Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

South Korea Could Ban Apple From Requiring Developers to Use In-App Purchase System

farewelwilliams said:
I'm an iOS dev too. Do you use Apple Maps? CloudKit? Do you submit more than 3 times a year? If so, $99/year for developer program is NOT enough to pay for these services.

If it was a choice, you'd likely need to pay additional to use Apple Maps, CloudKit, for each app submission, etc... because most of the top earners would switch to an alternate system. Apple would not be able to fund these resources if they lost a majority of the 30% cut. I as an indie developer do not accept this.

Right now I can release a 100% free app that uses Apple Maps, have 1 billion users use it, and not pay Apple a single cent other than the $99 a year. These types of apps wouldn't be possible if you were using Google Maps which the bill would cost six figures per month.

And those are just three examples. I've previously posted a long list of resources that developers get FOR FREE minus the $99/year.
Click to expand...
Well, Apple can still continue to offer it as a incentive to keep you offering your App through the AppStore.
Sideloading won't kill the AppleStore, and in that case other map providers will lower their prices or find a way to also offer it for "free or less", that's exactly what competition is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedRage
_Spinn_ said:
I absolutely do not want third party app stores or other payment options in apps. I don’t want to give my payment info to every app/store under the sun and risk potential data leaks where my credit card number gets stolen. I trust Apple to keep my payment info secure. That’s why I don’t buy much online. I limit my purchasing to Amazon (since if they were hacked everyone would be screwed) and websites that take Apple Pay or PayPal (which is a pain to use). I don’t give my credit card numbers out anywhere else.

If Apple could require apps to provide both Apple’s and 3rd party IAP I guess that would be the least bad of all options. I doubt Apple would be allowed to do that though - this would probably see this as an abuse of their market position. Allowing 3rd party IAP also introduced headaches for the consumer when trying to dispute charges or get refunds.

I’m mostly worried about apps that only support 3rd party IAP or are walled behind third party app stores. While it has been pointed many times out that I can just ignore those apps, what happens when there is one that I actually need (not just want)?

As far as allowing third party app stores, I could potentially see larger devs like say Google forcing users to install their App Store to get their apps (based off what they did with Windows Phone this doesn't seem that far off). Or what if some government like Russia forced all apps installed in their country to go through their App Store? Who knows what kind of surveillance could be injected this way. If third party stores could also offer ApplePay that would potentially be better than nothing.

As a consumer I already have options for what payment method actually backs Apple's IAP - whether that be a credit card (Visa, MasterCard, Discover, etc.), PayPal via linked AppleID account, or cash via purchased gift cards. This isn't really about consumers, this is about devs that don't want to give Apple a cut of the payments. I highly doubt prices would be lower with 3rd party IAP - Apple already lowered their commission from 30% to 15% for most apps and I'm not aware of any that have lowered their prices to pass the savings onto the consumer. The App Store has already done a lot to lower software prices for consumers. Before the App Store most commercial software was $50 - $100 or more.

Physical stores already limit what payment methods consumers can use. Visa and MasterCard are accepted pretty much everywhere though Costco only accepts Visa. I've already been to places that won't accept my Discover card and American Express has an even lower acceptance rate than Discover. Some stores don’t even accept credit cards. There are even stores that will give you discounts for using their store loyalty/credit card. Should they be forced to accept all credit cards?

Allowing third party stores will benefit large devs the most since they will have the infrastructure to host them (think Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Epic) and then they can pocket 100% of their IAP themselves. This won't help small devs nearly as much - they would have to partner with other app stores to be hosted. I can even envision certain apps being signed to exclusive deals with certain stores (similar to how streaming services get their exclusive content). What happens if an app moves stores? Do I need to re-download it again to continue to get updates? Will I have to re-buy my IAP since that was tied to the original store?

Many like to try and draw a comparison between iOS and Mac OS/Windows but that really isn't really the same thing. iOS has always been closed while Mac OS and Windows have always been open (more or less). This is nothing like a formerly open system suddenly locking things down so apps can only be installed from an app store. If anything this is more like the model game consoles have.

If this starts being enforced on Apple these changes need to be applied to game consoles as well. Going to your local store to buy a physical copy doesn’t get around the “App Store” tax since Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo still control the physical distribution (disc or cartridge) channels as well. Game consoles have had this walled garden approach going all the way back but somehow this is an issue now because why? I’ve seen some people comparing buying used games akin to side loading apps but to me that seems to be a stretch since the console makers still had to approve the software and got money from the original sale.

Again this isn’t about consumers. This is about big devs being greedy and wanting a free ride off Apple’s infrastructure.
Click to expand...
You don't have to use every option available. You realize that? Giving other people more options doesn't mean you need to change your habits. It's like saying "I don't want anyone offering me or anyone around me any food because I'm full". People care way too much about what other people do with their phones.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: arlomedia
farewelwilliams said:
I'm an iOS dev too. Do you use Apple Maps? CloudKit? Do you submit more than 3 times a year? If so, $99/year for developer program is NOT enough to pay for these services.

