Some Developers Say Apple Letting Apps Like Netflix and Spotify Share a Link to Web for Account Sign-Up Isn't Enough

[Red Menace]

Apple has been moving more toward services and less toward an App Store for a while now (more so now that everyone and their city/country seems to think they deserve a piece of the pie Apple baked). The applications themselves are just a loss leader for whatever services (real or imaginary) they try to advertise anyway.

I think a tipping point may have been reached, and web apps will be the norm (no store, no cut, cross-platform, and you can sideload all you want). Not all that funny since Google is just sitting there waiting, though.

 

[I7guy]

Wow, no matter what Apple does, there will be criticism.

 

[_Spinn_]

Tweetbot co-creator Paul Haddad expressed disappointment that smaller developers "now have to subsidize all these big publishers" given that Apple's in-app link allowance will be limited to "reader" apps, many of which are owned by large companies.

This entire push has been from large developers from the beginning. They don't want to give Apple a cut of their payments since they are large enough they can host their own app stores and/or payment platforms. Many smaller devs benefit from what Apple provides. This isn't really about consumers either since I highly doubt prices will go down if Apple is taken out of the loop.

 

[Spock]

of course it is not enough. they want the whole cake. lol.

The cake is a lie.

 

[I7guy]

Wow, n

This entire push has been from large developers from the beginning. They don't want to give Apple a cut of their payments since they are large enough they can host their own app stores and/or payment platforms. Many smaller devs benefit from what Apple provides. This isn't really about consumers either since I highly doubt prices will go down if Apple is taken out of the loop.

Right. Large developers want complete access to the ios ecosystem on Apple's dime.

 

[Jago]

It's not enough and it's infuriating that they are determined to do endless tiny little breadcrumb sized baby steps to avoid legal problems.

Apple should be leading on this and making big sweeping changes and fixing the issues and the narrative here.

I'm so totally disappointed in Apple leadership of late.

The magic is gone from this company.

The entitlement these developers feel is mind-boggling. You're not "owed" anything.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Trying to compare the market in 2010 with the market today is absurd.
App availability is what helps sell a device.
Apple NEEDS apps and they have already proven time and again that they kind of suck at it lately. Their battery killing, CPU cooking Podcast app comes to mind.

“Helps” to sell a device, but some things included with the OS are more important to folks than being able to play “Raize: Shatter Legendary” such as:
Being able to use Apple Pay
Having calendars, email, reminders, Safari
Making phone calls, including FaceTime
Making voice recordings
Taking and editing photos
Playing music, etc.

I wonder what the number one “app” used on most phones are? I’d take a guess and say Safari is near the top followed largely by social media apps that could be done just as well with a web interface.

 

[Infinite Vortex]

It's not enough and it's infuriating that they are determined to do endless tiny little breadcrumb sized baby steps to avoid legal problems.

It's a start though. And with the trial with Epic going on I think bigger, forced, changes are on the way.

Success with this I think will come one step at a time!

 

[frenchcamp49er]

Apple should just allow side loading. Let the free for all begin, apps will get pirated and developers will get nothing. Apple can then wash their hands of this, caveat emptor. Then they can run their store as most of us want them to, not the 3% of whiners.

​

 

[frenchcamp49er]

Apple should charge based on downloads. Like $15 per 100 downloads or updates + $1 per gigabyte transfer + $20 per app review + $100 dollar per app review reject + $5 per gigabyte per month hosting fee + $10 per 100 search displayed + $1 per placement ads displayed + $10 per click through install.

Probably what's going to happen. Apple will still get its money. Cant wait for the $40 solitaire game, LOL

 

[frenchcamp49er]

Trying to compare the market in 2010 with the market today is absurd.
App availability is what helps sell a device.
Apple NEEDS apps and they have already proven time and again that they kind of suck at it lately. Their battery killing, CPU cooking Podcast app comes to mind.

and without the iPhone? Yep None of you would even be here discussing this.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Deflection noted.
Moving along.

Well, the 42.7 billion was your deflection from a comment about the problem of piracy on Android. It sounds like an impressive lump sum number, but when you drill down to actual developer experience, piracy, due to the way Android handles app installation, is a problem.

But sure, 42.7 billion! Great! And the Android model is juuuuuuust fine for developers, there’s no problem here that other platforms haven’t already solved! Moving on!

 

[frenchcamp49er]

That's you... you do not speak for all Apple customers.
Some of us actually want options for installing apps. No, I'm not talking about pirating apps, but being able to install apps that Apple rejects for App store distribution.
No one is asking that all users be forced to use multiple app stores. We would just like the option.

He does speak for most, I would bet there are less then 5% that want this change.

 

[frenchcamp49er]

It's a two way relationship. Apple needs devs and devs need Apple.
Without devs, there would be no App Store.
I'm not saying devs should have a free ride, but the pricing structure and rules Apple has used is the issue.
Apple could charge more for dev licenses to cover hosting and distribution costs. $99 per year is pretty cheap.
Up the license fee and drop the IAP requirement... offer it, but don't make it mandatory and change the cut they take to say 5% or 10% along with the fee increase.
I'm sure a lot of smaller devs like it well enough, but larger companies really can handle financial transactions just fine.
Apple getting a cut of subscriptions is absurd as they have zero involvement with delivery of that type of service.
I never understood how any company would have ever agreed to this fee. I can understand a one time transaction fee if it were setup through IAP, but 15-30% for basically processing a credit card swipe is obscene.

