iOS Apps with Dropbox Integration Running Afoul of Apple's App Store Rules

[ristlin]

Not true. You have to pay a developers fee to produce and distribute your app in the app store. Said another way, there is no possible way of having your app in the app store without paying Apple a fee.

$99 a year, which in a way, buys you the development tools and support on how to create apps. I call that cheap. How much does it cost to buy the tools in other professions with equal money-making potential?

 

[ppilone]

The problem is that Apple is charging much more what other billing companies do for this service, thanks to the fact that they don't allow any kind of competition whithin iOS. Most companies won't ever make use of it because it's priced far too high and it doesn't make sense to even consider it if you already have your own billing process in place.

Take the Kindle App as example: forget the 30% charge which is out of question already, it was impossible for Amazon to use Apple's in-app purchase even if they wanted because it's not designed to to handle that many items as available in the Amazon ebooks store. Still it was not allowed for the Kindle App to provide his own (fully functional) store web address. The result is a much worse user experience since you have to manually navigate to the store yourself without a viable alternative from Apple and without a viable alternative from anyone else thanks to Apple's rules enforcing his monopoly for in-app purchases.

I think it depends on the business model of the company. Content providers, like Amazon, can't use iAP because the 30% is more than the profit they make on the content they're providing.

Where it does work beautifully is the micro-purchase model that we see often in games. Developers will gladly pay Apple 30% to resell "unlockable" features to the millions of users who downloaded the free version of the app.

 

[ristlin]

To rephrase your shortsighted comment: "Apple should stick to develop their own apps for their devices, not expecting a free ride from third party developers."

It's not a free ride. It's true that iOS offers a nice userbase of potential customers, but third party apps provide added value to the iOS platform. An iDevice without third party apps is basically worthless to a lot of users.

If you took the time to notice, I was replying to the chain starting with the original shortsighted comment: "Apple trying to get 30% of everything in the universe is getting tiresome."

 

[Flitzy]

Oh yes it is. Demanding 30% for simply processing a payment is outrageous. They don't administer the registration of the subscription neither do they host nor deliver the content to the customer. All they do is process the payment. Other payment processors take about 2-5%.
It's not worth 30% and that's why content providers take a different, less convenient route.

Please. 30% is pretty generous considering.

App developers that complain otherwise are just being greedy.

 

[Daveoc64]

$99 a year, which in a way, buys you the development tools and support on how to create apps. I call that cheap. How much does it cost to buy the tools in other professions with equal money-making potential?

Forget other professions, the same tools can be used to create Apps for Mac OS X for free.

Android's tools are free and open source.

Apple iOS is the odd one out here.

 

[astrorider]

The problem is that Apple is charging much more what other billing companies do for this service, thanks to the fact that they don't allow any kind of competition whithin iOS. Most companies won't ever make use of it because it's priced far too high and it doesn't make sense to even consider it if you already have your own billing process in place.

It's absurd to think Apple's just a billing company. They provide an integrated market where 250 million customers are one click away from buying a product from within your app. They also provide an easy to integrate mechanism / API for developers to integrate e-commerce into their apps to take advantage of those customers.

Take the Kindle App as example: forget the 30% charge which is out of question already, it was impossible for Amazon to use Apple's in-app purchase even if they wanted because it's not designed to to handle that many items as available in the Amazon ebooks store. Still it was not allowed for the Kindle App to provide his own (fully functional) store web address. The result is a much worse user experience since you have to manually navigate to the store yourself without a viable alternative from Apple and without a viable alternative from anyone else thanks to Apple's rules enforcing his monopoly for in-app purchases.

Not impossible at all. Use a "consumable" in app purchase token that allows you to buy any book priced at what you charge for that consumable token.

 

[ristlin]

Hum... you just repeated the same thing I replied to.

The reality is, Developers and Apple are in a symbiotic relationship. Developers make applications, Apple uses that fact to make their devices more attractive to users. The more apps, the more devices are sold, the more devices are sold, the more apps are made.

Apple can't live without the developers and the developers get paid for their apps.