If it was a choice, you'd likely need to pay additional to use Apple Maps, CloudKit, for each app submission, etc... because most of the top earners would switch to an alternate system. Apple would not be able to fund these resources if they lost a majority of the 30% cut. I as an indie developer do not accept this.

Right now I can release a 100% free app that uses Apple Maps, have 1 billion users use it, and not pay Apple a single cent other than the $99 a year. These types of apps wouldn't be possible if you were using Google Maps which the bill would cost six figures per month.

And those are just three examples. I've previously posted a long list of resources that developers get FOR FREE minus the $99/year.
Click to expand...
If you followed the Apple v Fornite case, judge repeatedly tried to get Apple to explain how much it costs to run the store - they said they don't track it.. Reason ? the cost is TRIVIAL!

3rd party apps fuel demand for iPhones - the most profitable consumer device is probably history. To develop for iOS you MUST Purchase iPhone, Macbook, $99 dev account in that order
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: KevinN206, RedRage, GMShadow and 2 others
DHagan4755 said:
I believe a lot of malls & shopping centers charge tenants for a percentage profit, in addition to the rent. Thus if the App Store is an extension of the mall in a virtual sense, what Apple is doing is not out of bounds with in-app purchases. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.
Click to expand...
Some do but the difference is stores have a lot of options on where to set up shop. In terms of mobile Apple and Google are a duopoly. They are your only choices and have started abusing their power.
 
q64ceo said:
Which Apple should have never done.Thanks to crypto, businesses are being attacked and extorted out of money with ransomware because it provides cybercriminals with an ability they never had before. These attacks have hit hospitals, food processors, even our energy producers.
Click to expand...
We refuse to stay in the stoneage thank you ~ Humans who believe in evolution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wildkraut
icanhazmac said:
To date I have not seen any of the supporters of 3rd party payment systems explain how Apple is supposed to recoup the costs of the store and everything that supports the developers when most apps are listed FREE!
Click to expand...
By selling iPhones and iPads. That's why they launched the store in the first place -- to increase the value of those devices. It seems to have worked.
 
JPack said:
So?

You're pointing out a problem with Apple's business model. It relies on sucking up profits from in-app purchases. That's something for Apple to fix.

Just beccuse $99 might be too cheap doesn't mean Apple should continue to force in-app purchases in their walled garden.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, a dev couild opt-out of the app store if they don't like the TOS.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: RedRage, icanhazmac and frenchcamp49er
Apple will just have to charge all developers a hefty fee to enter the store and per download. Why should Apple do anything to promote anything they will be forced to do for free. Its there store they dont have to allow anyone in it. I hope they charge a hefty amount. I for one and I'm probably not in the minority that all not purchase from a third party.
 
Rogifan said:
Whatever is subsidizing the App Store is clearly more than enough to cover the cost of running it. This isn’t about that any more it’s about ‘services’ as a revenue and profit generating business. And I’ll bet the largest component of services revenue is App Store IAP and most of that is coming from games.
Click to expand...
And imo, apple is entitled to that revenue.
Rogifan said:
Back in the early days of the App Store in an email to Steve Jobs Phil Schiller questioned the App Store commission structure and if Apple should reduce it once they get to a certain run rate. Back in 2008 Steve said he expected the App Store to be a break even business. It wasn’t really until Apple execs saw all the money they were making from IAP (and then a dip in hardware sales growth) that the decision was made to squeeze as much money out of the App Store as possible.
Click to expand...
The world has changed since 2008. Some things Steve said back then today don't hold much water today.
 
farewelwilliams said:
Seems fair to me. What's the issue?
Click to expand...
It's simple. If Apple really cared about security they'd lock down macOS in the same way as iOS. If consumers and developers really enjoyed the App Store experience as much as Apple claims, the macOS store would be much more popular than it is. If Apple really cared about the environment your iPhone wouldn't still be using a proprietary cable.

Apple uses security, privacy and the environment as convenient arguments when it's obvious that they are just trying to maximize shareholder profit. In this case they don't want consumers or developers to have a choice of where to conduct iOS software transactions because it's not profitable for them to do so.

I acknowledge that they build great hardware and that the goal of any successful corporation is to make money. I just get tired of the marketing spin. And I get tired of Tim Cook telling me what I want - both as a consumer and as a developer. It's ok to love their hardware and still call BS.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: KevinN206, RedRage, Wildkraut and 2 others
vagos said:
Simple. Say an app costs 10€ and apple takes 3€ from the sale. If you buy directly from the developer you pay 7€ and apple gets nothing.
Click to expand...
Not true. In that scenario, Apple would just increase the yearly fee every developer has to pay for the Xcode development tools. Plus there would be a fee for free apps (today developers do not pay a cent).
 
