Korean Startups Call for Investigation into Apple and Google In-App Purchases

[Grohowiak]

Get rid of IAP, stop Ads in games and just make everything 'old school' where you pay once and that's it.

I always turn on Airplane mode to stop ads and IAP requests popping up, I will usually delete the game straight away if it can't be used with Airplane mode turned on!

Apple make the rules for their store, software and hardware... if you don't like it, don't release it on iOS! Simple!

So... the developer is paying yearly fee, buys hardware and pays 30% cut to apple and also doesn't get paid since you are making sure they can't make a single $$ from a product that you are using...

Oh the audacity of developers that they are trying to fight this system so they can host their apps by their own rules and actually make a $...

ROFL

 

[I7guy]

So... the developer is paying yearly fee, buys hardware and pays 30% cut to apple and also doesn't get paid since you are making sure they can't make a single $$ from a product that you are using...

Oh the audacity of developers that they are trying to fight this system so they can host their apps by their own rules and actually make a $...

ROFL

The audacity of the developers wanted to develop for the lucrative iphone market, but play by their own rules..especially when they do not own the infrastructure and services.

 

[sirozha]

This is bad for Apple. Very bad.

Apple would lose either way. Either a large chunk will have to follow the apps they love to the Android platform and Apple will start losing the smartphone market share or Apple will have to significantly lower the App Store fees, which will lead to the drop in revenue and profits.

This problem will only escalate. It’s not going anywhere any time soon.

Most kids who play Epic games don’t care about the platform. They will follow the developer onto the other platform, especially because there are a lot of nice Android phones out there nowadays. Apple won’t be able to persuade the teenagers that the iPhone is so cool that it’s worth abandoning Epic for.

Apple will also lose most of the Chinese market because China is about to retaliate on Apple for Huawei and for WeChat. An easy retaliation for China would be to pull WeChat from the Apple App Store. That would immediately destroy future iPhone upgrades for Apple in China.

Here’s a little clue. You can’t try to destroy the spaceship of the Chinese ascend to high-tech superiority, which is what Huawei is, without having your own high-tech leaders being targeted by China. Those are: Apple, Cisco, and Qualcomm. China will not allow the US to destroy all the achievements they have made in high tech, of which there are many.

 

[Grohowiak]

The audacity of the developers wanted to develop for the lucrative iphone market, but play by their own rules..especially when they do not own the infrastructure and services.

Very lucrative when a poster (customer) like I just quoted makes sure developer doesn't make a dime trying to compete and the system supports it.
Yeah. Very "lucrative" just only for apple in this scenario. They sold the license and the hardware. Cha ching.

 

[Drogba11]

You fanboys and apologists have to face it, 30% is too high. 15 maybe even 20 would be fair. Put yourself in the devs shoes, putting all the hours and hours of development work to provide a service to paying customers and someone comes takes 30% of every transaction made to you just because they host your app. For all Apple are providing, it’s not worth 30% especially on larger companies like Spotify. Why should Apple get 30% of a monthly subscription fee from Millions of customers when they provide exactly ZERO for that service apart from a place to download it. It’s like the bank taking 30% of your paycheck just for allowing your work to deposit it there. Real estate agents are no different. Why should they get a set percentage of a home sale and not a fixed fee? percentage based commissions are BS period.

 

[I7guy]

Very lucrative when a poster (customer) like I just quoted makes sure developer doesn't make a dime trying to compete and the system supports it.
Yeah. Very "lucrative" just only for apple in this scenario. They sold the license and the hardware. Cha ching.

Screwing with a program or app can happen in other scenarios. That has little to do with the app store and fees.

 

[I7guy]

You fanboys and apologists have to face it, 30% is too high. 15 maybe even 20 would be fair. Put yourself in the devs shoes, putting all the hours and hours of development work to provide a service to paying customers and someone comes takes 30% of every transaction made to you just because they host your app. For all Apple are providing, it’s not worth 30% especially on larger companies like Spotify. Why should Apple get 30% of a monthly subscription fee from Millions of customers when they provide exactly ZERO for that service apart from a place to download it. It’s like the bank taking 30% of your paycheck just for allowing your work to deposit it there. Real estate agents are no different. Why should they get a set percentage of a home sale and not a fixed fee? percentage based commissions are BS period.

