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

[I7guy]

If this is such a burden on Apple they can easily solve the problem by letting the developers independent distribution of apps. Besides, you are comparing only two options. You omitted the third and probably most interesting option: let other companies create their own app stores. Let, say, Google open and maintain an app store for iOS (and visa versa) then we'll see if 30% fee is really necessary.
[automerge]1595356737[/automerge]

Does the percentage even matter? If Microsoft achieved this high percentage by developing a superior product, it's one thing. Apple intentionally preventing iOS device owners from installing the software they want is a totally different situation. Antitrust laws are intended to protect the consumers. There are very good arguments in favor breaking Apple hold on the app store.

Apples to oranges. Microsoft is THE dominant player. Apple is a minor player according to market share arguments put forth here.

What happens is outside my control, but Apple won’t go down without a fight. It’s imo less about the money and more about the control of the ecosystem.

 

[Abazigal]

Apples to oranges. Microsoft is THE dominant player. Apple is a minor player according to market share arguments put forth here.

What happens is outside my control, but Apple won’t go down without a fight. It’s imo less about the money and more about the control of the ecosystem.

I agree. Microsoft obviously doesn’t like having to go through the App Store (and Apple) in order to access their customers. It’s not so much about money as much as it is about control.

Microsoft is afraid of Apple. There is really no other explanation for this. They know that Apple’s control over their iOS App Store is absolute and considering that they lost the phone wars, but other recourse do they have?

If it’s a fight Microsoft wants, then I hope it’s a fight Apple gives them.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Some people just don't get it.

You can buy Playstation and Nintendo games outside of the Sony/Nintendo online stores. You can buy them on Amazon, you can buy discs at your local store, you can buy them anywhere. You can't do any of that with Apple.

Awesome. How can the platform can survive when Sony/Nintendo don’t make any money from games sold outside their own store though?

Also, don’t forget with retail distribution you’re going to be selling your product at somewhere around a 50-60% discount to distributors. That leaves you with 40-50% of the revenue. Now pay for advertising and marketing expenses to try to drive customers to retail, and you’ll be lucky to have 20% of your revenue. Out of business before you even start 🙁

 

[funkahdafi]

Awesome. How can the platform can survive when Sony/Nintendo don’t make any money from games sold outside their own store though?

Is that really so hard to understand?

First of all, they still sell an awful lot through their stores. And Apple would be, too. See Google Play Store: It works and brings in a ton of revenue for Google despite the fact that you can get Android apps from anywhere, not just the Play Store.

They also make a ton of money from selling the actual hardware, the consoles, as well as accessories. In addition to that, they provide services such as online multiplayer. In Sony's case, people actually have to pay a monthly fee to be able to play online multiplayer games. On top of that, both Sony and Nintendo are publishers. They have their own studios, and produce and sell their own games.

Would they make even more money if they would deploy a similar tactic as Apple? You bet. But they don't. And by not doing so, they are far more consumer friendly than Apple.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Is that really so hard to understand?

First of all, they still sell an awful lot through their stores. And Apple would be, too. See Google Play Store: It works and brings in a ton of revenue for Google despite the fact that you can get Android apps from anywhere, not just the Play Store.

They also make a ton of money from selling the actual hardware, the consoles, as well as accessories. In addition to that, they provide services such as online multiplayer. In Sony's case, people actually have to pay a monthly fee to be able to play online multiplayer games. On top of that, both Sony and Nintendo are publishers. They have their own studios, and produce and sell their own games.

Would they make even more money if they would deploy a similar tactic as Apple? You bet. But they don't. And by not doing so, they are far more consumer friendly than Apple.

I’ll ignore the smart ass comment 🙄

1) Are you sure Sony/Nintendo make money on the console? I thought they lost money on them and made it up in license fees and revenue share?

2) Are you sure everyone who publishes outside the online store gets a free ride? Maybe they still pay hefty license fees. Do you know how those fees are structured?

3) If Sony/Nintendo are subsidizing online store fees with huge publishing profits, how is their situation comparable to Apple’s App Store? For all you know, they’d have to charge 50% revenue share on their store if they didn’t have their publishing profits to make up for it.

4) What’s the revenue share for Sony/Nintendo on a dollar of developer sales? Is it higher or lower than Apples 30%?

5) Is there some reason you edited my post and didn’t respond to my reply about the economics of selling at retail?

