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 v. Apple Trial Wraps Up, But We Likely Won't Know the Outcome for Months
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, crooks will always exist, Apple wont save you from them, better learn to realise and become sensitive to this, and read before signing any contracts, it helps in many life situations.
Apple iOS iPhone Google Android App Subscription Scam Fleeceware Apps
Are Apple and Google doing enough to protect users against rip-off apps?
www.forbes.com
Specially if you're from another continent, e.g. in the EU other rules apply, EU is more consumer friendly than the USA, but it's not a reason to become careless. If you're from another country usually the rule of your country applies, in that case I would simply write them, then stop paying, and get a lawyer if needed.
E.g. my mom once opened the door, a guy offered her a "free tryout" book of a club membership. He said no problem you can keep this book for free, if you like it, just fill the form and send us to make a contract and to save this special membership offer. He fooled her, and didn't say that by keeping the "free tryout" book, she auto enter an expensive 1 year book club subscription with Bertelsmann, if this book is not send back between a time frame.
She managed to get out of the subscription, but had to get a lawyer.
At least such kind of door subscription contracts was officially rendered invalid here in Germany.
She learned to never open the door to sellers again, and to read stuff more carefully to not enter any shady contracts.
Last edited:
Apple is the biggest company in the world worth money (market value), and have been for a while now. Numbers are not lying. I know we all can read and interpret those numbers. And it's almost all coming from mobile market and mobile services today. They probably have been building all this bit by bit and thus far they have been good avoiding the pitholes. They are smart.
Still, there is just that much one can take from them going down the road of wrong doing. Unfortunately for me that point is achieved by now. And that makes me think about my choices from now on. With everything apple branded actually.
Btw. I used to be a Apple workstation user even more than of their mobile devices. But that's another topic..
Still, there is just that much one can take from them going down the road of wrong doing. Unfortunately for me that point is achieved by now. And that makes me think about my choices from now on. With everything apple branded actually.
Btw. I used to be a Apple workstation user even more than of their mobile devices. But that's another topic..
That already exists. Every app page has the developer's web page linked to it. If someone wants to look for deals it is right there. To go further , as I believe you mean by your comment, would be to allow the developer to put in the app details a notification that you can click the Buy butting in the App Store for $5 or click the developer web link and buy for $3. That would likely not happen for the same reasons as within the apps.
Anti-steering policies are legal and make sense. To allow what is implied here would be like walking into Giant, picking up their in-store circular and finding an ad for the same products for less at the Acme down the street (Giant and Acme being two local grocery stores).
Apple Music is trash compared to Spotify. I get it free with Verizon and still don't use it.
Does Spotify have equivalent of iTunes Match which Apple Music has? I have some CDs that aren’t available on Apple Music but I am able to utilize iTunes Match and have those in my library in the cloud.
The Nordstrom example does not necessarily imply alternate stores or even direct payment options.
What it could indicate is that she could provide options for the transaction processing part of the fees. Meaning you can opt for all Apple payment (swipe) and transaction services (tax withholding, tax payment, tax reporting, etc) and the App Store commission fees or have a third party handle the payment, forgo the transaction services for a lesser fee amount. Could be something like 30% for full service and 15% for commission only. Then the developer pays the swipe fee out of the difference, as well as uses internal resources to handle all the tax payments and compliance reporting.
Even with alternate payment processors Apple could require the transaction to run through StoreKit.
Why match nice high quality CD music to get low quality music, better rip and put them decently elsewhere, if you own them anyway.
You know what match is? It uses your ripped version if a higher quality does not exist.
And they don't. Anyone at any time could have swiped up, opened Safari, bought v-bucks, and returned to Fortnite to spend them. Apple never stopped that or blocked access to the v-bucks purchased.
No one is forced to use IAP. Epic could have simply decided to stop supporting IAP and had all purchases made through their own storefront on the web, on PC, or on a game console. What that could not do is pull a card reader out of their back pocket.
My/Our cd rips are on my/our servers, the whole family can access it, why waste money and subscribe to a service to match something that you already own, I see no benefit. Even if it up your ripped music version, as you said.
I have Spotify because of the kids(15 & 20), as soon they move out, we’ll say Adiue to Spotify, I hate subscriptions.
What are you talking about? What fine print? What mess? They lay the levels out quite clearly here: https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships.
The Developer Program has three plans (if you want to call them that):
- $0 - Access to all developer tools and APIs; able to deploy apps on your own registered devices
- $99 - Same as above, plus: 2x live developer support, OS betas, and certificates necessary to list apps on the App Store
- $299 - Same as above, plus: private app distribution (ability to directly install apps on MDM controlled devices within your enterprise)
Apple should be allowed to be Apple just like a brick and mortar store like Best Buy is allowed to be Best Buy. I think when a comparison is drawn between Apple's storefront, the App Store, and any other brick and mortar business, it's easy to see the absurdity of what Epic is asking for.
