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 vs. Apple Takes a Twist As 35 US States and Department of Justice Weigh in to Back 'Fortnite' Maker
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So you are saying Android is a closed, walled garden environment JUST LIKE iOS then? "Just don't enable side-loading on Android". Again, this is NOT what we are referring to when we want a closed system. And you KNOW THIS but intentionally playing the "wellllllll technicalllllyyy!!!!"
Yes in certain respects. And forcing the app store open to sideloading would only make it worse of a garbage dump than before.
I personally don't browse the app store looking for apps I think I need. I download apps based on need, usually from vendors whose products I buy that support an app. The app store is a serious moneymaker and imo, the reason politicians want a hand in it.
Good question, I don't know.
Don't know. Apple is secretive as much as they can be, with respect to many of finances.
Until an app you really want...or even NEED...can not be downloaded without going through third party.
No. Where did I ever say that? What I'm saying is this:
You can still get and live in your closed garden by choice.
If you don't enable that sideloading switch, you get the closed garden you want to live in:
You obtain your Phone, its OS and the apps all from the same source: Apple.
There are people that will champion voluntary submission into slavery as a great expression and exercise of free choice.
Thankfully we don't have to forcefully enslave people to allow that choice.
You can't say it both ways in the SAME POST. You said so Android is not a closed, walled garden system. iOS is. That is the CURRENT CHOICE. Android for open, iOS for closed. Where will my choice go if iOS is forced to open? Its gone. You said so yourself. If android is not closed, iOS becomes Android, therefore, iOS will no longer be closed. I will no longer have that choice.
You do know that there is a toggle in Android right? So if Android is not a closed walled garden system due to the existence of a toggle, neither will iOS with an existence of a toggle.
I don't believe I am wrong. Lets take your example, 2CheckOut. When I check their website they don't offer a store front, they interface with existing backend store solutions like shopify (they support 120+ carts which is quite impressive). They do, of course, offer a 'till', this is what I mean about payment processing, but you still need a store front such as Thrive, Shopify, etc. Their payment processor will generate links, so the shop front doesn't have to be terribly complex or expensive, you could do it using a free version of WordPress. Their pricing, though, is not based on a fixed percentage, rather there is a minimum charge and a percentage.
If I compare 2CheckOut with Apple, then I would need to use their 2Monetize plan to get the same level of service in terms of global tax compliance. This means I need to pay $0.60 per successful sale and 6%. So for a $1.99 app purchase which Apple would take $0.60 commission on, 2CheckOut would take $0.71 and I would still need to pay for my store front, this is not to mention other development expenses that are covered by the Apple Developer Program.
Of course, for me (unfortunately!), I don't make enough money to breach the Small Business Program (I wish I did), so Apple actually only charges me 15% commission, so my $1.99 app would cost me $0.30 in commission. If I took the cheapest 2CheckOut plan, it would still charge me $0.42 in commission, and on top of the other items above I mentioned I would still need to pay for, I don't get any analytics.
According to Apple, the average price of an app on their store is $4.90, even with this price, for someone selling on the App Store who revenues less than $1 million, their 15% commission would be $0.74 whereas with 2CheckOut they would be paying $0.90 for the equivalent payment service only.
Maybe contact their live chat and ask them how you can integrate their payment processing into your mobile app to support in-app purchases across multiple devices with account syncing. Of course, your users will need the ability to restore previous purchases so hopefully their API will allow you to query this, but I doubt its going to be Apple easy!
Apple doesn't give their developer tools away for free, nothing comes free in this world! They charge an annual developer subscription (which costs my independent business the same amount as the company I work for, and the same amount as they charge a company the size of Epic). They also take their commission, and with this revenue they are able to provide developer tools.
Me personally, I'll even pay a premium to Apple for that peace of mind.
Within reason. For instance, one of the Apps I bought cost - and still costs - 130 from the App Store - while I got it for 52 through the (well-renowned) developer's website. (Admittedly a Cyber Monday promotion)
You can choose to use another app then.
There are apps today that I really want - and can't get them, due to Apple App Store guildelines and approval process.
Personally, I'd see the bigger issue with the duopoly of relevant App Stores (or the monopoly of the Apple one on iOS) rather than "some random apps" people want.
Your assumption is basically an admission that there are - or could be - apps people really want that wouldn't be on the App Store. The App Store can't be that attractive to developers then - were it not forced upon them (once they've decided to develop for that OS). Allowing would thus promote innovation.
It's not.
Rather than that at the time of your hardware purchase (like now) you'll just be making it in system/device settings.
You can even revert that decision without paying hundreds of dollars for a new phone at any time.
Much more flexible, consumer-friendly and promoting innovation.
You are intentionally changing your argument to fit your narrative.
Android - has a toggle to allow side loading. Can we agree that Android is not a closed, walled garden system? Yes or no.
iOS currently - no toggle, no way with iOS alone to allow side loading. Truly a closed and walled garden environment. We agree here so far? Yes or no.
iOS post lawsuits - has a toggle to allow side loading. Oh look here. SAME as Android. If we say Android is not a closed, walled garden system - then neither will iOS after all of this. It is impossible for both ways to exist. So comparing iOS now vs post lawsuit, my choice is removed.
Third-party services' current pricing certainly doesn't scale (down) well with today's mobile app pricing.
I'm pretty though that they would adapter or come up with new pricing models for mobile platforms and that that would put some pricing pressure on Apple, for the benefit of consumers and developers alike.
It's really not, imo. It's a big business ploy and the indie devs will suffer, which means the consumer won't be better off. This is not promoting innovation, it's promoting suffocation.
Yes, we can agree on that.
No.
- Today: by buying an iOS smartphone, you're making an irreversible choice for a closed garden app environment.
- Tomorrow, if sideloading were allowed: you'd just make that choice in your device's settings later.
You can still to choose to operate your device as and live in the same walled garden environment that there is today.
It's only the irreversibility of your initial choice that is changed.
Making a choice reversible doesn't negate or take away your choice.
Last edited:
What’s embarrassing is the stupid , continual assumptions that’s what this is all about ?
No, that’s a side effect of what is being asked for. OP is not incorrect.
Sure...
I was just saying there are some companies who have avoided the dreaded 30% curse.
Thank you for correcting me.
No further replies required.
You can leave developers out of this. That's like saying I need to consider the feelings of my kid's date when setting a curfew and where they are allowed to go.
To combat eminent domain.
Except since you are on both platforms Apple restriction doesn't matter, which was part of my point.
It does matter. To be on all smartphones you have to bend to Apple’s every whim. To be honest, I’m not entirely sure what your point is.
AFAIK Apple, unlike Steam, doesn't do holiday promotions so that is not a fair comparison.
To diagnose all cars you have to bend to Ford's/Honda's/who ever's whim. In fact, that was the reason the AAA garage in Las Cruces would not even look at certain cars (diagnostic machine cost something like $10,000 IIRC). Your argument falls apart in the real world.
This seems to be the major problem for some of these developers. Apple is in control of their own ecosystem that they created and built with their own blood sweat and tears and these devs don't like someone dictating to them what the rules are.
Which automaker is part of a duopoly?
You are moving the goalposts. The law cares about monopolies not duopolies. As long as there is healthy competition (ie no collusion on prices or output between the various companies) it doesn't matter if the market is two or hundred and two companies.
That is why Disney hasn't been having a nice chat with judges regarding their mammoth control of media despite the selection being pretty much limited to big mammoth corporations.
As I said before no one seems to worry about the real local monopolies - the cable ISPs.
Last edited: