Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Unfortunately full price full featured games constantly flop on mobile. Consumers don’t like paying for mobile games even when they are console quality. Nintendo entered mobile gaming trying to charge for full featured games but pivoted to free to play because consumers complained $10-$15 was to expensive

This is all true.

However, one might think the platform owner could do a little more to combat the blatant misuse of IAP in many games, especially the ones aimed at kids.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WarmWinterHat
Cool, then Apple should offer/facilitate to let me remove and any all software my phone, including the OS, at will, and install something else if I see fit.

It would be more environmentally friendly, too, since iPhones and iPads could be useful with a different OS past their sunsetting date.

Wait, why should they? What's their incentive?

You knew what the HW limitations were before you bought the devices.
 
Time will tell and all of the complaining in the world is not going to change whatever is going to result from these laws. This cat is out of the bag. If it will result in:
  • disaster, the world can watch the EU be destroyed in the disaster... and not make the same mistakes.
  • something better, the world can watch the EU enjoy being first to the "better..." and perhaps adopt similar things for the benefit of their consumers.
In a sense, the EU is an isolated "test cell" to prove out all of the certain doom or new consumer benefits to result from these laws already in place and in effect. Apple is choosing to comply. Our EU friends will either be destroyed/harmed/etc or not. Time will reveal all.

My own guess is that this will be just as much as an EU-"forced" disaster as "making" iPhones adopt USB-C vs. Lightning. 500 threads proclaiming the certain disaster of that seemed to completely miss the actual outcome: no wobbly, no broken tongues, still have lint in our pockets, etc. The difference between that "wolf! wolf!" and this one is that that one has now had too much time to keep spinning the certain disaster of adopting USB-C... which this one is still new enough that there's some room to keep crying "Wolf!" But time is ticking fast and nearly 4 months of these laws is already behind us. I wonder if 6 months of no consequence will be the point where we stop spinning security... or 9 months or 12 this coming Spring? TBD. I see very little of the USB-C disaster anymore. So these seems "on deck."
Whatever happens in the future happens. However the Mac and iOS environments are not identical even though they are part of the apple ecosystem.

The cat is out of the bag and we will see how it goes. All that glitters is not gold.
 
The point is that when there is more than one "store" (one SOURCE of things consumers want to buy), there is competition to woo the transaction... often in pricing and/or value-added bonuses. Competition makes that happen. If the ONLY place to get Apple stuff was Apple, only Apple pricing would be available to buyers.

Best Buy, Amazon, etc want to move inventory... so they sweeten the pot vs the very same offering from Apple direct. Consumers then can shop around for the SAME product and get some added value and/or lower prices. Shopping around for the same product is what makes this work for consumers.

Video games on Steam are usually cheaper than the same game on any of the consoles, which suggests that it's at least possible that competition in software distribution can lower prices.

But even if they don't, I'm not entirely clear why more money going to developers rather than Apple is necessarily a bad thing.
 
Congratulations EU people for getting to install whatever software you want on the computing devices you own. The rest of us have this exact same ability with our Macs but you get to enjoy the capability with your iDevices too. They are- after all- YOUR computing devices, no longer belonging to the manufacturer.

Those of us completely unaffected by your laws will be sure to bash away at something of zero consequence for us anyway... but I'd bet fairly large that many of those most vocal have a third-party sourced app (or several) on their own Macs... and that hasn't led to security meltdowns, trojans, viruses, bank account drains, death of first born, locusts & frogs and the four horsemen (but we'll let on that all that is going to happen to you, even though these laws will be in play for 4 months now in just a few more days). "Wolf! Wolf!" the boy cried... but will the villagers come yet again... or finally realize the truth (they already know from Macs always being this way)?

Enjoy access to apps that the rest of us can't access... because "Father" knows best.
Epic will compound it with App Store inception (OS --Running--> Apple Appstore --Running--> Epic App --Running--> Epic App Store). Where does the line stop? Why can't I have an App Store inside of Fortnite?

See, we do own the device, but thanks to Microsoft's model of software copyright, we license the OS... and turns out, the apps don't run on the device (per se) they run on the OS...

Either way, I prefer the controlled iOS experience and detest apps on Mac that bypass the App Store. In the Mac model we then have separate updaters, separate purchasing methods, and the Wild West of security. Is it doom and gloom? No, but it is a 💩 Show.
 
As consumers (instead of paid employees of the seller), we SHOULD want "our cake & eat it too." Our part of the capitalism "bargain" is to try to get as much as we can get for our money... and competition is key part in making that happen.

Bottom line: you and others can feel whatever you want to feel about this topic. Laws are in place. Apple is complying. Results of that compliance is unfolding before our very eyes.

The most vocal against these laws seem to be people NOT within the EU, thus unaffected by these laws. If you are not in the EU, today is the same as yesterday and the day before in terms of how & where you can buy apps, do in-app transactions, etc.

If you ARE in the EU, you can opt to stick with "business as usual" by sourcing new apps from only the Apple App Store. If you don't already possess some app that you fear may exit the store, get it now and then you'll not need to buy it direct should it exit.

Relative to all of these security disaster impacts so many are so certain are going to impact, we can watch that storm destroy the EU... or see that it- like the complete disaster of the EU "forced" conversion to USB-C- was much ado about nothing.

