Microsoft President Met With U.S. Antitrust Committee Investigating Apple and Expressed Concerns Over App Store

[rwxx]

Actually no it’s not.

Apps can be side loaded for free bypassing the app store.

With the App Store, apple is providing a service.

Oh come on. While technically true, in reality this only applies to specific scenarios, ie: custom apps for business. Consumers have no choice but to use the App Store for software and developers have no way to reach iPhone users unless they go through the App Store.

I think the government will eventually take action when it comes to the App Store. The fact that Windows users could download and install another browser didn't stop the government from making a case against Microsoft. The fact that consumers can choose Android over Apple probably won't matter in the end.

I have mixed feelings when it comes to the App Store (as a consumer). The simplicity is great, but I don't really care for Apple's nanny approach to what it permits in the store, making judgements, moral and otherwise, about what its customers should be allowed to access. Even though Apple is a reasonably benevolent gatekeeper, I don't like the concept of gatekeepers in general. I loathe the day the Mac App Store is the only way we'll be able to get Mac apps.

Also, given the number of privacy-related issues with certain apps in recent years, I'm not convinced that Apple does a very good job of vetting the apps it approves.

If I were a developer, I'm not sure how I'd feel about the 30% cut. On the one hand, Apple's solution is elegant and they'd handle all of the tedious details like hosting, payment processing, etc, things I'd have to pay for myself otherwise. So I see the appeal. However, I have no choice. And neither do consumers. If my app doesn't meet Apple's "standards", consumers will never get to use it and decide for themselves if they want it. Apple has already made the decision for them. And if I want to host my own site, sell my software directly, and create a relationship with my customer --- like I can do today on macOS --- that's not possible. To me this is inherently problematic and it's only a matter of time before some government (US or otherwise) steps in and forces some changes.

 

[hortod1]

Q: “Hey grandpa, what would you say your biggest accomplishment was way back in 2020 when there was a global pandemic and you were a member of Congress?”

A: “Made sure people didn’t have to pay too much for Fortnite”

 

[alien3dx]

the problem is the compatibility. Most companies have to choose Microsoft Office because they have a monopoly. What we need a standard like wifi. Every company can make it compatible. Compete on features.

corel have monopoly before but when era past, adobe is the main stream. Some country government have enforce to use libra open source solution so in the end 0 monopoly.

every company can make it compatible?
ask apple again arm fiasco ?90 percent of world stick to 80386_64

 

[ddtmm]

Can't wait to hear how Apple is going to justify their 30% cut. I can't see how they will, but they have some pretty smart people under their hood so I expect they will have a good argument. Nonetheless, I still think it's a pretty steep toll.
[automerge]1595299721[/automerge]

Windows, Word, Excel has MONOPOLY in all companies! But I guess it wasn't on the agenda.

Dream on... You have a choice. And most of the good choices are free.

 

[Dicelu]

Hilarious. Asking an established monopoly its opinion on would-be monopolies. What a joke that MSFT gets a free pass while they use its Windows monopoly to beach-head into markets with Teams, OneDrive, Azure, Surface, XBox, etc. Maybe because it facilitates state surveillance so the gov turns a blind eye on them.

With Windows, MSFT has corporate customers by the balls. CTOs are offered bundles for Teams, Office Cloud, Surface devices and Azure. The cost of switching will cost them dearly because then MSFT would increase their Windows license fees. Yeah, choices my @ss. Talk about dream. What an irony.

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Why shouldn’t Apple get a cut? They host the file so they are incurring an expense for server space and bandwidth. Now, perhaps it’s their position that the fee is just too high? I don’t know.

But I still think it is a better deal than the extortion a mall does to tenants where you have to pay rent AND a percentage of sales and if the mall isn’t earning enough they don’t renew your lease.

 

[Rogifan]

How do we know Microsoft is paying Apple 30% or 15% for Microsoft 365 subscriptions? I wouldn’t be surprised if it‘s less than that and a reason why Microsoft allows in-app signups.

 

[throAU]

How do we know Microsoft is paying Apple 30% or 15% for Microsoft 365 subscriptions? I wouldn’t be surprised if it‘s less than that and a reason why Microsoft allows in-app signups.

They aren't. Its zero (or can be, in a lot of/most cases where an end user is logging into a corporate 365 account).

Because the apps are free from the App Store and the license for using them is not via in-app purchase, you need to sign into an MS account, which you set up outside of the app.

e.g., I install the App Store version of 365. I sign in with my corporate details. Those are paid directly to MS via enterprise agreement and Apple doesn't see a cent, despite hosting the apps and distributing the updates.

My 365 account has an enterprise license applied to it by my organisation that doesn't report account/licensing information to Apple at all.

 

[Rogifan]

They aren't. Its zero.

