Microsoft is more than welcome to build their own phone and App Store. Oh wait, they tried that and failed because it was total crap
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.
Microsoft President Met With U.S. Antitrust Committee Investigating Apple and Expressed Concerns Over App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why on earth would Apple permit you to distribute your spyware to businesses and consumers?
One day they might just let us sideload apps. That way Apple have an easy out without letting go of it's 30% cut.
As long as side loaded apps are properly sand-boxed there should theoretically be no issues? Perhaps I'm being naive though.
As long as side loaded apps are properly sand-boxed there should theoretically be no issues? Perhaps I'm being naive though.
Last edited:
customize apps dear, some client scare their pro-claim idea could go to other company. Spyware is old term, new term "Suprise Mechanic" -EA
not really a monopoly when you have to pay for it or subscription, libre is free and a lot of linux options i really can't see this as a monopoly. its windows is theirs so is word so duh. Its like saying pages and numbers is a monopoly to ios and mac products
Well they’re giving it another go lol.
Oh wait, it’s not a smartphone, it’s a “communication device”.
I'm a microsoft fan, but this speaks poorly of Microsoft. It's a very cheap move from Microsoft. It reeks of the old Balmer's Microsoft. Come on Satya, you're better than this.
Meanwhile, there are Windows 10s and Surface Pro X that locked customers into Microsoft app store.
Meanwhile, there are Windows 10s and Surface Pro X that locked customers into Microsoft app store.
Yeah that’s for most developers. But big names Apple needs on its platform? I mean why do you think they created the reader category where certain apps can bypass IAP all together?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
I don’t get this argument. People purchase things online where they have to provide credit card details all the time. Apple doesn’t require all payments to go though the App Store. I mean they created the reader category just so apps like Netflix could bypass having to use Apple’s payment system. And of course Apple doesn’t take a cut of physical goods so if you’re buying lunch from Panera, a ride from Uber or clothing from Kohl’s you’re providing credit card info to those companies (or using Apple Pay where available).
I think it’s pretty tough for Apple to prove they deserve a cut of someone else’s revenue stream. I can’t remember the last app I downloaded or service I signed up for because of Apple. Most of the content I watch is on my Roku smart TV. I’m only using the TV app for HBO Max and Peacock because they haven’t done deals with Roku yet. When I was a Spotify subscriber it wasn’t because of Apple. Same with Netflix. I think Apple saying they deserve a cut of those revenues is ridiculous. And it’s arbitrary because it only applies to digital goods. So Uber doesn’t have to pay Apple a cent but Spotify and Netflix should give Apple 30% or 15%? And then of course the reader category Apple created which just so happens to benefit companies Apple directly competes with. So Netflix, Spotify, Amazon, Dropbox etc. can get around having to offer IAP but an email app like Hey can’t. How does that make any sense?
If the $99 per year developer fee (and portion of hardware sales) doesn’t cover the cost of the App Store then perhaps that fee needs to be raised. Or perhaps Apple needs to get rid of ”free” apps and force every app to be at least 99 cents. Of course Apple will never do the latter because what they care most about is having a crap ton of apps and app downloads in the store. John Gruber made an interesting criticism on his blog a week or so ago.
A Moment of Clarity Regarding the Raison d’Etre for the App Store
You can’t pack every last ounce of joy, beauty, and elegance *into* something while simultaneously trying to squeeze every last dollar *out* of it.
daringfireball.net
You can’t pack every last ounce of joy, beauty, and elegance intosomething while simultaneously trying to squeeze every last dollar out of it.”
Not just Office. Microsoft is fully intergraded in the U.S. government and its technological infrastructure...so they have Major influence over politicians. This should not be surprising.
There's a number of errors in the above:
1. Anyone can compile apps from source code and install them on their own devices just using your own AppleID (and not a paid developer account). The development deployment signing is only valid for 7 days I think, so you do need to refresh it.
2. $99/year for a standard developer program is not a significant barrier in most cases. In quite a few countries, not for profits, educational institutions and governments get this fee waived, so long as their Apps are $0 on the store. If you added to the team for one of these (eg you are a student at a university, or a volunteer at a not-for-profit), a free developer account can publish to the store (it might need the team admin to do that for you, depending on what level of control you are given by the owner of the account).