Using Best Buy as my example, let's just say they have a gorgeous, huge, well stocked, impeccably maintained store that's visited by over 1.65 billion people (current active Apple Devices as of Jan. 2021). I want to sell my product in their store. Moreover, I've used some of their resources to help build my product and make it as good as it is. I ask what it takes in order to get my product on their shelves and they say, "30% of your profit...IF you profit. If you want to sell for free, you can be here for free." Great deal, right?
But why 30%? Well, maybe because every other store on earth does it. After all, does not EVERY STORE mark up their products to pay for the infrastructure and employee costs that help to make their store great? Not to mention all the other costs associated with running a business.
So I take that deal. After all, they've built this incredible store, that's located in the heart of an ecosystem of over a billion people, and I want to be a part of that. And part of my business model, which is really great, is that I don't actual sell my product in the store. I give it away for free! But if my customers want something a little extra to go along with it, well then they can make purchases in my product (app). THEN I end up paying the 30% cut.
This is fine for a while, but I get tired of paying. Why should I have to pay 30% of my profit? So I decide I'm going to make it so that my in-app currency can be purchased outside of the store but used in my app. What does the store say? "Ok." "Really, that's okay?" ... "Yep." "Well...cool!"
So that's great, but I still have customers choosing to buy my in-app offerings from the app itself, instead of going to my website, or let's just say, my other shop across town. I decide that it would be better for me if customers KNEW that they could get the product cheaper. So I ask, "Hey, can I indicate that these things I'm selling can also be purchased elsewhere?" And the store says, "Yep." "Really???" "Absolutely!"
So that's great...but I still have customers who don't want to travel somewhere else to get what they can get so conveniently right there in this huge store of which I'm a part. So they just buy in the big store, because it's so easy, and I end up having to pay that 30%. So I decide I want to change things up: I'm going to create a tunnel from my booth in this big store that connects directly to my other store across town (online) so that customers can instantly get out of this store and go and buy my stuff cheaper somewhere else.
And the store says, "Wait...that's really not okay." And I say, "Why?" "Well...you used some of our resources to make your app, you've benefited from the clean, well-kept, well-organized, immensely popular store, where we've prominently featured your product. You've been allowed to sell it for free and not pay anything unless customers want to buy in-app purchases, you've been allowed to tell them that they can get them somewhere else, but...it's crossing the line to actually take them away from our store. They're welcome to travel there of their own accord, but it's just not good business to be advertising your store while taking advantage of ours."
So I go a step further and say, "You know what...you're right. Instead of linking customers to my own store, I'm just going to build a little store right here in my booth. Oh, and you're not going to get a dime of my profits."
And the store...well...they kick me out. And I sue them...because I want to be a part of their ecosystem, use their resources, benefit from their environment, connect to their 1.65 billion customers...and I want to do it all for free.
That's where I see Epic and Apple, and I think that if any one tried what Epic tried in an actual, physical store, there'd be no debate about who's right.
This is just how business works. Even food trucks may their share. Imagine a food truck asking Disney World if they give their food away on main street and just charge for the extras. Disney says "Yes, but we'll take a cut of the extras." And once the food truck is there, they just stop paying. Bye bye food truck.
Apple is a privately owned company and they created a product that billions of people want. You can't go in and say that you deserve a spot in their store, a booth in their storefront, or a prime location on main street, and demand that they just give it to you for free. It's absurd. This whole thing is absurd.
Using Best Buy as my example, let's just say they have a gorgeous, huge, well stocked, impeccably maintained store that's visited by over 1.65 billion people (current active Apple Devices as of Jan. 2021). I want to sell my product in their store. Moreover, I've used some of their resources to help build my product and make it as good as it is. I ask what it takes in order to get my product on their shelves and they say, "30% of your profit...IF you profit. If you want to sell for free, you can be here for free." Great deal, right?
But why 30%? Well, maybe because every other store on earth does it. After all, does not EVERY STORE mark up their products to pay for the infrastructure and employee costs that help to make their store great? Not to mention all the other costs associated with running a business.
So I take that deal. After all, they've built this incredible store, that's located in the heart of an ecosystem of over a billion people, and I want to be a part of that. And part of my business model, which is really great, is that I don't actual sell my product in the store. I give it away for free! But if my customers want something a little extra to go along with it, well then they can make purchases in my product (app). THEN I end up paying the 30% cut.