Why would you classify developers as free-loaders in this scenario ? Both sides are profiting from the other. I don't see why you feel Apple is more entitled in this then the 3rd party developers. If all the developers disappeared and took their apps with them tomorrow and the App store was a big empty hole, I doubt Apple would continue selling iPhones and iPads by the million like they do today.

I like developers as much as you do. I'm simply throwing out the direct opposite claim to "Apple is greedy" with the hope that people will notice the irony in all the rage against Apple for charging a % of sale.

 

[bsolar]

$99 a year, which in a way, buys you the development tools and support on how to create apps. I call that cheap. How much does it cost to buy the tools in other professions with equal money-making potential?

How much does it cost 1 hour of work from a developer? I call that *not* cheap at all and Apple does not pay any of it, and stil gets the app available for their environment.

To leverage a "There's an App for that" commercial you actually need Apps which customers want, and Apple needs to thank the many third party developers investing time and resources in iOS for that.

 

[Flitzy]

How much does it cost 1 hour of work from a developer? I call that *not* cheap at all and Apple does not pay any of it, and stil gets the app available for their environment.

To leverage a "There's an App for that" commercial you actually need Apps which customers want, and Apple needs to thank the many third party developers investing time and resources in iOS for that.

How much do apps make, per year, when you don't have to provide advertising, support, billing, licensing?

Apple handles pretty much everything besides making the app and developers have the nerve to complain about a measly 30%?

 

[bbeagle]

How much does it cost 1 hour of work from a developer? I call that *not* cheap at all and Apple does not pay any of it, and stil gets the app available for their environment.

I guess Microsoft needs to get off their a$$ and start paying all the third-party developers for Windows now, right?

 

[ristlin]

Forget other professions, the same tools can be used to create Apps for Mac OS X for free.

Android's tools are free and open source.

Apple iOS is the odd one out here.

False actually.

Android charges $25 bucks for registration and also a 30% cut to sell through various services.

I agree that $25 is less than $99, but iOS tends to make more money for developers (almost $3 billion so far). I don't believe we've heard Android "payout to developer" numbers from Google.

 

[Lennholm]

Please. 30% is pretty generous considering.

App developers that complain otherwise are just being greedy.

No it's not considering the service it's charged for and if anything, it's the customers who are to cheap to pay the increased price the content providers would have to charge to cover Apple's cut. We are mostly talking about content with already small margins as is.

 

[gotluck]

I guess Microsoft needs to get off their a$$ and start paying all the third-party developers for Windows now, right?

Apples and oranges... Microsoft doesnt require one to sell their app in an app store.

There is no alternative for iOS.

 

[bsolar]

It's absurd to think Apple's just a billing company. They provide an integrated market where 250 million customers are one click away from buying a product from within your app. They also provide an easy to integrate mechanism / API for developers to integrate e-commerce into their apps to take advantage of those customers.

And why I'm not able to decide to use another billing company or e-commerce API? If Apple is so sure its service are competitively priced and the best avilable they should have no issues in actually competing. Instead they enforce a monopoly to avoid competition completely.

Not impossible at all. Use a "consumable" in app purchase token that allows you to buy any book priced at what you charge for that consumable token.

That's a ugly workaround, not a solution. If you need to resort to consumable tokens to avoid the billing system's limitations the billing system is just inadequate.

 

[KnightWRX]

I like developers as much as you do. I'm simply throwing out the direct opposite claim to "Apple is greedy" with the hope that people will notice the irony in all the rage against Apple for charging a % of sale.

But In-App purchases/In-App subscription exclusivity is a greedy move by Apple, there's no denying that.

 

[Renzatic]

Developers getting free access to millions of customers for a quick buck is getting tiresome.

It's like this. When it comes to apps, Apple deserves their cut. They host the file, distribute it, and advertise it. They give developers a convenient, easily accessible way to sell their products. A 30% isn't that much to ask considering what they give in return.

