Do you realize that different companies started lawsuits against Apple regrading this point ? Don't you think they will spare themselves legal fees if they knew it would cost them the same 15/30% ? This is about giving developers / clients a choice. App store can still be used if developers want to.
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.
Rival App Stores on iPhone Estimated to Have Limited Impact on Apple's Revenue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You just changed the question from why Apple cares to why you don't.
My experience is different than yours here, so you (or I) don't individually represent "customer experience".
With things the way they are today be yesterday, I doubt third party app stores will have other benefits…only down sides.
Because 1% of $100,000,000,000 is still $1,000,000,000. That's still a lot of zeros!
Estimations are just that. Estimations.
Investors won’t like the drop to services revenue one bit.
Investors won’t like the drop to services revenue one bit.
Not if they're goal is to be the one's that charges the commission instead of Apple.
The question was why Apple wants to maintain control of the AppStore if it isn't having a significant impact on revenue. I believe Apple would say it's because of the customer experience. Integration of hardware, software and services has always been Apple's way. Personally I find the Apple approach provides a customer experience that I appreciate, but there have always been people who think otherwise-- that want to install MacOS on a standard PC, or want more low level control over peripherals, or think they can get something good enough more cheaply, or want some level of openness and user choice that Apple restricts. People who don't like the Apple model have generally drifted to other platforms. Give that Apple is minority player in every market they engage in, it's probably fair to even say that most people don't like the Apple model-- but there is a sufficient number of active customers who value their approach enough to keep it alive.
Except that if this actually happened, the impact to consumers would be substantial and that would trickle (or gush) back to Apple, and that is where the real revenue impact would come from.
"In an implausible worst case scenario where Apple somehow lost the entirety of its App Store revenue in Europe as a result of competition from third-party app stores, the analysts estimated this would equate to just a 4% hit to Apple's services revenue and a 1% hit to Apple's total revenue.
Uh, an investment bank just said they don't really care... So while you might be right or wrong, the article you are responding to does not support your assertion.
It affects both revenue and control. Its not an insignificant amount of money either, and it is in the area that Apple is hoping to grow its business the most. This is a very high profit margin sector for Apple so it makes sense Apple would fighting for these dollars. As some state, it is also about control of the ecosystem but I don't think its entirely about that either.
Can you give a concrete example where this is actually happening in a large way on android phones? Google's main distribution and discovery is still through the Play Store. I can't think of an example where a mainstream, large developer requires you to sideload or download an alternative app store to use their App, and android has allowed this for a very long time. Fortnite is possibly the only example? It's hardly the 'android experience' though.
This is why we cannot have nice things. How will Playstation have their store, or Nitendo their store, or MS their store? How am I going to sideload on the Switch? But politicians too short sighted to understand the problems they cause.
It’s not ridiculous. It’s the reward for building a platform and brand where all the magic happens.
If they are going to be messed with they should have given the App Store at least 20 years like a parents. Some rational other than powerful people who make laws decided after 5 seconds of subpar thought that it was no good.
The only app I want, and I'll say this every time it comes up, is game emulators. I don't care how old I get I will always want to play retro games on all my devices. This will have zero impact on Apple because I will continue my Apple Arcade subscription with or without emulators. But it will ensure I don't jump ship to Android just to access them, not that I would when you currently can side load those emulators onto iPhone and iPad. But a 3rd party App Store would make it easier instead of faffing about with developer accounts.
Because it sucks for everyone except 1% who wants a computer in their hand instead of an amazingly advanced phone.
Somehow, I don't think that wanting something that is primarily used for piracy is the best argument.
In that implausible scenario, however, it would be a far greater percentage of affected third party developers' revenue. I think particular popular apps making it to a third party store with replaced code signing is quite likely, which will also impact developer revenues: certainly less than a 100% loss, but likely much more than 1%.
I'm still convinced that Apple's entire goal with pushing back against this for as long as they possibly could had more to do with them preparing to launch the App Store on Android devices than it did any major worries they had over lost revenue. I think they saw that any legislation that made them open their platform to 3rd party stores would draw attention to the ability to do just that on Android and they wanted to capitalize on a potentially huge new market. Based on that theory this comes as no surprise. A huge majority of people on iPhone will keep using the App Store almost exclusively. Even the folks that are desperate to play Fortnite on their phone will probably still turn to Apple's storefront for everything else.
Or, alternatively, they know that a product’s success is intimately tied to the user experience. If they lose control of the experience, the product quality can decline.
I hope Apple modifies the warranty agreement to say that installations from third party app stores that result in software problems will not be serviced by Apple. Gotta figure it out for yourself
You mean they already don’t do that? Or force use of a company run App Store?
Good lord
Last edited:
That's a nice thought, but Apple demonstrated inability to be reasonable, and took their control too far, as most do with that amount of power.
For many of the same reasons people want sideloading on iOS. Many apps are not able to be distributed through the app store due to policy restrictions. Unfortunately even with sideloading I have a feeling all those same policy restrictions will be enforced at the OS level anyway.