You critics have to face it. Your opinion is just that.

Nobody is forcing a dev to develop for the iphone. The criticism by the critics of the app store by those who aren't actually developers is a "joke" (and I don't use that term lightly), do not understand the value the app store brings. As a former dev, I was very happy with what the app store brought to the table.

The devs have to do some analysis to determine if what they want is feasible and financially sound. These days a little more than a hope and a dream is needed. Some sound financial analysis is also needed.

30% seems reasonable, given all the dev has to do is press the upload button.

 

[mrcloaked]

There's only one gatekeeper.

 

[Anaxarxes]

So, you're saying your clean and tidy experience depends on others not being able to install 3rd party stores? How does that make sense?
Or is it more like that you are afraid some apps might not be published in the Apple App-Store anymore and you would be "forced" to download a third party store?
So, it's is OK to force developers to use certain app-stores but asking the user to go the store that carries his product is not OK? The real world situation of having multiple stores is suddenly an issue for so many.
This logic that people are applying when it comes to the app-store is beyond me... "I like the tidy and cleanliness of my Target, I don't want a Walmwart here..."

Not quite what I meant. So, the integrity of the Apple ecosystem vs other platforms is that is proprietary. 3rd party app stores - no matter what Apple is setting the targets of what's allowed or not, will be determined by that app store.

So, yes, some of the apps that I used might be de-listed from Apple's App Store and I might have to download them somewhere else. Maybe their quality get worse or they get worse in protecting user's privacy just because they wanna get the 30% too. How does the customer win in this case?

Best would be to keep the App store and provide a tiered system on revenue split. The more time Apple's servers are used, you get a heftier split. Protects small developers and finances from larger ones like Epic.

 

[Anaxarxes]

I suppose you only use Safari as a web browser and Mail to check email, too? Only Apple Maps for getting directions? All on your Mac?

Yes on Safari and Mail lol.

Google maps FTW.

 

[mrcloaked]

Alternatives require workarounds.

 

[BehemothManiac]

Wait I totally get it now, when the mafia protection services in my area come by for their shakedown, I should be grateful! After all, they created this safe environment for me to live in!

That mafia is called police and you are already paying 35%.

 

[mrcloaked]

There wasn't much choice.

 

[nt5672]

This is getting silly.

Apple produces the hardware for these apps to run on.

They also produce the OS the apps run on.

They provide the storefront for these apps to be hosted on. Allowing the storefront to deal with the payment, distribution and customer service for the purchase of these apps.

if a company wants to produce software for running on these specific devices they can understand and agree to these terms.

If they think this is anti competitive they can put their software somewhere else.

Everyone on the App Store is on a level playing field. If you don’t think you’re getting enough then you’re not pricing your apps appropriately.

You left out the most important part. We own the iPhone and should be free to load the apps we want. You may only want Apple approved apps, but a lot of others have other wants.

What is interesting is that both desires can be satisfied if Apple allowed other ways to load apps. You could be nannied to death in the Apple eco system, and I could load useful Apps that I determine are safe outside of the Apple nanny laws.

 

[quagmire]

You left out the most important part. We own the iPhone and should be free to load the apps we want. You may only want Apple approved apps, but a lot of others have other wants.

What is interesting is that both desires can be satisfied if Apple allowed other ways to load apps. You could be nannied to death in the Apple eco system, and I could load useful Apps that I determine are safe outside of the Apple nanny laws.

You own the hardware, but only own a license to the software. You can make the argument of doing what you want with the hardware( right to repair, etc), but not with the software.

 

[locovaca]

These examples are for physical goods and services.

This is all related to software app and in-app purchases. Please spend a bit more time understanding the issue.

Tell me, what makes a physical goods app cheaper on the OS and App store infrastructure than a digital only goods app? It is an artificial distinction that has no bearing on actual costs incurred by Apple.

