'Reader' Apps Can Now Add Links for Account Signups Outside of the App Store

[AndiG]

You could always get another smartphone. no one is forcing the iPhone/ios on you.


I never understood a company charging its own company for things like this. It’s wasteful. It’s the same company. Plus, are we sure the don’t capture this on their financial sheets?


PayPal is just the credit card fee. Apple is a whole lot more.


there’s android for that. How about those who want sideloading should just go use android? No one is forcing you to use iOS.


YES!!! it’s literally the only app that doesn’t. I forget about Netflix shows half the time because all my other apps do support it. Netflix requires an extra step or two. Oh, and they support interactive content on iOS but not the Apple TV and that baffles me.


You are talking the Apple TV hardware. @bg1419 is talking the app that is hardly niche as it’s built in to iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and macOS. And syncs across all* of these. It’s glorious. I add “The Dropout” to my ”Up Next” on my iPad? It’s instantly there on my iPhone and Apple TV.

*macOS only supports Apple TV, iTunes content and and Apple TV Channel because the other apps are websites

You do not understand. At the moment there are no other payment services than Apples. But there could be and PayPal could be one of them offering the same functionality at a cheaper proce.

Competition is what I‘m talking about and what is essential in a market.

 

[obviouslogic]

...which is good, because Apple is not entitled to a cut of your transactions with third parties, particularly for any recurring content (but really none of it honestly).

We've got to stop tolerating this gatekeeper behavior of theirs.

It’s not a behavior, it‘s a rule and an agreement that EVERY developer agrees to when they decide to sign up for Apple’s developer program. Maybe you should stop yelling at Apple and start yelling at devleopers for their own behavior; why would they agree to something then act like it’s not fair later on? That’s a behavior.

 

[ct2k7]

It’s not a behavior, it‘s a rule and an agreement that EVERY developer agrees to when they decide to sign up for Apple’s developer program. Maybe you should stop yelling at Apple and start yelling at devleopers for their own behavior; why would they agree to something then act like it’s not fair later on? That’s a behavior.

and its the purview of the regulators to ensure consumers are treated fairly

 

[obviouslogic]

You do not understand. At the moment there are no other payment services than Apples. But there could be and PayPal could be one of them offering the same functionality at a cheaper proce.

Competition is what I‘m talking about and what is essential in a market.

…in an open market.

Fixed that for you. iOS is not an open market, never has been. iOS App Store is literally Apple’s market, that it created, that it maintains, that it develops, that it shapes. It only distributes software that only works on Apple’s operating system, that only runs on Apple’s devices.

 

[obviouslogic]

and its the purview of the regulators to ensure consumers are treated fairly

No, that’s what they say they’re doing. The fact is, this is all about money and who’s getting what cut, and who isn’t. That’s it. Regulators ”want” perceived fair competition in hoping that will somehow benefit consumers. But that’s not always how things work out. It’s one thing if you have a company that completely controls an open market and does not allow competitors in at all and then starts gouging consumers. It’s something else when you start targeting a company that is making money hand over fist and not sharing, even though competitors can still compete and make money on other viable platforms, if they don’t like how they’re treated on Apple’s.

It would be something else if Apple decided to make changes to their rules that directly benefitted them while hurting competition, but they never have. The rules have been the same. In fact, over the years Apple has relaxed and removed rules to the benefit of users and developers.

 

[ct2k7]

No, that’s what they say they’re doing. The fact is, this is all about money and who’s getting what cut, and who isn’t. That’s it. Regulators ”want” perceived fair competition in hoping that will somehow benefit consumers. But that’s not always how things work out. It’s one thing if you have a company that completely controls an open market and does not allow competitors in at all and then starts gouging consumers. It’s something else when you start targeting a company that is making money hand over fist and not sharing, even though competitors can still compete and make money on other viable platforms, if they don’t like how they’re treated on Apple’s.

It would be something else if Apple decided to make changes to their rules that directly benefitted them while hurting competition, but they never have. The rules have been the same. In fact, over the years Apple has relaxed and removed rules to the benefit of users and developers.

So regulators shouldn’t exist?

 

[jlc1978]

What is the point of the $99 annual developer fee?

Access to some specific deeloper resources and the App Store.

Because storage and bandwidth are dirt cheap, and Apple already sells their app distribution service to developers for $99/year, which is more than enough to cover costs for 99% of apps.

