Microsoft takes 5% on the non exclusive windows store. Game stations are another topic - these sell in quantities and prices that make a high cut of every title sold necessary.
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, Spotify, and Tile Form 'Coalition for App Fairness' to 'Fight Back' Against Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Fairness is such only applicable when it meets your desired outcome ... this won't go anywhere.
well stated.
it’s somewhat similar to Napster back in the day. Recall all the recording moguls freaked out along with artists like Metallica (love their older stuff). The interesting thing back then was artists like Prince understood the game as wel as Apple (iTunes) and instead of complaining used entrepreneurial spirit and adapted. Successfully.
today it’s comical that 2 members of this coalition are music companies; non of which would have existed today if it wasn’t for the dawn of MP3’s. Spotify is much more successful than Apple Music ~ yet only now can they figure out how to make a WatchOS App to store& payback music. How’s that EU court case working for them?! Deezer - I just can’t.
so why can’t they do the same coalition against: Google, Microsoft and Sony?! Ahh vested interests and partnerships that affect existing business and deals for which the biggest player in this coalition has: Epic Games.
PS: I thought Blockchain was a technology not a service/app that exists? Are they representing every single blockchain app??
hey Macrumors,
sometimes we users NEED to have to emoticon tags for posts like this: Haha & Love.
Of all those whiners, the only one I kind of agree with is Prepear. That logo business is just silly.
Don’t count your game overs before they’re hatched.
They kinda have to use Apple resources to reach iPhone users. Right? It’s more about market share and access. Increasingly important since iPhone & apps etc. have disrupted pretty much EVERYTHING. Neither party is all right/wrong but somebody has to push back on Apple since they are content with their position and have the power & money to remain unmoved. It takes a form of class action to get a company like Apple to budge one micrometer. Apple is wealthier than most counties.
The problem stems from the fact that developers are forced to pay high-percentages for IAP because Apple offers no recourse.
I think the simplest solution would be to allow developers to pay for what they actually use. If Epic wants to use Apple to process IAP then they should be subject to the 30% fee -- but if Epic wanted to process payments themselves then they can do it in their app and not be subject to the fee.
For small/medium developers it would still be beneficial to use Apple because they take care of the payment processing/tax/etc but if you're a large enterprise then you would probably expend the development resources to process payments internally.
I dislike the whole angle of "Build your own phone/operating system if you don't like it!" That seems very anticompetitive and can be used to justify a lot of anti-consumer practices.
I think the simplest solution would be to allow developers to pay for what they actually use. If Epic wants to use Apple to process IAP then they should be subject to the 30% fee -- but if Epic wanted to process payments themselves then they can do it in their app and not be subject to the fee.
For small/medium developers it would still be beneficial to use Apple because they take care of the payment processing/tax/etc but if you're a large enterprise then you would probably expend the development resources to process payments internally.
I dislike the whole angle of "Build your own phone/operating system if you don't like it!" That seems very anticompetitive and can be used to justify a lot of anti-consumer practices.
3 big names combine to get a change that would render the Apple app ecosystem insecure with no way for Apple to provide any form of confidence to their users or policy control to stop children from utilising apps or features through parental control.
Beyond this, consider somebody with more pure interests over the integrity of sales from their store like Sony.
Imagine the outcry about big companies grouping together if Apple and Sony, or say Google, joined forces. They would claim this was a cartel action but I see no difference in this group's attack.
Beyond this, consider somebody with more pure interests over the integrity of sales from their store like Sony.
Imagine the outcry about big companies grouping together if Apple and Sony, or say Google, joined forces. They would claim this was a cartel action but I see no difference in this group's attack.
Well no, but there is no indication that will happen. Those companies wouldn't have a ton of avenues to make money when it comes to mobile if they did that.
Clearly if they want to make a point, they should just withdraw their services from the Apple platform. If that drives customers to another platform, then Apple can make a choice as to if they want to do something to bring them back. This is the wrong way
When trying to get my applications on the MS store, it wasn't a great experience, but not bad. But the reality is, the Microsoft store is basically dead; so few sales. Microsoft has such a low fee because they are basically begging developers to put their apps on it.
In other words, they don't like Apple limiting marketing push notifications by requiring a specific opt-out, they want to be able to spam their users through as many channels as possible. No thanks, all of these companies are now on my blacklist.
Let's just start with Apple applying the same rules to their own products. That means: bring Finder, Safari and all their own software to the App Store, without favoring themselves and developing according to the AppStore restrictions. Most of their own products would never even be accepted. It would be good to level the playing field.
Absolutely. Not to mention harvesting your user data and purchasing habits to sell off to the highest bidder.
This is what irritates me the most. They make is sound like they are David and Apple is Goliath but really they are a rich company just trying to get even richer.
I came up with CWB, but I can't say what it stands for on here.
It depends on if you call the app store a monopoly. If your point of comparison is smartphones, no, but if you're comparing it to other app stores on iOS, it is. If it's a monopoly, much different rules apply.
One could argue that this is the very definition of competition. Do you think that Spotify will pass some of that 30% savings off to their consumers...or just make 30% more for their investors?
My desire to have an app store that takes my security and privacy into account before selling me apps is much much greater than my desire to have the ability to purchase apps from multiple stores.
Lawyers are going to make big bucks during all this, just hope the App Developers get a benefit later down the road of a lower app fee
Apple and Google have the phone duopoly and it won't ever change. Microsoft, Ubuntu, Firefox and others tried to break in with their own phone OS but failed.
Apple and Google have the phone duopoly and it won't ever change. Microsoft, Ubuntu, Firefox and others tried to break in with their own phone OS but failed.