3. Apps that one company writes, using a normal $99/year standard developer account, can be distributed privately to other companies via the App Store - its called "Custom Apps" and has been around for a long time (earlier versions were called "B2B Apps"). Custom Apps can have $0 cost in the store, with all financials occurring outside the store, if thats what you want to do.
4. Apple also has an Enterprise Developer program for large companies writing Apps for internal use that bypasses the App Store entirely. Its USD $299/year, but thats hardly exorbitant for a large company (>100 employees IIRC).
You don't have to use the XBox store to get games for the XBox, you can buy them on disc.
And even if you couldn't, are you trying to use that as justification for Apple's behavior?
absolutely an overblown issue
[automerge]1595314262[/automerge]
They deserve 30% for investing billions into developer tools and services. Microsoft or Netflix might not use most of these resources, but plenty do. And because of these investments, millions of users on the Apple ecosystem empty their wallets into the App Store due to high quality apps. Allowing all developers to put "go here to sign up" will pretty much cause Apple to post a net loss from the App Store because most developers would opt in to do that.
[automerge]1595314603[/automerge]
all new Xbox games regardless of where it is sold must pay Microsoft a cut and it must pass Microsoft's review.
if you buy a game from best buy, all you're really doing is forcing developers/publishers as well as microsoft to give up more of their cut to best buy which is why we have ridiculous multi-year $60 DLC packs to make up for the loss.
[automerge]1595314262[/automerge]
They deserve 30% for investing billions into developer tools and services. Microsoft or Netflix might not use most of these resources, but plenty do. And because of these investments, millions of users on the Apple ecosystem empty their wallets into the App Store due to high quality apps. Allowing all developers to put "go here to sign up" will pretty much cause Apple to post a net loss from the App Store because most developers would opt in to do that.
[automerge]1595314603[/automerge]
all new Xbox games regardless of where it is sold must pay Microsoft a cut and it must pass Microsoft's review.
if you buy a game from best buy, all you're really doing is forcing developers/publishers as well as microsoft to give up more of their cut to best buy which is why we have ridiculous multi-year $60 DLC packs to make up for the loss.
Last edited:
I think what they are referring to, is that the Microsoft "Mobile Application Management" technology requires Apps to be built with Microsoft's SDK. Safari isn't. For devices that are managed by MDM (including inTune), you can us a combination of Apple's MDM controls like Managed Open-in), and the inTune MAM for the Microsoft bits. Its not 1997 any more and a Microsoft-Only software solution for all software needs of most companies simply isn't viable.
There is no other store when I cannot download apps for iOS from the Google Play store.
The fact that there's no other option for iOS users to get apps is a direct result of what Apple is doing. Can iOS app developers distribute/sell their apps outside of the Apple app store (such as on their own website) like they can for macOS apps? No, and that's because Apple prevents this.
At least I'd have the option to sell my product on my own website if Walmart and every other retailer refused to carry it. iOS app developers don't have that ability, though strangely macOS app developers do. Why is that? Could it be because there are a billion iOS devices in use while there are only 100 million Macs in use? Protecting that cash cow?
1. not 7 days
2. this is for the client so need to pay yearly 99 dollars.
3. Yes, but most clients reluctant to give Apple access to their system. They, not power users. They don't have access to the flow charts, data flow diagrams, tender documentation.
4. If you see history some companies try to abuse this future.
FACEBOO*
I've always bought Apple products, only bought Windows machines when necessary for business purposes, but I have to say that this lock down in the App Store to pay Apple will eventually fail, if not in America, in Europe.
I believe that when I buy a phone or a computer, I OWN IT, and therefor have the right to put anything on or in it like I want, just like a car.
Maybe this is horse and buggy thinking, but that is my opinion. I think Apple will eventually lose this, but not on my thinking, only because other corrupt anti-trust related corporations will stab them in the back to help themselves for greed, while saying, "No, we didn't do that at all. We're just looking out for consumers and price." HAHA! 😂
I believe that when I buy a phone or a computer, I OWN IT, and therefor have the right to put anything on or in it like I want, just like a car.
