Because it sets a precedent that erodes their control with potentially larger consequences in the future.
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
So a small time developer finds a bug in the OS, it should be their responsibility to fix the bug? Apps shouldn't be allowed to run outside their little sandbox. If it managed that, there is a flaw in the OS designed to prevent that.
Apple needs to squash that bug, not the small fry developer who discovered the bug.
Last edited:
If this is the stance “Apple can maintain veto rights” then I’m on board. But everyone on this site wants Emulators which Apple would offer certificates for.
Android manufacturers have a choice of licensing Google's flavor of Android or using AOSP (Android Open Source Project) versions of Android. Of course, they'd have to license G-Apps from Google or the user will be without a PlayStore, Gmail and a host of Google services.
Make it so. I can't stand Facebook or any Meta products popping when I'm searching for an App. It would like the trash taking itself out. I wasn't a booster of 3rd party appstores before, but now...😉
The only thing good about MS Office is Excel. And Excel is only good on Windows. Excel on the Mac, Excel on android, Excel on iOS...all crippled to the point to worthless to some who excels at Excel.
Samsung has the Galaxy Store built into their phones. No one I know uses the Galaxy Store, instead they ask me to install the PlayStore on their phone instead.
I don't know what that means. As far as I know, the only manufacturer that uses "Google's flavor of Android" is Google. Everyone else uses AOSP.
That's where the collusion comes in. Google leverages the Android trademark to convince horizontal competitors to all use the same Google Play services across vertical markets.
So even with the galaxy store everyone still wants to use the play store, what is the point of any of this at all?
I don’t understand this fervour to want 3rd party stores if a) people dont want them and b) it won’t change the competitive landscape.
The key question that needs answering is why those people don’t want to use the galaxy store.
But in order to rip it you need to modify your consoles. And that can sometimes lead to being banned. I looked at doing this with the Switch. It’s a major hassle.
Really? Ask most of the world. But something or get it for free. What will people choose?
Back when I was I kid (16), I did this with Photoshop. i had a job, I could have purchased it. I regret my actions even this day. I have been paying Adobe for well over 20 years now.
Along with Unity and Unreal Engine. Even if I just sell the exe from my website they still require a cut/license fee.
Amazon did that on their own, can't blame that on Apple they do the same on Android.
you really should curtail your use of everyone its infact likely a minority, i have no intention of using Emulators
Bloomberg's Mark Gurman this week reported that Apple is preparing to allow alternative app stores on the iPhone and iPad in the European Union, as part of an effort to comply with the Digital Markets Act, which goes into full effect in 2024. The report said Apple is aiming for the changes to be introduced as part of iOS 17.
In a research note this week, a trio of analysts at investment bank Morgan Stanley argued that third-party app stores and sideloading would pose a "limited risk" to both App Store revenue and Apple's overall revenue given that iPhone users have "long prioritized the security, centralization, and convenience that the App Store brings."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. If third-party app stores are allowed globally, the analysts forecast around a 9% hit to services revenue and around a 2% hit to total revenue.
In reality, the impact on Apple's revenue could be far less, as the analysts believe it's likely Apple would still receive a commission on purchases made through third-party app stores. In the Netherlands, for example, Apple's standard 30% commission is reduced by only 3% for dating apps using third-party payment systems.
While there are still a lot of question marks surrounding third-party app stores and sideloading, Morgan Stanley believes that the reported changes do not present material risk to App Store revenue/growth or the long-term performance of Apple's stock.
Article Link: Rival App Stores on iPhone Estimated to Have Limited Impact on Apple's Revenue
In Bains voice “but of course”
i own two switches for this reason one modded and offline and one normal ; i buy my games and rip so i play yuzu officially with games i own on my pc and hope one day on m1 macbook
The commission rates may stay exactly as they are - maybe even higher. Think about it, if an App was previously banned on the Apple store due to content, why would another store not charge grossly more just so it will actually be listed.
2-4% would be unsustainable unless it's one guy in his moms basement. 2-4% for the store charge PLUS 10-20% to Apple for licensing fee's is more likely.
Isn't that the point of the App Store? In order to get your app accepted, it must meet Apple protocols to insure it interfaces with OS. If there is an issue the app must be modified to Apple's satisfaction or it won't be accepted. If it's the OS causing the issue, that's what beta program is for.
Apple is about all about revenue. Privacy is a marketing strategy not a charity.
Correct. Apple is about customers and control. The money comes from the customers and control. Privacy is a mantra.
I think there are anti-trust issues with the App Store store rules, but more stores isn’t going to solve this. That was tried on Android and it didn’t work. Now Apple will need to devote resources to creating something that will inevitably fail. A limited side-load would be great. People want to emulate games they bought as a kid or run GPL software, but this will not likely end in that. Apple will certainly choose to allow alternative stores over side-loading and will make sure those stores pay 27% of revenue to license their APIs. The EU legislation allows charging licensing fees as written. I hope I’m wrong. Side-loading would be great for a small number of users even if it is otherwise doomed.
The Google Play store for Android doesn’t exist in a vacuum. I suspect that large developers will be incentivized to invest in creating their own app distribution when it is possible to do it for both platforms. Paradoxically, the reason why many developers stay in Google Play Store is BECAUSE Apple doesn’t allow sideloading or alternative app stores. (After all, Apple app store is the more profitable platform.)
Once both platforms permit it, large developers will take their apps off and force users to go to their app stores to download their proprietary apps.
The conversations have been interesting. Thoughts, positive, negative, and indifferent have been intriguing. However until we see Apple’s solution(s) all we are doing at this stage is wagging.
I have an S22 Ultra and am surrounded by Android users and never once have I felt the need to go out of the Play Store. My colleagues don't even know there is such an option on Android.
It will likely not have any impact on revenues whatsoever just like on Android. I have no idea why Apple has opposed this for so long. Alternative app stores also help provide innovative ideas which Apple can integrate into their own store down the line.
It will likely not have any impact on revenues whatsoever just like on Android. I have no idea why Apple has opposed this for so long. Alternative app stores also help provide innovative ideas which Apple can integrate into their own store down the line.