The cost of something doesn't determine the price, the value to the purchaser does. Apple givs developers access to a large and lucrative market; as well as handling storage, d/l, payment, etc.

So the high profit margins on all iOS devices and the $99 yearly developer fees aren't enough for Apple, they should get more from the developer's who helped make their platform a success and so that apple could sell them in the first place???

Apple also created a widely popular phone and customers who, on average spend more than other platforms. Apple has every right to charge what they want to make money, and developers to decide whether or not to develop for the iPhone.

This is Apple's greed pure and simple.

You could make the same argument about developers who don't reduce prices once they've recouped their development costs or make small updates / fixes and charge for the update.

 

[obviouslogic]

So regulators shouldn’t exist?

Didn’t say that. don’t think that. They should not abuse their powers by using ”poor defenseless, ignorant consumers” as the basis for what really is a money grab. You can’t honestly think for a moment that whatever sanctions are put on Apple or Google, that prices of software will come crashing down? It won’t, why? Developers set those prices and if Joe Smith was willing to pay Apple $10, they’d be willing to pay me $10 too. This is human nature, not some altruistic idealism at play.

As an example, Apple dropped fees to 15% for some developers that do not earn more than a million… did prices drop 15%. Nope.

 

[AppleHore]

Apple should just do what it really wants to do: team up with federal governments to have any technology company on Earth that publishes iOS apps to automatically hand over 30% of its net profit...

 

[svish]

This is a good change. Apple is making adjustments due to legal trouble from various authorities.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

The cost of something doesn't determine the price, the value to the purchaser does. Apple givs developers access to a large and lucrative market; as well as handling storage, d/l, payment, etc.

If that's the case, it sounds like there's an anti-trust issue.

Otherwise food costs would be astronomical, as food provides a greater value to the consumer than almost anything else.

 

[DaPizzaMan]

Access to some specific deeloper resources and the App Store.

"You can learn how to develop apps for Apple platforms for free without enrolling. With just an Apple ID, you can access Xcode, software downloads, documentation, sample code, forums, and Feedback Assistant, as well as test your apps on devices."
Sounds like the $99 is not for resources, because those are free.

"If you’re interested in creating apps for distribution on the App Store, Apple Business Manager, or Apple School Manager, join the Apple Developer Program.* Membership includes access to beta OS releases, advanced app capabilities, and tools needed to develop, test, and distribute apps and Safari Extensions."
Instead, the $99 goes towards tools and distribution.

Source: https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships/

 

[Abazigal]

So regulators shouldn’t exist?

I will say that the regulators are barking up the wrong tree here.

 

[jlc1978]

If that's the case, it sounds like there's an anti-trust issue.

No it isn't. Vertical integration does not mean they are colluding with their competitors to control prices.

Otherwise food costs would be astronomical, as food provides a greater value to the consumer than almost anything else.

Much food is a commodity so sellers have very little pricing power until their is consolidation in the industry. There are also many substitutes so if one item gets too high, others are perceived as a better value. That's also why companies seek to differentiate their product and avoid commoditization to sustain a higher price.

Some specialty foods, however can demand astronomical prices, above those of similar products; because people value them highly.

Price and cost to produce are relevant to profitability, but supply and demand determine price.

Didn’t say that. don’t think that. They should not abuse their powers by using ”poor defenseless, ignorant consumers” as the basis for what really is a money grab. You can’t honestly think for a moment that whatever sanctions are put on Apple or Google, that prices of software will come crashing down? It won’t, why? Developers set those prices and if Joe Smith was willing to pay Apple $10, they’d be willing to pay me $10 too. This is human nature, not some altruistic idealism at play.

As an example, Apple dropped fees to 15% for some developers that do not earn more than a million… did prices drop 15%. Nope.

Exactly. Developers will simply pocket the difference. Greedy capitalist bastards screwing the consumer. Maybe regulators out to require developrs to drop prices 30% on sales outside te App Store.

I suspect all the changes they are clamoring for will wind up costing them in the long run. Apple can introduce separate fees and charges for things now included, 3rd party app stores likely will not be as popular so they either have to manage multiple stores and or their own web page on top of Apple's, etc. Apple should add in user selectable toggles to turn off side loading, access to core databases, data collection as they do now, etc. and give consumer real choice.