Maybe this is horse and buggy thinking, but that is my opinion. I think Apple will eventually lose this, but not on my thinking, only because other corrupt anti-trust related corporations will stab them in the back to help themselves for greed, while saying, "No, we didn't do that at all. We're just looking out for consumers and price." HAHA! 😂
The app store on the Xbox doesn't restrict you from using your own payment processor. Additionally, the Xbox has a developer mode where you can sideload your own apps. It's not quite the same.
So, when will Microsoft reduce the markup on all its products to less than 30%?
No matter what your viewpoint on Apple's App Store policies; this is not some egalitarian effort by MS to help users and developers; it's just the standard trick of trying to get a regulator to hurt your competitor to help bolster your position.
I'd bet that if regulators decreed "you can't markup a digital item for more than 5% of what the developer charges" a lot of the companies that bash Apple would change their tune.
I'm not sure if developers would be that better off, since Apple could simply charge for things that are currently part of the 30%, such as App review and approval, as well as raise developer fees. So instead of deferring costs via the 30% cut, a developer would have to upfront the costs without knowing if the app will be popular enough to recoup the costs.
I'm not sure customers would benefit by prices going down, either.
[automerge]1595316592[/automerge]
Are you claiming MS doesn't take a cut of the download price even if you use a separate payment processor? I'd be surprised if that were the case; rather than paying MS and the processor. MS would still know the product was downloaded and thus take its cut.
No matter what your viewpoint on Apple's App Store policies; this is not some egalitarian effort by MS to help users and developers; it's just the standard trick of trying to get a regulator to hurt your competitor to help bolster your position.
I'd bet that if regulators decreed "you can't markup a digital item for more than 5% of what the developer charges" a lot of the companies that bash Apple would change their tune.
I'm not sure if developers would be that better off, since Apple could simply charge for things that are currently part of the 30%, such as App review and approval, as well as raise developer fees. So instead of deferring costs via the 30% cut, a developer would have to upfront the costs without knowing if the app will be popular enough to recoup the costs.
I'm not sure customers would benefit by prices going down, either.
[automerge]1595316592[/automerge]
Are you claiming MS doesn't take a cut of the download price even if you use a separate payment processor? I'd be surprised if that were the case; rather than paying MS and the processor. MS would still know the product was downloaded and thus take its cut.
Apple has a developer mode for the iPad and Iphone as well using Xcode, and custom apps can be installed via the Apple Developer Enterprise Program as well for a large organization. Not quite the same as being able to sideload any app, though.
Last edited:
It's never about % but on distribution. If single distribution which means apple can anytime increase whatever % as a sole monopoly.
As for me as a developer, apple is nonprofit at all. Consider as a loss to support customers.
I don't get why some people think Apple has an obligation to let them access the iPhone's market in any wya they want. It's their store, they set the rules. There is no fundamental right to be able to sell your product in someone else's store.
The wya the PC software market developed. In the early days of Pcs, there were no app stores. The internet was still a DARPA toy. Apps were developed and sold on media such as cassettes or floppy disks; often with mimeographed instructions and in a zip lock bag. Retail stores were the main way to reach consumers, although mail order from Byte, Nibble, etc. also offered a way to get a program. Since that market has extablished itself changing it is very difficult.
Nope
Sure. As with any business, Apple has a right to act in its best interests.
And no, iOS is not a monopoly; there are plenty of other options for developers and consumers, as evidenced by Apple not having a dominate market share; unlike say MS with Windows.
[automerge]1595317952[/automerge]
But that doesn't preclude making a margin on sales; just like stores charge slotting fees plus markup products.
[automerge]1595318145[/automerge]
Except Apple is not a monopoly, even if its users are an attractive market based on buying habits. Developers have other options, and if Apple makes it to hard or expensive to develop for iOS then they will move on.
I get everyone wants to make more money; I'm the same. In the end however, it is worth my giving a cut of the revenue to someone in exchange for access to a customer that makes me money.
Last edited:
Not even that, Microsoft is asking legitimate questions about app stores in general, not specifically Apple's App Store. They are basically asking regulators to formulate their vision for the future going forward when it comes to app stores, access to platforms (or restrictions to them) and the price of admission.