 

[alien3dx]

Apples to oranges. Microsoft is THE dominant player. Apple is a minor player according to market share arguments put forth here.

What happens is outside my control, but Apple won’t go down without a fight. It’s imo less about the money and more about the control of the ecosystem.

don't pull all operating system segment.

Just said mobile operating system segment

1. Android
2. iOS
3. KaiOS
4. Sailfish
5. Tizen

Android the most flexible to deploy to any scenario.
Windows Mobile is DEAD, but in old times the operating system quite good for businesses.
iOS the worst scenario to implement.

** Microsoft kinda mistake buying NOKIA and overthrown Symbian and few operating system come out like meego , sailfish OS.

In Consumer Operating System

1. Microsoft Windows
2. Linux
3. MacOS
4. Chromium


Linux might not much seem in end user but still people using fedora, ubuntu.
Microsoft not care apple since they help them in old times.. Microsoft always in winning side because their solution not limited to their operating system anymore.

What realy problem is distribution

With Apple Store, Google Store

1 .Developer no need to push notification, new apps /update been deploy
2. Easy for end user to check it out.
3. More market.

What most client want to distribute Without Apple Store,Google Play Store

1. Customise Application which may contain special business logic/trademark.
2. Small target consumer not for whole world.
3. Easy distribution for tester.
4. Business 2 Business Application (B2B)
5. Some issue with country like China.

 

[mariusignorello]

its not. We dont want apple to access our app and test either it was b2b or b2c.

You’re able to distribute B2B via VPP and Business Manager

 

[alien3dx]

You’re able to distribute B2B via VPP and Business Manager

I mean give access to APPLE as demo user. Since they don't have proper documentation flow chart, data flow diagram. They only check base on apple human guideline. Diff Segment testing.

Sometimes if do customize application like me, you will saw a lot of thing which sometimes even apple don't follow the base of human guideline and consumer asking weird design layout which not good user experience (ux)

 

[mariusignorello]

If it’s such a burden on Apple, why not start billing developers of free apps (presumably with an exception for schools, nonprofits, etc.) fees to offset the storage space and bandwidth they’re using and/or for App Review? Seriously, I’m not sure why we’re supposed to feed bad for Apple here. If they don’t like their business model, they have every right in the world to change it, and I strongly expect that they would prefer to do so themselves before a government entity does it for them.

Ultimately what’s happening is paid/IAP app developers are being forced to subsidize costs associated with work that mostly isn’t theirs by way of a fee that far exceeds Apple’s actual costs for their own work. This policy also indirectly pushes developers toward making their apps free and ad-supported. Is that best for privacy?

Seriously, Apple’s not a charity. No one’s making them host free apps for free.

Paid devs don’t subsidize anything. They pay commissions on their sales. Where commissions go, I don’t know. Probably is pure profit for all I know, but Apple is entitled to charge what they want on their platform for their tools and resources.
[automerge]1595385205[/automerge]

I mean give access to APPLE as demo user. Since they don't have proper documentation flow chart, data flow diagram. They only check base on apple human guideline. Diff Segment testing.

I’m not following... You’re able to create a sandbox test user in App Store Connect for Apple to review your app.

 

[Abazigal]

Is that really so hard to understand?

First of all, they still sell an awful lot through their stores. And Apple would be, too. See Google Play Store: It works and brings in a ton of revenue for Google despite the fact that you can get Android apps from anywhere, not just the Play Store.

They also make a ton of money from selling the actual hardware, the consoles, as well as accessories. In addition to that, they provide services such as online multiplayer. In Sony's case, people actually have to pay a monthly fee to be able to play online multiplayer games. On top of that, both Sony and Nintendo are publishers. They have their own studios, and produce and sell their own games.

Would they make even more money if they would deploy a similar tactic as Apple? You bet. But they don't. And by not doing so, they are far more consumer friendly than Apple.

Consoles are more or less a money-losing venture for Sony.

As for Google, I feel it's more that they can't be bothered to invest as much time and resources to maintain the App Store as Apple does, so they just open it up and leave it to manage itself. If Are Technica is anything to go by, there also seems to be a higher incidence of malware in the google play store, and it just looks and feels like a bigger mess overall.

Personally, for me as a consumer, I am really indifferent whether 30% of the app money goes to Apple or to the developer, because it doesn't really affect the final amount that I pay. What I can and do appreciate however, is the care that Apple puts in to ensure a safe and fluid purchasing experience for me. I quoted this once from another website, and I will post it here again.

