Apparently you can’t do math. The 7% is only from a part of the total from which the 25% is from. So it’s probably more like 1-2% of total revenue. Even if Apple would just sell iPhones and nothing else, they would still be very profitable.
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.
EU Antitrust Chief Warns Apple About App Store Fees and Safety Warnings
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
but i already know they’re incredibly profitable in the eu…you seem to be happy in ignorance
You think this makes the EU market unprofitable for Apple lmao? Have you seen the prices for hardware over there?
Anyone that opposes this or sideloading in general on iOS should explain why it's not fine on iOS but fine on macOS, as sideloading exists there and no fees and royalties are paid to Apple.
Go on.
Go on.
EU calling Apple out on its bs as always.
No, Apple's dominance wouldn't exist without the App Store, these developers would have been perfectly fine on whatever platform might have taken its place... Stop pretending like Apple's hostile behavior is somehow warranted because in your imaginary world developers might have been worse off.
Yeah about that...
Not even the letter of the law is being followed by Apple.
From https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32022R1925
And there are significantly more security risks in macOS, despite iOS being a much more attractive target. Funny how that works.
Guys, look, he didn’t expect to be called out on his hyperbole, ok?
I really wonder if some people know how listed companies work. A prevailing thought that keeps coming up is that Apple have a huge pile of cash and can do anything they want. They have shareholders, and very many of them. Cook and the Board answer to them. Any significant drop in income or loss of capital is a massive deal, not matter how much money they have. So people implying Apple can just say no to the EU (or China or whoever) and it is of no consequence, just reveal an ignorance of how these things work. I am not expert myself, but I can see the fundamental clearly enough. Apple is not sitting on a huge pile of cash that it can just burn with no consequence.
Maybe the desire for a "closed system" isn't as systemically important as ensuring a free and open market with fair terms and prices and room for competition, where people and businesses can interact and transact without two abusive and unreliable overlords (Apple and Google) constantly inserting themselves in that relationship and dictating terms and prices.
Some people seem to forget that the “they wouldn’t have been successful” thing cuts both ways. Does anyone imagine the iPhone would still be here if devs had flocked to BlackBerry instead?
Wonder if Apple will get tired of the EU BS and just walk away from selling products there. If you want to buy Apple products in the future you'll have to get it through a 3rd party, this would solve a lot of headaches for Apple.
Difficult to know who to cheer on. There's first the uber-bureaucratic EU that sticks its nose in to too many things [EU resident writes] yet at its core it has some good things (cross-border travel, consumer protection, single market]
then
Apple
Dry on innovation, a bit of a **** to developers, a lot of a sh-t to customers in recent years, environmentally unfriendly with its not-repair friendly|sham of a right to repair malicious compliance.
Well Mr Cook, the door is really over there if you want to leave. I'll cut off my nose to spite my face and get by. A competitor will come along and in a few years well, maybe you'll be giving a keynote at the local fast food staff association [ha, you don't have to think of money ever again, even if you were sacked and blacked in the industry for some reason].
then
Apple
Dry on innovation, a bit of a **** to developers, a lot of a sh-t to customers in recent years, environmentally unfriendly with its not-repair friendly|sham of a right to repair malicious compliance.
Well Mr Cook, the door is really over there if you want to leave. I'll cut off my nose to spite my face and get by. A competitor will come along and in a few years well, maybe you'll be giving a keynote at the local fast food staff association [ha, you don't have to think of money ever again, even if you were sacked and blacked in the industry for some reason].
No, because Apple's devices are in so many hands that its impact is on a societal level.
The monetary infrastructure and revenue generated through digital platforms like Apple's iOS App Store or Google's Play Store is on a global and international level and cannot be understated.
If the tech giants aren't regulated and opened up adequately they'll swallow up most of the players below them and take most of the cake, stagnating all but their own growth.
No society can thrive if the biggest markets are disproportionately dominated by a handful giant corporations.
America in 2024 provides a number of great examples of how indirect monopolies hurt all of society but the bottom-lines of the very few people who own said monopolies.
When business get too big they need to be regulated or broken up.
Apple is a business that has gotten too big.
I actually think most EU customers won't go rushing towards an alternative app store UNLESS there are very good, compelling reasons and even then.
BUT that doesn't mean Apple, its malicious compliance, and childishness-near-American-monopoly can play its games and have toddler tantrums when someone dares cross it.
The letter of the law (aka textualism) has almost never been a way to read or interpret any EU law. Teleological, multil
In EU any law, regulation is legally equal in the 24 different languages it’s written in.
The method of teleological interpretation may be defined as the method of interpretation used by courts, when they interpret legislative provisions in the light of the purpose, values, legal, social and economical goals these provisions aim to achieve.
European national constitutional courts as well as the European Court of Human Rights apply this method.
What’s am I saying that doesn’t make sense? Do you not know how EU is funded with 1% of the GDP of EU?
That countries have a right to make laws?
Apple aren’t free to do whatever they want in foreign markets?
What you and others keep forgetting is the reason developers flocked to the App Store is Apple created an attractive market where normal, non technical, users felt safe trying and buying apps. The developers flocked to the iPhone because APPLE created a safe and secure marketplace that customers felt comfortable using.
So they are lawless and over-regulating at the same time. If those opinions are floating around I guess they found the perfect balance.
My Mac seems safe and reliable. Well other than the hardware issue every single one has had. GPU on the first, GPU on the second, and keyboard on the third.
Challenge accepted.
While macOS is not a bad platform for app distribution, iOS has proven to be very profitable for smaller developers. Furthermore, the App Store provides end users with a convenient and reliable way to find, install, pay for, and update all apps. As a result there is more consumer commerce that happens on iOS than any other OS platform.
As a small developer, I appreciate the App Store for reducing payment churn. This is because all developers benefit when end users manage their payment method to continue using Apple services. When we distribute apps independently, there is always a certain percentage of lost subscription sales when users are required to manually update payment methods on multiple platforms.
If major app developers decide to distribute their apps via "side loading" outside the App Store, it could lead to fewer users visiting the App Store. This could put smaller developers who rely on the current iOS model and its 70-85% revenue split at a disadvantage.
It was abundantly clear this was going to happen. In the European Union the intent of a law matters a lot. Following the letter of the law matters not if one clearly violates its intent. Malicious compliance won’t fly in the eu and this is exactly what Apple tried. And what it will be punished for until it complies not only with the letter but also with the intent of European law. In case there is any doubt the intent is abundantly clear, and anybody can understand it by reading the public documents.
Not surprised the EU is looking at the CTF. I’m glad they’re looking at Apple’s scare sheets too. It’s one thing to inform users but scaring them into thinking anything that happens outside Apple’s App Store is a privacy and security risk is disingenuous.
how they will make sure that it is safe is for them to decide
Ironically people always claim the EU is a nanny state while Apple is actually the one assuming it’s users are too dumb to make their own free decisions.
If I want to catch a virus, let me catch a virus! just as I make the decision to only use the AppStore (but mostly for convenience)
Ironically people always claim the EU is a nanny state while Apple is actually the one assuming it’s users are too dumb to make their own free decisions.
If I want to catch a virus, let me catch a virus! just as I make the decision to only use the AppStore (but mostly for convenience)