 

[aaadktda]

I think the biggest problem is that it seems that Apple and Google are in cahoots with the 30% fee. If Google dropped it to 5% (just an example) developers would devote more time to Android and in a few years Apple would start to feel the pressure. This is how the market would regulate itself it there would be true competition between Apple and Google.

 

[spazzcat]

Epic did exactly that. They put Fortnite on their own online store.

Tell me, how can I get Fortnite on my iPhone or iPad now that it's been removed from Apple's app store?

Crazy how I can do so on my Mac, but cannot on my iPhone or iPad.

Why are you using an iPhone, you knew before you bought the phone you would only have the app store...

 

[sirozha]

You left out the most important part. We own the iPhone and should be free to load the apps we want. You may only want Apple approved apps, but a lot of others have other wants.

What is interesting is that both desires can be satisfied if Apple allowed other ways to load apps. You could be nannied to death in the Apple eco system, and I could load useful Apps that I determine are safe outside of the Apple nanny laws.

According to Apple, you don’t own the iPhone. You paid for the privilege to use it. Apple claimed that jail breaking iOS was a crime until the government told it to back off. They try to block third-party repair services from being able to repair Apple devices. They block third-party app stores from being able to function on iOS. They refuse to sell macOS, and they claim that installing macOS on a non-Apple produced computer is a crime. All these are signs of a monopoly. And by the way, a duopoly is just a form of monopoly, so the fact that there’s an alternative platform doesn’t do away with the validity of the claim that Apple has violated the principles of anti-trust behavior. The courts will have to decide on the matter now. Our opinions don’t matter at this point.

 

[nt5672]

You own the hardware, but only own a license to the software. You can make the argument of doing what you want with the hardware( right to repair, etc), but not with the software.

"only own a license to the software" has never been tested in court. One does not "own a license", I think you mean "
granted a limited non-exclusive license to use the Apple Software" which has also never been tested in court.

The Apple license does not by itself limit how I can use the software only how I can not damage Apple's intellectual property.

So, yes I can with the software.

 

[spazzcat]

These developers want to use Apple’s/Google infrastructure without having to pay Apple/Google for the use of it. But there should be a balance in what is allowed to be debundled from the in app purchase structure( such as Netflix) or if you debundle it all, then all apps will be free with in app purchases and you have the situation in my first sentence where Apple/Google setup the infrastructure and the developers are using it for free. Apple/Google does deserve a share of the revenue for the infrastructure they setup.

It worse then that, they want access to Apple's user base without paying for it...
[automerge]1597849728[/automerge]

"only own a license to the software" has never been tested in court. One does not "own a license", I think you mean "
granted a limited non-exclusive license to use the Apple Software" which has also never been tested in court.

The Apple license does not by itself limit how I can use the software only how I can not damage Apple's intellectual property.

So, yes I can with the software.

Have you ever asked yourself why it has never been tested in court...

 

[spazzcat]

So... the developer is paying yearly fee, buys hardware and pays 30% cut to apple and also doesn't get paid since you are making sure they can't make a single $$ from a product that you are using...

Oh the audacity of developers that they are trying to fight this system so they can host their apps by their own rules and actually make a $...

ROFL

You know this is no different then if the developer created an app then try to sell in physical store right...I'm finding most people have no idea how retail works.

 

[spazzcat]

So you never buy anything outside the App Store with a credit card? Or you never buy a non digital good inside of an app? None of those things use Apple for payment.

If an app on my phone asked me to go get my credit card, I would delete the app...

 

[spazzcat]

So you never buy anything outside the App Store with a credit card? Or you never buy a non digital good inside of an app? None of those things use Apple for payment.

If an app on my phone asked me to go get my credit card, I would delete the app...

 

[Rogifan]

If an app on my phone asked me to go get my credit card, I would delete the app...

So you‘ve never bought any physical goods via an app? Never used Uber or Lyft or bought food or things off Amazon? None of those use Apple for payment.