My garden is not walled, it’s well protected, nourished, watered & kept in blossom by the best gardeners in the world. If there’s a weed, they wack it. If there’s a bad bug, they squash it. Everytime I walk in my garden I’m in awe of its palette & synchronicity.

I’ve seen the neighbour's garden, and I am far less impressed. Sure there are way more flowers in the garden, but its formation is a mess & the lack of a fence just allows any dog to piss in it, weed to penetrate it & makes it harder to maintain.

What's good for the developers and third party vendors may not necessarily be what is good for us consumers, and I think that as a customer, I ought to have a say in this as well.

 

[alien3dx]

Consoles are more or less a money-losing venture for Sony.

As for Google, I feel it's more that they can't be bothered to invest as much time and resources to maintain the App Store as Apple does, so they just open it up and leave it to manage itself. If Are Technica is anything to go by, there also seems to be a higher incidence of malware in the google play store, and it just looks and feels like a bigger mess overall.

Personally, for me as a consumer, I am really indifferent whether 30% of the app money goes to Apple or to the developer, because it doesn't really affect the final amount that I pay. What I can and do appreciate however, is the care that Apple puts in to ensure a safe and fluid purchasing experience for me. I quoted this once from another website, and I will post it here again.



What's good for the developers and third party vendors may not necessarily be what is good for us consumers, and I think that as a customer, I ought to have a say in this as well.

Need to remind, Both apply stricter regulation and Google each month publish new regulation and something become Apple store strictness. Both take 30% also .

Apple more strict because asking us to give us LOGIN the application while Google only rely on BOT and sometimes they will check manually for certain thing also.But apple only check base on human guideline but very perfectly because they don't have access to technical document like data flow diagram.

As consumer, yeah 30% doesn't really matter. What the matter is output which you can used as long bug free and fast respond support.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

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.

"I loathe the day the Mac App Store is the only way we'll be able to get Mac apps." - that will be the day that myself and many many others will abandon Apple and move back to Windows or Linux. It will be a sad day.

 

[H2SO4]

Uh, no. There’s endless piles of versions of Linux you could use, or macOS - you’re not forced to use Windows at all.

As for Microsoft Office, you could instead use Google’s programs, or iWork, or OpenOffice, or LibreOffice, or there’s tons of other smaller Office competitors.

This. I dunno what on earth the OP was thinking.
Also, I might be wrong but anybody can write a game for the xBox and sell it wherever they want, I'm not sure the case is the same with the App Store.

 

[alien3dx]

This. I dunno what on earth the OP was thinking.
Also, I might be wrong but anybody can write a game for the xBox and sell it wherever they want, I'm not sure the case is the same with the App Store.

xbox diff because you can purchase box or digital. Mutiple distribution. Apple only have one monopoly store. Android don't have monopoly.

 

[jlc1978]

You don't really want to compare a random app developer with Apple, do you?

Sure, because the argument that Apple is a monopoly at 50% (or less worldwide) marketshare sets the precedent to make the same claim for another product.

And are you really worried that one of the most valuable, richest and successfull companies in the history of mankind would be in danger because of a little regulation?

No, because they are smart enough to figure out how to use it to their advantage and find other ways to charge developers for use of the app store; such as transferring more up front costs to developers. Right now, a developer has very little upfront costs for marketing and selling their app. They pay the developer fee, develop an app, and put it on the app store. If it doesn't sell they are only out the developer fee plus the time it took to develop the app, they haven't had to pay for ads, bandwidth costs for trial version downloads, etc. They have a low risk way of seeing if their idea is commercially viable. As a result, it is a lot easier to bring an app to market tahn in the days of computer stores and mail order sales; as evidenced by the explosion of apps on app stores.

Let's say Apple is forced to lower its fee. They could charge developers to for placing an app on the store and each upgrade, roll out a commercial version of the developer tools so if you want too sell an app you have to pay for the tools, etc. All of a sudden the costs oof developing an app go way up. A small developer may not recover the initial costs for quite some time, if ever, and others simply would forgo developing because they lack the upfront money.

There would be no consumer benefit because I doubt developers would cut the price of an app if Apple cuts its fees. of course, if Apple did the we could all complain about greedy deevlopers and if Apple is allowed to side load simply pirate apps because, well developers are greedy and make enough already.