To be fair, South Korea is a different country where Android is dominating thanks to Samsung. They aware of anti trust issue with Apple and Epic store very well.

If Apple and Google lose the law suit from Epic games, then it will impact both companies in a rough way.
 
brandnewshmoney said:
If you followed the Apple v Fornite case, judge repeatedly tried to get Apple to explain how much it costs to run the store - they said they don't track it.. Reason ? the cost is TRIVIAL!
Click to expand...

1. I don't recall Apple's answer. Please point me to the link that I can read up on that particular question
2. If there's no data, you cannot assume for a fact it's because the cost is trivial. We just don't know how much it truly is.
3. I'm not saying Apple is breaking even or losing money on average from the App Store today. Of course Apple is making a profit from IAP. But if you made IAP a choice, Apple will likely cut back on developer resources because they need to keep their profits up.
4. You're essentially saying people like Epic Games should stop paying this Apple Tax that us small developers benefit from.

brandnewshmoney said:
3rd party apps fuel demand for iPhones - the most profitable consumer device is probably history. To develop for iOS you MUST Purchase iPhone, Macbook, $99 dev account in that order
Click to expand...

Chances are, you likely have an iPhone already. Use that.

The bare minimum would be a Mac mini + $99 dev account.
https://www.apple.com/shop/refurbished shows I can get a Mac mini for $589, so about $700 to get started.

How many updates are you going to submit in one year? At least 10. One of my previous app submissions took the reviewer about an hour to review. App reviewers make about $34/hr (glassdoor). That's $340 Apple has to pay out + benefits to the app reviewer for reviewing YOUR app.

Subtract $99 from the dev program you paid out, that's still $240 in the negative for Apple. Assuming 35% is Apple's profit margin off of the Mac mini, that's about $206 in profits from the Mac mini. $206-$240 = -$34 means Apple lost money total (not including benefits to App Reviewers, not including CDN, not including the many services you can use like CloudKit).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: uberzephyr and icerabbit
D4vidrim said:
Not true. In that scenario, Apple would just increase the yearly fee every developer has to pay for the Xcode development tools. Plus there would be a fee for free apps (today developers do not pay a cent).
Click to expand...
Well, they could simply go the Microsoft route and offer a community edition of their tools and different plans.
Additional third party tools would also show up.
Additional compilers, editors, etc. just like on windows now a days, too.
LLVM is open source, Swift is open source, there are several ways to compile for macOS and there would exist several ways to compile for iOS, too.
That's really a no-brainer.
 
JPack said:
You're pointing out a problem with Apple's business model. It relies on sucking up profits from in-app purchases. That's something for Apple to fix.
Click to expand...

It is not a problem with the business model but a choice as to where generated funds come from.

Low dev account cost balanced by IAP profits from free apps

Vs

High dev account cost and low or no IAP profits from apps that have a cost

Consumers will pay the same, only larger devs like Epic will profit.
 
Last edited:
LonerATO said:
I could careless if Apple has to open to 3rd party payments, but this notion that a developer is going to pass on any kind of savings just because they no longer pay Apple a 30% cut is crazy. If I'm a developer, I'm still selling my app at the max price. Why leave money on the table?
Click to expand...

You're right, but in my case I've always used a third-party payment system for 2.9% and have my prices pegged to that. If Apple started forcing me to use its in-app system for 30%, I would raise prices for those purchases accordingly. I would also continue offering the original prices for purchases made outside the app. Apple's rules (currently) allow this silly situation. So what I object to is not so much the inflated fees but being forced to do redundant development work and maintain parallel systems. That's a loss of efficiency introduced solely to benefit Apple's revenue.

I'd accept the "Apple wants to help consumers by ensuring they have access to the most secure payment system" argument if Apple priced it competitively. But I would still object to Apple telling developers how to prioritize their time. Every hour spent supporting another payment system is an hour I can't spend providing features that users have actually asked for.

I'm not a freeloader and am happy to pay a fair and rational price for the Apple services I'm using. But I don't want to be forced to use a service I don't need just because Apple is stuck on an outdated business model.
 
Last edited:
farewelwilliams said:
1. I don't recall Apple's answer. Please point me to the link that I can read up on that particular question
2. If there's no data, you cannot assume for a fact it's because the cost is trivial. We just don't know how much it truly is.
3. I'm not saying Apple is breaking even or losing money on average from the App Store today. Of course Apple is making a profit from IAP. But if you made IAP a choice, Apple will likely cut back on developer resources because they need to keep their profits up.
4. You're essentially saying people like Epic Games should stop paying this Apple Tax that us small developers benefit from.



Chances are, you likely have an iPhone already. Use that.