I suspect some companies who are currently cheering regulator moves will be on the opposite side when they find themselves in the crosshairs. Take EPIC and Fortnight - they, like Apple, are a closed ecosystem and widely popular with over 250 million users. Under the TOS/EULA, IIRC, EPiC does not allow sale of items outside of the game; since that would impact VBuck revenue. Console makers, as they move away from physical media to virtual, could face similar scrutiny. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

"If you’re interested in creating apps for distribution on the App Store, Apple Business Manager, or Apple School Manager, join the Apple Developer Program.* Membership includes access to beta OS releases, advanced app capabilities, and tools needed to develop, test, and distribute apps and Safari Extensions."
Instead, the $99 goes towards tools and distribution.

Source: https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships/

Thanks for providing a link to prove my point the developer fee provides "Access to some specific developer resources and the App Store."

 

[djphat2000]

Do you understand the term "offer different service models"? One model could be to leave everything as it is now.

Apple has to reinvent itself within the next years. Smartphones have become an important platform for all people. Nor Apple neither Google can be the gatekeepers of those platforms.Those platforms have become a part of the market, so they have to be free, accessible and play by the rules.

The same thing happened to Google some time ago. Google (Alphabet) is the owner of Google Search but it is not allowed to show only its own services in Search and it isn't allowed to show its services in the first place (what it was trying to).

Same thing happens to Apple now. Ist just isn't possible to be platform owner, gatekeeper und competitor at the same time in a free market. So all countries start to regulate Apple, there is no way out for Apple. It has gotten to big.

I know that a lot of Apple Fans hate this, but Apple has to change. A service company should be the goal and xxxOS is the place where you can offer services - I don't know if Tim, Phil and Co are still flexible enough to lead Apple into the future. I highly doubt it.

This is all anti everything it is to be a business in America. They are not in business to get only so big. You set out to be the best, and along the way if your successful. Your reward for that effort is being where Apple is today. Otherwise you will never get the best from any company. You will get good enough out of fear of being too successful.

If regulations placed on these companies forces them to change tac. We will be at this again in another way down the line. None of what is being proposed is going to lessen the so called control Apple or Google has within their platform. Because none of it targets what has given them that control. The end user. The customer. These laws don't fund a new company/startup to create a new platform outside of Apple or Google. They don't create a new choice for consumers. At best, they limit the earnings these companies can get by the means in which they currently do. If Apple or Google starts to sell their devices for more money, or for updates to their OS. Basically nickel and dime to death to make up the revenue lost. There are just so many ways you guys are not seeing for all of this to be completely defeated and your right back at this issue in a new few years.

Too many here are stuck on this Apple/Google is too big and too much in control of everything, and we need to break them down. To not realize you're not going to get what you want. There isn't a CEO or CO-team on earth that would be willing to be as flexible as being asked. They ALL have to answer to shareholders. They will kick them out if they don't produce. You can't serve to masters. It's not going to work. So you will pay more later for things you got for free today.

 

[iSRS]

Too many here are stuck on this Apple/Google is too big and too much in control of everything, and we need to break them down. To not realize you're not going to get what you want. There isn't a CEO or CO-team on earth that would be willing to be as flexible as being asked. They ALL have to answer to shareholders. They will kick them out if they don't produce. You can't serve to masters. It's not going to work. So you will pay more later for things you got for free today.

Anyone remember the “Ma Bell“ breakup? Yeah, that lasted a while until some failed and were gobbled up into a new company.

Also, think about all that “a la carte” we begged for from the cable companies. It was going to save us money, remember? Well, we pretty much have it now. Ten bucks to NBC, ten bucks to CBS, ten bucks to ABC (Hulu), etc

yeah, breaking things up (and adding overhead) always helps the customer.

 

[bluecoast]

In a parallel universe:

Apple saw which way that the wind was blowing, realised that they couldn't act in the same away as they had done under Steve Jobs - when they were a far smaller company - and instigated three key measures:

- Cut its App Store commission % fee down to extremely competitive rates.
- Let in other payment providers into the App Store and to access the NFC chip.
- Made sure that Apple's own services were not promoted in iOS and on the Mac more than others

These moves, meant that the threat of major regulation receded in both the USA and the EU.

Sure there were still some people who wanted side loading on iOS - but they weren't many, and some people are never satisfied.

Sure Apple was booking less commission but they basically retained control of the iPhone's business model - and they were able to focus 100% on new product categories.

How fortunate we were to have seen this change coming, mused its (alternative universe) senior leadership, instead of allowing ourselves to become bogged down in antitrust legislation and losing control of key parts of our business.