The thing is, this stuff works just fine outside the Apple world. See Android, for example. It's clear as day that Apple is abusing their market power and preventing free, open market competition. You can twist and turn it however you like.

Thats right, there is no problem with software piracy or malware on Android, and every Android app will run on every Android variant or fork. Forcing Apple to open up iOS would be a loss for developers and users.

Consumers chose which system they like because it works for them. No one is forced to use one or the other and is free to switch if they want. It's a free market at work.

But to your point, the existence of Android provides competition for Apple. Developers can chose what platform they want to support, Apple is not the only game in town and does not have market power to prevent developers from supporting Android.

What do you think would happen if all the bigshots like Netflix (who curiously don't have to pay Apple a share of their subscription revenue) and others would all pull their apps from Apple's app store?

Sure the big players have the power to cut special deals with Apple when it is in both's best interest. It's a smart business move since they need each other and thus being on the App Store is a plus for both.
Netflix et. al. would lose a lot of subscribers and probably bear the brunt of the complaints. They have more to lose in the short run tahn Apple since Apple's user base is not likely to dump their ATV/iPhone/iPad for another device. Apple could suffer in the long run but I'd bet companies would come back once they see the impact on their revenue.
[automerge]1595400691[/automerge]

Does the percentage even matter? If Microsoft achieved this high percentage by developing a superior product, it's one thing. Apple intentionally preventing iOS device owners from installing the software they want is a totally different situation. Antitrust laws are intended to protect the consumers. There are very good arguments in favor breaking Apple hold on the app store.

Apple achieved its position by producing a product consumers see as the best in the marketplace.
iOS users know how the ecosystem works and make a choice, if they don't like it they have other choices in a smartphone.

Apple is not dictating what type of apps can be in the marketplace since a developer can always make an Android app and thus Apple does not have market power over the smartphone market and its not an anti trust issue. If Apple was the only smartphone on the market it would be a different story but they aren't.
[automerge]1595400995[/automerge]

Also, don’t forget with retail distribution you’re going to be selling your product at somewhere around a 50-60% discount to distributors. That leaves you with 40-50% of the revenue. Now pay for advertising and marketing expenses to try to drive customers to retail, and you’ll be lucky to have 20% of your revenue. Out of business before you even start 🙁

That's the point most people don't get - developers are much better off in the app store model, in terms of the cut they get plus the lower risks since they do not have a lot of upfront costs for marketing, packaging, etc. App store give them a low risk way to test the marketplace. In Apple's case it also has removed a lot of the piracy problems and made subscription apps viable.
[automerge]1595401146[/automerge]

There’s no other app marketplace, and direct-to-consumer distribution is disallowed.

There is. It's called Android. If you don't like Apple's terms don't develop for iOS.

 

[Abazigal]

Does the percentage even matter? If Microsoft achieved this high percentage by developing a superior product, it's one thing. Apple intentionally preventing iOS device owners from installing the software they want is a totally different situation. Antitrust laws are intended to protect the consumers. There are very good arguments in favor breaking Apple hold on the app store.

The counterpoint to this is that I can also argue that Apple is as successful as it is today because we customers have voted with our wallets and decided that the Apple way of doing things is the right way for us. That the much lauded Apple experience is derived in part because of the App Store model, not despite it.

As a customer, I am telling you that I very much prefer the current status quo where Apple has complete control over the iOS App Store. You weed out much of the malware and piracy, thus making it safer and easier for consumers to purchase apps knowing that they have been pre-screened by Apple. iTunes also means that developers never get my payment information, and it’s neater to have my subscriptions in one place where I can monitor and manage them more easily.

I am not really seeing the benefit to me as a consumer were Apple to open up the App Store. How am I being protected here again?

 

[alien3dx]

The counterpoint to this is that I can also argue that Apple is as successful as it is today because we customers have voted with our wallets and decided that the Apple way of doing things is the right way for us. That the much lauded Apple experience is derived in part because of the App Store model, not despite it.

As a customer, I am telling you that I very much prefer the current status quo where Apple has complete control over the iOS App Store. You weed out much of the malware and piracy, thus making it safer and easier for consumers to purchase apps knowing that they have been pre-screened by Apple. iTunes also means that developers never get my payment information, and it’s neater to have my subscriptions in one place where I can monitor and manage them more easily.

I am not really seeing the benefit to me as a consumer were Apple to open up the App Store. How am I being protected here again?

it is old time as mention, apple make one whole set system. But the main issue was the distribution not the apple store. Some people keep arguing the same thing again and again.