The bare minimum would be a Mac mini + $99 dev account.
https://www.apple.com/shop/refurbished shows I can get a Mac mini for $589, so about $700 to get started.

How many updates are you going to submit in one year? At least 10. One of my previous app submissions took the reviewer about an hour to review. App reviewers make about $34/hr (glassdoor). That's $340 Apple has to pay out + benefits to the app reviewer for reviewing YOUR app.

Subtract $99 from the dev program you paid out, that's $240 in the negative for Apple. Assuming 35% is Apple's profit margin off of the Mac mini, that's about $206 in profits from the Mac mini. $206-$240 = -$34 means Apple lost money total (not including benefits to App Reviewers, not including CDN, not including the many services you can use like CloudKit).



Do the math.
Click to expand...
Regarding no App Store on Apple Profit & Loss statements
https://twitter.com/x/status/1400810652445388803

Benedict Evans has long covered apple and is a pretty neutral voice. Wrote a great piece on this issue im reading as I type. One thing I should note from you is your thinking assumes developers only take from Apple the way you broke down the costs of different app store functions. It would help to measure the impact of 3rd party apps on iPhone sales and the entire apple ecosystem for that matter. The app store charts are a good start. None of Apple's optional apps even rank in there. 3rd party apps sell Apple products. Apple provides the shovel (Dev tools), we dig for the gold. Even if they provided the shovel for free, they still make money from the gold we dig. The InAP argument is about how much profit they make per shovel which is trivial compared to GOLD!

www.ben-evans.com

Do App Store Rules Matter? — Benedict Evans

After a decade of arguing, regulators will change Apple’s App Store rules. How much money is involved, what might happen next and, most importantly, who cares? This is a big deal for Spotify, but does it matter to anyone else?
www.ben-evans.com www.ben-evans.com

To innovate, you must go outside apples in-app purchases. What alot of people fail to note is payment innovation has enabled so many business models. Amazon is an ecommerce giant becasue for 17 years they held a patent on on-click checkout. Imagine what this in-app purchase policy is doing to the digital economy in terms of business models its preventing.
1629835553074.png
 
Last edited:
badmojo said:
It's simple. If Apple really cared about security they'd lock down macOS in the same way as iOS.
Click to expand...

No. The floodgates were already open in the 90's. Hundreds of thousands of businesses have already distributed their apps before the App Store existed. Businesses rely on Adobe Creative Cloud, Microsoft Office, and many other pro apps. Closing it up means most pro apps shutdown. No pro apps means Mac business is gone. Tightening security there would simply kill Macs.

iOS started with the floodgates closed, therefore Apple can start off with a high level of security then slowly open the gates.

badmojo said:
If consumers and developers really enjoyed the App Store experience as much as Apple claims, the macOS store would be much more popular than it is. If Apple really cared about the environment your iPhone wouldn't still be using a proprietary cable.
Click to expand...

Essential apps were already distributed outside the App Store. That's why Adobe basically holds a monopoly of creative professional software. If Adobe left the Mac, professionals would rather switch to PC instead of waiting for an Adobe replacement. Apple can't tighten up Mac security as much as iOS without severely damaging it for users and developers.

badmojo said:
Apple uses security, privacy and the environment as convenient arguments
Click to expand...

There is no way to close off the Mac without killing it (or severely damaging it). There's a way to keep iOS closed without killing it.
 
brandnewshmoney said:
Regarding no App Store on Apple Profit & Loss statements
https://twitter.com/x/status/1400810652445388803

Benedict Evans has long covered apple and is a pretty neutral voice. Wrote a great piece on this issue im reading as I type. One thing I should note from you is your thinking assumes developers only take from Apple the way you broke down the costs of different app store functions. It would help to measure the impact of 3rd party apps on iPhone sales and the entire apple ecosystem for that matter. The app store charts are a good start. None of Apple's optional apps even rank in there. 3rd party apps sell Apple products. Apple provides the shovel (Dev tools), we dig for the gold. Even if they provided the shovel for free, they still make money from the gold we dig. The InAP argument is about how much profit they make per shovel which is trivial compared to GOLD!

www.ben-evans.com

Do App Store Rules Matter? — Benedict Evans

After a decade of arguing, regulators will change Apple’s App Store rules. How much money is involved, what might happen next and, most importantly, who cares? This is a big deal for Spotify, but does it matter to anyone else?
www.ben-evans.com www.ben-evans.com
Click to expand...

Read this reasonable reply to the tweet:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1400824541589360644
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RedRage
farewelwilliams said:
sounds like south korea's committee has no clue what the hell they're doing. indie developers rely on app store resources that are paid for by in app purchases. 🤦‍♂️
Click to expand...
Sounds like you may not have a clue here. They are not going to ban Google and Apple from offering their service of IAP. They are going to ban them from making it the only option. Big difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedRage and Wildkraut
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back