Because the apps are free from the App Store and the license for using them is not via in-app purchase, you need to sign into an MS account, which you set up outside of the app.

e.g., I install the App Store version of 365. I sign in with my corporate details. Those are paid directly to MS via enterprise agreement and Apple doesn't see a cent.

I have an Office 365 Personal subscription. I purchased it in-app. I would be surprised if Microsoft didn‘t cut a deal with Apple where the percentage they’re paying is less than 30 or 15 percent. Apple needs Office on iOS more than Microsoft does.

Windows, Word, Excel has MONOPOLY in all companies! But I guess it wasn't on the agenda.

How is it a monopoly that no other company can create anything as good as Excel?

Actually no it’s not.

Apps can be side loaded for free bypassing the app store.

With the App Store, apple is providing a service.

How does the average consumer side load an app on to their iOS device? Especially an iOS consumer who doesn’t own a Mac?

 

[ddtmm]

How do we know Microsoft is paying Apple 30% or 15% for Microsoft 365 subscriptions? I wouldn’t be surprised if it‘s less than that and a reason why Microsoft allows in-app signups.

That's not how it works.

 

[trip1ex]

it's been great for reliability and security purposes and just ease of use too.

on windows so much stuff is available thru sites which make you click 1000 times on a stuff. and you never know what you're getting.

 

[sw1tcher]

Why shouldn’t Apple get a cut? They host the file so they are incurring an expense for server space and bandwidth.

I love it when people try to use this argument as justification when it fails.

Many apps are free. Why is Apple not charging these people to host the files?

Then there are the price differences between apps. Does it cost Apple more to host an app that costs $119.99 (Microsoft 365 Personal) vs an app that costs $69.99 (Adobe Photoshop Elements)? No.

 

[B4U]

Microsoft complains about monopoly is like pot calling the kettle black.
How much of the market of desktop/laptop computer OS do they own again??

Not saying Apple is right or wrong, just pointing out Microsoft is being a little hypocrite.

 

[Rogifan]

That's not how it works.

That’s not how what works? You don’t think Apple cuts deals with big name players they need on their platforms?

 

[sw1tcher]

Brad Smith is a hypocrite.

I'd say all the Apple fans who were in favor of the anti-trust case against Microsoft but are now defending Apple for the same abusive behavior are the hyprocrites. But that's just me.

 

[gsurf123]

By the law it's self evident that Apple as a Monopoly as it can deny anybody to put an App in the only available store for ANY reasons they want. We will see what happen, it is more about politic then anything else.

It is not a monopoly as they are dwarfed by Android. I'll compare this to wanting to sell something all Walmart who's decides:

• If they want to sell your product
• How much they will pay for it
• How much they will sell it for
• Where it will be displayed (aisle, end cap, high, low, eye level, back of store, front of store, etc)
• The amount of shelf space used
• If it will appear in the sale flyers
• If and when it will be put on sale

The AppStore looks pretty good when you consider how retail works. The creator of the product has no say in any of this. One might say they could sell at another store, which you could, however if you a product suitable for sale at Walmart you will want to sell it there. Of course no store has to sell any product.

I cannot stand people/businesses who want to change the rules after agreeing with them from the start.

 

[throAU]

I have an Office 365 Personal subscription. I purchased it in-app. I would be surprised if Microsoft didn‘t cut a deal with Apple where the percentage they’re paying is less than 30 or 15 percent. Apple needs Office on iOS more than Microsoft does.

I would wager you're the exception rather than the rule.

Most people who need office need it for business (they're business apps, after all). Most of those will be connecting to an employer's (or educational institution's) 365 tenant that is already paid for as part of their enterprise sub. Apple see zero dollars from that.

As soon as you want your own domain name working in 365 properly, you've gone down the path of a proper 365 tenant, where licenses are purchased from within the 365 tenant admin. Any real business with more than a handful of employees who is making use of 365 to any significant degree will be doing that.

What I'm saying is that whatever the in-app purchase cost is, even if apple get 30% of in-app purchases, the total percentage cut they're getting from all 365 apps distributed via the app store will be a tiny fraction of that, because the vast majority of 365 subscriptions simply aren't purchased that way.

 

[sw1tcher]

It is not a monopoly as they are dwarfed by Android.

When Apple's app store is the only game in town for iOS users, it is a monopoly.

And before someone points it out, yes, I know that being a monopoly isn't illegal.

I'll compare this to wanting to sell something all Walmart who's decides:

• If they want to sell your product
• How much they will pay for it
• How much they will sell it for
• Where it will be displayed (aisle, end cap, high, low, eye level, back of store, front of store, etc)
• The amount of shelf space used
• If it will appear in the sale flyers
• If and when it will be put on sale

The AppStore looks pretty good when you consider how retail works. The creator of the product has no say in any of this. One might say they could sell at another store, which you could, however if you a product suitable for sale at Walmart you will want to sell it there. Of course no store has to sell any product.