Google Charge 30% also.

The most conclusion is , all file need to compile and some of trademark key signature either it was Google nor Apple. Just make the Apple Store like MACOS Store. If not sure, Are you sure you want to install it.. Just same thing as android. Pure simple.

What if anything wrong ?

Apple can contact back the sign application .

What really matter on ARM issue?

Like above said, you cannot more download apps macos from website. You need to go through Apple Store.

 

[I7guy]

...And by not doing so, they are far more consumer friendly than Apple.

No they are not. They have to raise the bar to even begin approaching Apple.

 

[funkahdafi]

No they are not. They have to raise the bar to even begin approaching Apple.

😂

Good one.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Sure, because the argument that Apple is a monopoly at 50% (or less worldwide) marketshare sets the precedent to make the same claim for another product.

Nobody is saying Apple has a monopoly on smartphones. Apple has a monopoly on iOS Apps. There is no other OS on earth like it. Every other OS that has a web browser has the ability to download and install apps with that web browser. Every other OS that can browse files on removable media can run or install apps from that removable media.

You want security? Stop comparing iOS to Android - compare it to macOS. macOS is the original gold standard for a secure operating system. macOS allows apps to be downloaded from the official Mac App Store, or from the open internet, or from USB sticks, or from any number of third party app stores (the biggest of which is probably Steam.) Macs that still have DVD drives can install from that, too, although those are getting rare... not sure if there's any remaining Mac with a DVD drive built in that can run current versions of macOS...

 

[edgonzalez32]

This is laughable, what a cluck. They're scared Apple will impose threatening competition - and they will - on their new 'Add-droid' powered foldable doohickey.

You know, I got in a tizzy with someone in a previous thread with comments I still attest to and standby my replies with, but perhaps I was too defending...... of MSFT.

That's a bad Brad!

Anyways

[automerge]1595294732[/automerge]



You do realize they're coming out with their own smartphone, right? The timing couldn't be more paralleling. As per your first quote, yeah man I'm actually right there with ya, but c'mon - this is just bull****.

that phone runs Android.Its just the Microsoft launcher on top of it. And it’s isn’t BS. What’s BS is a developer unable to add a CTA on a signup page that says “go here to sign up” because Apple forces signups to be through the AppStore. That’s BS and is a dark UI pattern. Users outside the sphere of tech news would never know that they are paying more for a service if they sign up through the App Store.

that’s a bad user experience, something that Apple touts itself on. And this whole thing is completely outside of apple too.

 

[I7guy]

Nobody is saying Apple has a monopoly on smartphones. Apple has a monopoly on iOS Apps. There is no other OS on earth like it. Every other OS that has a web browser has the ability to download and install apps with that web browser. Every other OS that can browse files on removable media can run or install apps from that removable media.
...

Yes, they do. And until that changes, Apple can legally have a monopoly on IOS Apps and enforce whatever methods it deems appropriate. Those who want "freedom" to do otherwise are free to go to the competition.

 

[jlc1978]

Nobody is saying Apple has a monopoly on smartphones. Apple has a monopoly on iOS Apps. There is no other OS on earth like it. Every other OS that has a web browser has the ability to download and install apps with that web browser. Every other OS that can browse files on removable media can run or install apps from that removable media.

However, anti-trust law is based on the market, not some subset; no matter how much some people want to argue otherwise.

You want security? Stop comparing iOS to Android - compare it to macOS. macOS is the original gold standard for a secure operating system.

Android is a mobile operating system, MACOS isn't and iOS has a much larger market share than MacOS; making it a more inviting target and for those reason the proper comparison.

 

[subi257]

Great. So you should be free to be able to use the App Store to procure your apps if that's what you want. I'm not saying the App Store shouldn't exist. I'm saying that it should also be possible to install apps in other ways.

So, then Apple would have to potentially query your device anytime it want to connect to Apple's servers to protect for possible malware on your device.

And they would need to have a disclaimer whereas if you put on an app the f(^)s you OS over, well that's on you. Like what came out of the battery fiasco.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

So, then Apple would have to potentially query your device anytime it want to connect to Apple's servers to protect for possible malware on your device.

Every day macOS downloads a list of malware fingerprints from Apple's server and makes sure none of the apps on your computer match it. I don't see why they couldn't do the same thing on iOS.