Apple probably will and charge for every aspect of having your app on the store. I'm sure its more than $99 and the 30% fee.

 

[rjohnstone]

Well, the 42.7 billion was your deflection from a comment about the problem of piracy on Android. It sounds like an impressive lump sum number, but when you drill down to actual developer experience, piracy, due to the way Android handles app installation, is a problem.

But sure, 42.7 billion! Great! And the Android model is juuuuuuust fine for developers, there’s no problem here that other platforms haven’t already solved! Moving on!

Your argument was most Android users don't pay for apps. Play store sales data shows this is absolutely false.

You're trying to deflect by saying this was about piracy. Pick a lane.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

It's a two way relationship. Apple needs devs and devs need Apple.
Without devs, there would be no App Store.
I'm not saying devs should have a free ride, but the pricing structure and rules Apple has used is the issue.
Apple could charge more for dev licenses to cover hosting and distribution costs. $99 per year is pretty cheap.
Up the license fee and drop the IAP requirement... offer it, but don't make it mandatory and change the cut they take to say 5% or 10% along with the fee increase.
I'm sure a lot of smaller devs like it well enough, but larger companies really can handle financial transactions just fine.
Apple getting a cut of subscriptions is absurd as they have zero involvement with delivery of that type of service.
I never understood how any company would have ever agreed to this fee. I can understand a one time transaction fee if it were setup through IAP, but 15-30% for basically processing a credit card swipe is obscene.

A MSDN subscription used to cost thousands of dollars, plus you had to purchase Visual Studio, and buy the updates, etc.
$ 99/year is a steal!
Why complain so much, let Apple make some money too, so they don't lose interest in the AppStore.

It's not just a matter of processing a credit card. Apple has to maintain the IAP API, database and transactions, consumer support, etc.
It's a full eCommerce hosting service.

 

[Mr.Blacky]

Are developers around here? How did you sell your apps before the App Store and how did you reach costumers? Did you sell more apps and earn more money?

 

[bousozoku]

I would imagine many of the same developers thought it was unfair when their parents wanted them to pay a part of the mortgage after they finish college and came back to live at home.

I'd been self-sufficient for the longest time. Moving back to California was a slap in the face. We have people making a three hour commute to be able to have a house of their own.

Still, the development houses making the most noise probably aren't worried about their commutes as much as their wealth.

 

[0924487]

Probably what's going to happen. Apple will still get its money. Cant wait for the $40 solitaire game, LOL

Or just introduce an iPhone platform maintenance subscription. Make users pay to keep their iPhones running with Apple server access, this includes iOS updates and App Store access. Maybe lump in AppleCare and Apple One.

 

[Michael Scrip]

So basically... apps weren't allowed to have a link to their website. It was part of Apple's "anti-steering" rule.

I remember developers loudly complaining "We can't even tell customers about our website! It's unfair!"

But now developers can have a link to their website. Good news! They can now easily send users to their website and they can subscribe with them directly and they don't have to give a cut to Apple.

I'm gonna repeat that last part: users can subscribe directly on the developer's website without the developer having to give a cut to Apple.

Oh but that's still not enough?

Well sure... it's not sideloading or alternative app stores. But let's pick our battles here.

At least developers don't have to say this anymore: "This app doesn't do anything... come back after you've created an account... good luck... we can't tell you how!"

 

[citysnaps]

It's not enough and it's infuriating that they are determined to do endless tiny little breadcrumb sized baby steps to avoid legal problems.

Apple should be leading on this and making big sweeping changes and fixing the issues and the narrative here.

I'm so totally disappointed in Apple leadership of late.

The magic is gone from this company.

Why be infuriated and dissappointed?

Will you be voting with your wallet in order find happiness? When?

 

[Amazing Iceman]

So basically... apps weren't allowed to have a link to their website. It was part of Apple's "anti-steering" rule.

I remember developers loudly complaining "We can't even tell customers about our website! It's unfair!"

But now developers can have a link to their website. Good news! They can now easily send users to their website and they can subscribe with them directly and they don't have to give a cut to Apple.

I'm gonna repeat that last part: users can subscribe directly on the developer's website without the developer having to give a cut to Apple.

Oh but that's still not enough?

Well sure... it's not sideloading or alternative app stores. But let's pick our battles here.

At least developers don't have to say this anymore: "This app doesn't do anything... come back after you've created an account... good luck... we can't tell you how!"

Apparently some devs want Apple to collect money and provide consumer support on their behalf for free.
If they are now able to link to their own website, well.... they should deal with their own transactions.

 

[WiseAJ]

The whining continues from the ungrateful developers

 

[citysnaps]

Wow, no matter what Apple does, there will be criticism.

And... Apple will not be losing revenue in any changes they make. They'll simply make it up elsewhere with increased prices for products and services consumers purchase. And continue to set record-breaking revenue numbers every quarter.

Either way the consumer will pay.

 

[hn333]

Great now I can buy kindle books directly from the app.