Apple from charging for the development tools. That's the well accepted practice. iPhone buyer pays for iOS. Apple gets paid for everything. But they want more. They want to be paid percentage of everyone's business which is just ridiculous. If someone, say, developed a very successful game and made a lot of money, Apple wants to get a big chunk of it. This distorts the system. Apple did nothing to make the game a success. Why should they be rewarded?
Yes I'm not a software developer and I find it... odd...how iOS APIs are put on such a high pedestal as if every individual API on iOS were forged from meteorites upon the tallest mountain at noon on the solstice. Somehow these diamond crusted triple platinum API's are a primary argument for why Apple should be entitled to 30% of all digital commerce on iOS when the very same APIs aren't given a second thought on macOS where many of them originated from anyway.
We already have a provision for innovators to be compensated for their developments with patents granting them exclusivity for 15 years. Yes this is not exactly patenting the cotton gin yet iOS and the App Store has been around for 17+ years commanding 60+% of the mobile app market across billions of devices. It's time for Apple to allow alternative stores for the public good.
We are all really stretching this analogy 😂, but I don’t think your analogy doesn’t quite hold up. Apple doesn’t prevent Epic or Spotify from creating Android or web apps. In this analogy, it’s similar to Heinz being able to make a similar ketchup product at a factory constructed with someone else infrastructure or a public facility.
We are all really stretching this analogy 😂, but I don’t think your analogy doesn’t quite hold up. Apple doesn’t prevent Epic or Spotify from creating Android or web apps. In this analogy, it’s similar to Heinz being able to make a similar ketchup product at a factory constructed with someone else infrastructure or a public facility.
I check back in and we are talking about ketchup?
Lmfao
Lmfao
Oh the ketchup thing has been going for a while. Soon it'll be "are frogs people?"
I can imagine the day they ticked over 1B in app store profit.
Phil : Good news, we reached 1B!
Tim : Well done phill and team
Phil : So should we start reducing our cut to keep it at 1B?
Tim : I'd prefer us to increase our cut and aim for 2B
Apple reached 1B in App Store revenue in 2008, its first year, so it would have been Steve Jobs, pushing for higher. In 2024 the revenue was $84 Billion, and they have paid out developers to the tune of over 200 Billion since starting.
So we have to ask this; how do we get the products and innovations we want? We demand and expect companies like Apple to innovate. How do they do that, well they have to have the best materials, and most importantly the best people. How do they get those people, and those materials, they pay for them. How do they get the money to pay for them? As you can see, they have to find ways to make profit, so that can afford to innovate.
So why is this so difficult for many people to understand. We all remember (or perhaps the Generations born this century don't) the period of time, in the late 90's, where innovation was stifled, Apple was leaking money, and producing lemons.
Last edited:
The truth is somewhere in between the walmart analogy and yours. Spotify is a free app that anyone can download. Apple makes no money from that part. Apple charges a few bucks for the annual developer fees, but other than that, they offer their infrastructure without charge on the assumption they will make a cut of future revenue. In that sense, its a loss leader for apple. If developers start funneling all their sales outside the app, then apple will have to create new revenue streams. Expect to see something like aws where developers will be charged for bandwidth, downloads, updates, installs, store listings, api access, etc. Any metric they can quantify. The end result will be big companies make way more money, and small developers and free apps will suffer. Maybe apple will counter with something fair… probably not.
Yeah but it does because that is epic’s argument as to why they don’t go after the games console makers for the same thing
As apple releases new iPhones every year so in turn they make a fat profit every year
Unlike the game console makers who release new generation every 6 to 7 years
And that’s one of the reasons why epic don’t challenge the console makers
There is no way that Apple will allow alternative apps stores in the USA unless they are regulated to do so
You will probably find that Apple will still make money from the App Store but just a bit less going forward
Yeah that's true... there is only one choice on iOS.
But all stores take a cut... even if there are multiple stores.
If you sell a product at Best Buy... Best Buy gets a cut.
If you sell a product at Walmart... Walmart gets a cut.
If you sell a product at Target... Target gets a cut.
etc...
Yes however
There is fundamentally differences between stores in real life that you can walk into
Than an App Store controlled by just one company on said platform.