But then you have programs such as Dropbox here, which only use the App Store as a gateway to the services they provide. Does Apple host the files you upload on servers they themselves provide? No. It's all Dropbox. They maintain the server themselves, do their own tech support, pay for the bandwidth to make sure their program works as intended. Why should Apple get a 30% cut of their monthly subscription fees? Because you use the app on an Apple product?

Hell, that'd be like Samsung demanding Comcast give them a 30% of your bill because you watch your shows on their TV.

 

[Lennholm]

False actually.

Android charges $25 bucks for registration and also a 30% cut to sell through various services.

I agree that $25 is less than $99, but iOS tends to make more money for developers (almost $3 billion so far). I don't believe we've heard Android "payout to developer" numbers from Google.

It's not false, iOS is still the only one that prohibits sourcing of apps from 3rd parties. You don't have to use Android Market and give 30% to Google.

 

[ristlin]

I'm sure you love monopolies in other areas of your life.

It's not a monopoly. There are other "Mobile Application Stores" out there. Android is one and Windows Phone will be the other. It may feel like a monopoly because Apple produces many products that interface with it that we tend to buy. But if you want, you could do the same if you jump over to Android phones and tablets and it will still "feel like a monopoly."

 

[bbeagle]

Forget other professions, the same tools can be used to create Apps for Mac OS X for free.

Android's tools are free and open source.

Apple iOS is the odd one out here.

How much does it cost for the tools to create Sony Playstation applications, Microsoft Windows applications, Nintendo Wii applications, etc? All are VERY pricey (thousands of dollars). iOS is very cheap comparatively. Mac development also costs $99 for the Mac App Store.

It seems like Android is the odd one out here.

 

[ristlin]

It's not false, iOS is still the only one that prohibits sourcing of apps from 3rd parties. You don't have to use Android Market and give 30% to Google.

It isn't against the law to jailbreak your phone. So still false.

 

[Renzatic]

It isn't against the law to jailbreak your phone. So still false.

Tell me when I can finally jailbreak my iPad 3, and I'll get back to you on that.

 

[Daveoc64]

How much does it cost for the tools to create Sony Playstation applications, Microsoft Windows applications, Nintendo Wii applications, etc? All are VERY pricey (thousands of dollars). iOS is very cheap comparatively.

It seems like Android is the odd one out here.

I like how you miss out the Xbox 360.

The same subscription will let you develop Apps for Windows Phone and games for the Xbox 360.

Mac development also costs $99 for the Mac App Store

If you choose to use the App Store then yes, it costs $99, but if you don't use the Mac App Store (like many developers) then you can make whatever you want using the developer tools and distribute it in any way you want.

 

[ristlin]

But In-App purchases/In-App subscription exclusivity is a greedy move by Apple, there's no denying that.

How else would would you pay Apple the 30% fee in the "free app and in-app purchase model" (Free to play)? I think this is the most fair way, but there may be a better solution I'm not aware of.

 

[Stella]

$99 a year, which in a way, buys you the development tools and support on how to create apps. I call that cheap. How much does it cost to buy the tools in other professions with equal money-making potential?

The development tools are free. You don't have to pay $99 to start developing iOS apps. You just can't run them on your own device unless you pay up.

 

[fins831]

It's like this. When it comes to apps, Apple deserves their cut. They host the file, distribute it, and advertise it. They give developers a convenient, easily accessible way to sell their products. A 30% isn't that much to ask considering what they give in return.

But then you have programs such as Dropbox here, which only use the App Store as a gateway to the services they provide. Does Apple host the files you upload on servers they themselves provide? No. It's all Dropbox. They maintain the server themselves, do their own tech support, pay for the bandwidth to make sure their program works as intended. Why should Apple get a 30% cut of their monthly subscription fees? Because you use the app on an Apple product?

Hell, that'd be like Samsung demanding Comcast give them a 30% of your bill because you watch your shows on their TV.

This isn't about the 30 percent, this is about the subscription being offered so easily on the main site/mobile site and within the app and other developers integrated Apps....if they just make it so you have a subscription before downloading or not in the app, it would solve the issue....makes it more clunky yes, but no red tape