Time will show the outcome, isolated to this one market, where we can see the certain disaster play out or not. If EU people are devastated by these laws, they can elect replacement politicians who can revoke the laws and put things back to the ideal of the one company "gatekeeper" having ALL say and being the ONLY source of apps.

Feel whatever we wish to feel, but Pandora has opened this box... it's already done... and either all of the great evils will manifest or they won't.

The fact that we in the EU won't get iPhone mirroring and other cool features probably until next year sucks for us EU consumers already, and it's all thanks to the DMA.

So at least that negative part is playing out already and as an EU consumer, I am not exactly thrilled.

(Note: this is not to say tech companies shouldn't be regulated because clearly they do, but the DMA is a hamfisted mess that is causing more harm than good. See Microsoft and Teams for a non-Apple example of what's potentially in store for any EU designated gate-keeper company that wants to offer an integrated service.)
 
Video games on Steam are usually cheaper than the same game on any of the consoles, which suggests that it's at least possible that competition in software distribution can lower prices.

But even if they don't, I'm not entirely clear why more money going to developers rather than Apple is necessarily a bad thing.
Developers that spend zero to develop the hardware, the OS, the dev tools. That is like getting a car, insurance, and fuel handed to you unlimited and asking why a driving service company takes so much of the cut of revenue. Anyone can write code, not everyone can build an ecosystem. Don't assume one can freeload from that huge multi-billion dollar investment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
Unfortunately full price full featured games constantly flop on mobile. Consumers don’t like paying for mobile games even when they are console quality. Nintendo entered mobile gaming trying to charge for full featured games but pivoted to free to play because consumers complained $10-$15 was to expensive
Thats not true. All of Nintendo's mobile titles have been F2P.
 
Video games on Steam are usually cheaper than the same game on any of the consoles, which suggests that it's at least possible that competition in software distribution can lower prices.

But even if they don't, I'm not entirely clear why more money going to developers rather than Apple is necessarily a bad thing.

I think most of us here are for more money going to developers than to Apple.

Where many of us have an issue is when companies such as Epic or Spotify try to use political power to force platform owners - who have spent millions of man years and billions of dollars to create, develop, maintain, and support the platform - to give it away for free to developers to use their distribution, tools, frameworks, and discovery.

Spotify and Epic don't want to pay less to Apple. They want to pay nothing, and I personally think that's a terrible precedent for any platform.
 
You bought an iPhone to have walls. The vast majority bought an iPhone to have an iPhone.

Some of us, myself included, bought an iPhone despite having walls.
Most sheep have no clue, indeed, and yet so many want to weigh in on another companies investment and challenge the model that they built. You want to raise your pitchforks for a company go after Adobe and Autodesk. They have majority market share in the markets they compete, have little/no competition, and charge way more than Apple for products.
 
I think most of us here are for more money going to developers than to Apple.

Where many of us have an issue is when companies such as Epic or Spotify try to use political power to force platform owners - who have spent millions of man years and billions of dollars to create, develop, maintain, and support the platform - to give it away for free to developers to use their distribution, tools, frameworks, and discovery.

Spotify and Epic don't want to pay less to Apple. They want to pay nothing, and I personally think that's a terrible precedent for any platform.

Until developer accounts are free, every developer pays something.
 
I think most of us here are for more money going to developers than to Apple.

Where many of us have an issue is when companies such as Epic or Spotify try to use political power to force platform owners - who have spent millions of man years and billions of dollars to create, develop, maintain, and support the platform - to give it away for free to developers to use their distribution, tools, frameworks, and discovery.

Spotify and Epic don't want to pay less to Apple. They want to pay nothing, and I personally think that's a terrible precedent for any platform.
Agreed, they are leeches. Apple is their desired host. Epic merely builds dopamine hits for pennies on the dollar and generate zero value to society. Spotify is even worse in that their product is licensed and simply acts as a middleman for other people's content on other companies' platforms.
 
I’ve never wanted someone to fail before … but just for a second … imagine if the Epic App Store had a malicious software package available to download on it. Epic would basically prove Apple right and make the EU’s laws look pathetic. It would be extremely fun to watch.
Pretty sure IOS has had many many malware issues over the years. I remember in 205 around 500 apps had malware on them. in 2023 - 389 apps had malware identifed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Most sheep have no clue, indeed, and yet so many want to weigh in on another companies investment and challenge the model that they built. You want to raise your pitchforks for a company go after Adobe and Autodesk. They have majority market share in the markets they compete, have little/no competition, and charge way more than Apple for products.

Adobe is being sued by the US DOJ for anticompetitive practices, as is Apple.


Grow up.
 
  • Love
Reactions: turbineseaplane
I want an iPhone with the ability to install whatever program I want on it. Like a Mac does.
You can buy a device from many of the manufacturers besides Apple that will offer you the option. I wanted to play the game Starfield but can’t on ps5 so guess what I bought an Xbox also to have that option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strongy
Until developer accounts are free, every developer pays something.

True. In principle, every developers pays Apple.

In practice, what they pay is not even a rounding error.

Facebook, for example, have made too many billions to count on the App Store despite never paying Apple anything for the pleasure besides the yearly developer fee.

You can bet your a** that Apple would change that if they could.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.