Exactly. If I don't like any of that, I can take my product to someone else like Target, Costco, Best Buy, etc. This is what open competition allows and is completely opposite of what Apple allows.

I can even sell the product on my own website. Will Apple allow an app developer to host his own app on his own website and handle payment for the app? No. You have to go through the Apple app store.

As for these points,

• Where it will be displayed (aisle, end cap, high, low, eye level, back of store, front of store, etc)
• The amount of shelf space used
• If it will appear in the sale flyers
• If and when it will be put on sale

it isn't always up to the retailer. Manufacturers can and often do pay for product placement and shelf space/positioning. They also can pay to have their product advertised in the retailer's weekly circular.

 

[alien3dx]

That’s not how what works? You don’t think Apple cuts deals with big name players they need on their platforms?

It's not in app future or physical item. If in app future will be take 30% first year and subsequent 15% .

App Review Guidelines - Apple Developer

The App Review Guidelines provide guidance and examples across a range of development topics, including user interface design, functionality, content, and the use of specific technologies. These guidelines are designed to help you prepare your apps for the approval process.

developer.apple.com

 

[steve62388]

the issue here is the App Store. It’s the same problems that come up time and time again. Between the 30% cut, the fact that developers can’t put a CTA that says “go here to sign up” (say what you want, THATS a crap UX issue that shows up because of Apple).

If it’s a subscription it’s 15% after the first year. Is 15% fair? What is a fair cost? Before app stores a developer was left with a lot less after paying out for a publisher and distributor.

I don’t see how anyone can think it’s a user interface issue. It strikes me as so much easier to double tap a buy button on your iDevice, not pass on your details to yet another third party, and then receive an invoice from a single company with all your purchases listed in one place. Otherwise exit out to a third party site, navigate a multitude of different layouts, and enter your name, address and card details (which will hopefully be safe) for the umpteenth time.

 

[317342]

2020 turned Microsoft into an anti-trust warrior. 👀

 

[DeepIn2U]

Windows, Word, Excel has MONOPOLY in all companies! But I guess it wasn't on the agenda.

Also ...

Microsoft locks in authorized resellers as well as clients whom have an existing MS Windows Server, Exchange Server, and SQL Server production server licenses NON-equal transfer to use their Azure Cloud service equivalents.

Microsoft's Store also prevents you from grabbing a few of their specific applications outside of their store (free/cost) as you can with 3rd party applications. I guess their CEO forgot about this.

They definitely have a gain against paying less to Apple since their a huge competitor and a client as they're a client of Apple so any less they pay is a win-win for them - especially if it's a bias suggestion since their in-bed with Samsung and Google's Android (the latter in 2021 Surface smartphone devices Duo and Book).

 

[PickUrPoison]

problem is, it's anti-competitive and that hurts us, the consumers of apps since developers could be much more competitive in pricing if they weren't paying 30% off the top

lol you really think developers will lower the price of that $1 app to $0.70 if they don’t have to pay Apple?

 

[steve62388]

I have mixed feelings when it comes to the App Store (as a consumer). The simplicity is great, but I don't really care for Apple's nanny approach to what it permits in the store, making judgements, moral and otherwise, about what its customers should be allowed to access. Even though Apple is a reasonably benevolent gatekeeper, I don't like the concept of gatekeepers in general. I loathe the day the Mac App Store is the only way we'll be able to get Mac apps.

I sometimes wish App Store owners were more restrictive on which apps they take. There is so much shovelware on the iOS and Nintendo stores (the two I have experience with) it can be incredibly frustrating wading through it all. At least the iOS store is better designed that quality apps have a tendency to rise to the top. Nintendo takes a more hands off approach and developers manipulate the store all the time, so it’s not always a good thing.

 

[bousozoku]

It's funny to me. When Microsoft was basing MS-DOS and PC-DOS on CP/M-80 through Tim Paterson's 86-DOS, no one but Digital Research complained. When Microsoft violated their agreement with Apple with Windows 3.x, no one said anything. When Microsoft couldn't sell Word for Windows and the other office applications, they added secret APIs to make their software work/crash more quickly, and no one did anything. When Digital Research was selling DR-DOS and Microsoft built bogus warning messages into Windows 3.x, nothing really happened.

Eventually, all of this was mentioned, and their strong-arming companies to sell their products with Windows led to an anti-trust lawsuit but the George W Bush administration nullified most of the penalties.

Apple's app store isn't as good as it should be for 30% but it's certainly better than Google's. Sideloading apps can be dangerous. Apple could drop the fee to 20% easily and still make money on resources and administration.