It’s nothing to do with it being a free app. They started promoting a paid for service in the free app but wanted to take users to their website to get the signups. That’s exploiting the platform. If you want to take advantage of advertising your paid service to all your free users, pay the damn fee that comes with that benefit.
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.
ProtonMail Compares Apple to Mafia, Says App Was Forced Into In-App Purchases in 2018
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s nothing to do with it being a free app. They started promoting a paid for service in the free app but wanted to take users to their website to get the signups. That’s exploiting the platform. If you want to take advantage of advertising your paid service to all your free users, pay the damn fee that comes with that benefit.
If the ProtonMail users sign up for a paid account offline before downloading the ProtonMail app for the first time, I can’t see how Apple can stop, or object, to that.
I don't understand from the article, do users need to use the in-Apps purchase, or can they still buy on the web site ?
This is so incredibly laughable. Yen is greedy and wants to make more money, but what company is Yen going up against here, the amount of power they have and how wealthy is poor little Apple?
Not level headed at all. Apple hosts plenty of completely free apps, so that argument is nonsense. They make money for hosting an app through developer fees to have access to upload those apps, paid or not. If that isn't enough to cover hosting the app, then Apple should raise those prices. IAP is bonus money, otherwise that would be an unsustainable business model.
And it still doesn't address the fact that they have an App Store monopoly. Competition is better in every way, it drives innovation and reduced prices.
Apple has both a Complete & Total Stranglehold on "App Discovery," & Completely "Controls the Narrative" in the iOS App Store !
I group those two into "Marketing".
If Apple doesn't (help) Market an App (i.e., recommend it in the iOS App Store), I believe their cut should be ZERO !
Regardless of ANY other circumstance !
I group those two into "Marketing".
If Apple doesn't (help) Market an App (i.e., recommend it in the iOS App Store), I believe their cut should be ZERO !
Regardless of ANY other circumstance !
You do understand that a Free App is one that users don’t pay for? When this becomes a paying service it’s no longer a Free App. Simple
You are presumably referring to the APPLE App Store? Try that thought again, but with Apple’s OWNERSHIP of the store in mind. Try that thought on a company’s warehouse, offices, manufacturing plant. Now, what companies do you know that say “do what you want here”?
Although I side with Apple when it comes to Epic, I think apps should be allowed to have Out-of-App Purchases, without being forced to also offer IAP. V-Bucks through the browser, subscriptions through the browser, etc.
At the same time, I do think Apple offering the platform for hosting the apps and updating it has value, so maybe apps that are being monetized outside the App Store would have to pay an annual fee that is waived if you offer In-App Purchase? I don't know.
I know I'm not a fan of the idea of multiple App Store on my phone, though... and Epic's demand to have their Store be available on the App Store, with same device access as the App Store and usage of the Update mechanisms in place in the App Store is bunkers; either you want to offer something within the App Store, or you want to offer an alternative (which like I said, I'm not fond of). I also know I don't want the App Store to become a collection of App shells for which you need to pay (wether in-app or out-of-app) to get any functionality out of. Forcing people into the IAP model is surely dissuading people from doing that, to a degree... it's a complicated issue
At the same time, I do think Apple offering the platform for hosting the apps and updating it has value, so maybe apps that are being monetized outside the App Store would have to pay an annual fee that is waived if you offer In-App Purchase? I don't know.
I know I'm not a fan of the idea of multiple App Store on my phone, though... and Epic's demand to have their Store be available on the App Store, with same device access as the App Store and usage of the Update mechanisms in place in the App Store is bunkers; either you want to offer something within the App Store, or you want to offer an alternative (which like I said, I'm not fond of). I also know I don't want the App Store to become a collection of App shells for which you need to pay (wether in-app or out-of-app) to get any functionality out of. Forcing people into the IAP model is surely dissuading people from doing that, to a degree... it's a complicated issue
So they want to be in someone’s store, but they are concerned that the store decides the terms. Very interesting indeed. Duh they are the judge and the jury it’s their store. I guess they want the rewards of being hosted but not pay up.
and that was the position when the App went live and a further 2 years....do Apple really vet all the apps on the store?
This was a free app and the paid app was not available on the store
So everyone offers only free apps, Apple get no revenue from this, and devs make their money on outside purchases. Do you see a flaw here somewhere?
Not necessarily. It may be wishful thinking or projection, but not a guarantee in life, like taxes and death.
Because some, for their $99, have made hundreds of millions of dollars until they got greedy?
Did you read the entirety of what I wrote? The last three lines and the second paragraph are about that.
Some of these services need to be opt in. I feel like there should be more trade offs that devs can make for themselves.
So, let the with at least 10 employees company die then, no-one with any common sense would do that.
I got to this bit and the rest of the article became meaningless. "You let us built a business by violating your rules for 2 years and now you want us to comply" isn't really the strongest argument to be making...
When your IP becomes critical to how things work, you often no longer have complete control over your IP. Ever heard of FRAND patents and Fair Use Doctrine for instance? With Apple as one half of a two party oligopoly controlling the smartphone OS market, they've gotten to the point where they may not get to fully dictate the terms of participation anymore.
its Apples proprietary platform and market place YEN... and yes since its theirs, its their rules not yours that apply.
Why are you there if u hate it ? or is it that you want your cake and eat it too !
Why are you there if u hate it ? or is it that you want your cake and eat it too !
Man, the mafia is really considerate to build an entire software and hardware platform tied into a marketplace that lets me sell my products for almost no cost. Damn shakedown artists!
If they don’t want to play by Apples rules on Apple own territory then leave already. No one is forced to have an iPhone app (or an iPhone for that matter)
But if you want to make money on Apple’s territory from Apple’s customer base you need to follow Apple’s rules (or “laws”)
it’s like living in America and complaining that the taxes and laws aren’t fair and should be like Canada or some other country. You have the choice to move to that other country, but while you are in America and making money from a job in America you have to pay all applicable American Taxes on that income.
But if you want to make money on Apple’s territory from Apple’s customer base you need to follow Apple’s rules (or “laws”)
it’s like living in America and complaining that the taxes and laws aren’t fair and should be like Canada or some other country. You have the choice to move to that other country, but while you are in America and making money from a job in America you have to pay all applicable American Taxes on that income.
I am convinced that ProtonMail is a good secure email solution.
I am convinced that Apple is a (very) large and very vertically integrated company.
But this does not allow good software company naming giant vertical company Mafia. Mafia has a certain meaning and the corresponding "society" does things that are not what Apple is doing.
I am convinced that Apple is a (very) large and very vertically integrated company.
But this does not allow good software company naming giant vertical company Mafia. Mafia has a certain meaning and the corresponding "society" does things that are not what Apple is doing.
To the Apple haters, imagine you owned a physical shop and someone walked in and placed cardboard advertising for their product sold elsewhere. You’d take it down immediately and kick them out, well, unless they also sold the product in your shop so that you could make some money on that sale. How much money you’d make on that sale would be entirely up to you and, if the product didn‘t meet your standards you’d reject it no matter the profit - your shop, your rules. You might allow giveaways of free product in your shop but only if there’s no embedded advertising for payments elsewhere - if you want shop floor and exposure then pay for it or take it to another shop. shop floor costs money. Consider the App Store to be a physical store for a minute to start seeing Apple side of things