This is fine for a while, but I get tired of paying. Why should I have to pay 30% of my profit? So I decide I'm going to make it so that my in-app currency can be purchased outside of the store but used in my app. What does the store say? "Ok." "Really, that's okay?" ... "Yep." "Well...cool!"
So that's great, but I still have customers choosing to buy my in-app offerings from the app itself, instead of going to my website, or let's just say, my other shop across town. I decide that it would be better for me if customers KNEW that they could get the product cheaper. So I ask, "Hey, can I indicate that these things I'm selling can also be purchased elsewhere?" And the store says, "Yep." "Really???" "Absolutely!"
So that's great...but I still have customers who don't want to travel somewhere else to get what they can get so conveniently right there in this huge store of which I'm a part. So they just buy in the big store, because it's so easy, and I end up having to pay that 30%. So I decide I want to change things up: I'm going to create a tunnel from my booth in this big store that connects directly to my other store across town (online) so that customers can instantly get out of this store and go and buy my stuff cheaper somewhere else.
And the store says, "Wait...that's really not okay." And I say, "Why?" "Well...you used some of our resources to make your app, you've benefited from the clean, well-kept, well-organized, immensely popular store, where we've prominently featured your product. You've been allowed to sell it for free and not pay anything unless customers want to buy in-app purchases, you've been allowed to tell them that they can get them somewhere else, but...it's crossing the line to actually take them away from our store. They're welcome to travel there of their own accord, but it's just not good business to be advertising your store while taking advantage of ours."
So I go a step further and say, "You know what...you're right. Instead of linking customers to my own store, I'm just going to build a little store right here in my booth. Oh, and you're not going to get a dime of my profits."
And the store...well...they kick me out. And I sue them...because I want to be a part of their ecosystem, use their resources, benefit from their environment, connect to their 1.65 billion customers...and I want to do it all for free.
That's where I see Epic and Apple, and I think that if any one tried what Epic tried in an actual, physical store, there'd be no debate about who's right.
This is just how business works. Even food trucks may their share. Imagine a food truck asking Disney World if they give their food away on main street and just charge for the extras. Disney says "Yes, but we'll take a cut of the extras." And once the food truck is there, they just stop paying. Bye bye food truck.
Apple is a privately owned company and they created a product that billions of people want. You can't go in and say that you deserve a spot in their store, a booth in their storefront, or a prime location on main street, and demand that they just give it to you for free. It's absurd. This whole thing is absurd.
I'm sure you have seen how many commercials have micro fonts at the bottom as a disclaimer that you will never read through before the ad is over.
EXACTLY! But, you know people think the world just works the way they want it to work. Not the way IT WORKS. And because it's digital, well they also feel it's so cheap for Apple to do all this stuff, surely they could charge less for it. Like you know, almost nothing?
All I can say is damn, you had this example that perfectly demonstrate a point I don’t agree on. But hey, kudos for the time taken to type such long wall of text (that is still readable unlike certain people somewhere else).
Um, wrong fees. Or I was mistaken. I was referring to the fees developers give Apple when their apps are in the store, for sale.
Some pay nothing, some pay 15%, and some pay 30%. I was getting the idea that who paid what was up for negotiation, and not a hard fast rule.
Paying for the Developer club access is not what I was referring to, and I already knew what the fees were.
oh but it would. That is what is in play here. A precedent that opens is a law waiting to be written. You cannot just say "because it was Apple is like this and for others is fine".
If indeed there is such an order, in the very next day, you would see fillings for all the other stores. It probably can be set on software goods only (avoiding the physical stores and physical goods) but the precedent would most likely make it to a law that would stop store owners from denying access to applications that wanted to redirect the user.
Granted that those stores could try to deny the app based on some other rule but that is another fight.
I still can't believe, the government can interfere in how a company is run after it becomes successful.
Nothing changed since 2008, the reason why people stick with the iPhone is exactly security and simplicity.
Why the hell this now? This shouldn't even be a thing hahahaha
The guy steals kids money with an addicting game! Selling virtual goods that change nothing, even inside the game!
Bizarre
Nothing changed since 2008, the reason why people stick with the iPhone is exactly security and simplicity.
Why the hell this now? This shouldn't even be a thing hahahaha
The guy steals kids money with an addicting game! Selling virtual goods that change nothing, even inside the game!
Bizarre
Greed, and the power of money.
There also seems to be an agenda to kick Apple.
…..
Matching your music uses your ripped quality. I don’t have access to my NAS when I’m out working out.
Geez ALL I asked if Spotify had similar features. I have music that is NOT ON ANY service. So I NEED to use features like this. I don’t take my 30 TB NAS to the store and everywhere I go.
What's so hard to believe about it? It's been that way for a very long time 🙄