Of course.
It affects us! Less secure OS, more engineering resources spent trying to appease bureaucrats who want to turn iOS into android because they don’t understand what they regulate, fewer features iOS customers actually want.
I agree. Spotify could possibly have launched on Android. And they could possibly have enjoyed the same success as they did on the iPhone. That does not change the fact that despite Android being available Spotify chose to launch on iPhone. The implication of that decision is that the iPhone offered greater benefit than Android and Spotify made the rational and historically validated decision to launch on the iPhone platform — because it was more beneficial to its business than Android despite Apple’s control-oriented platform governance ethos.
The argument about “engineering resources” kind of goes out the window when Cook just cost the company half a billion dollars.
Do you apparently believe that all of this, simply taken at face value, means Apple deserves a 30% cut from Spotify in perpetuity or otherwise be allowed to add friction between a direct competitor and their (potential) customers.
If they use App Store in app purchase, it’s 30% first year and 15% thereafter, so stop with the lies.
That's lies. For the US customers, the most vocal guys in the DMA discussion it changes literally nothing.
Those are certainly your suppositions anyway.
Whether 15% or 30%, it doesn’t matter. And those rules you refer to are no longer legal for a reason. The EU seems to take a rather dim view of rent seeking behavior.
That was the agreement that Spotify voluntarily signed. No one forced them to. And of course they have the right to try and negotiate a better deal now if they want one. And Apple likewise has the right to accept proposed terms or not. And if they cannot agree, Spotify has multiple alternatives and can take their business elsewhere.
Fortunately this is no longer the case in the EU.
Cool, well I hope someone supplies all those apps for you!
Signed under duress perhaps, since there are no viable alternatives to reaching iOS users.
Running and regulating do not mean the same thing lmao. Not even close, bud. Nice try I guess.
It's far from running the company. If you say things like this you don't know what you're talking about or you're just trolling.
Indeed, nothing much seems to matter in these “regulations”.
Providing something of dubious value, in exchange for a large sum of money is still rent seeking.
Dubious value “to you” doesn’t apply to everyone else now does it? 😉
So you think the ~€150bn/y are well spent money on this over governmental collossus?
Hmm .. You consider providing access to a market of 2B+ devices, higher income and higher spending consumers + development tools that simplify development, maintenance and distribution of secure software to those consumers dubious value? 🤔
That’s up to the person on the receiving end though isn’t it.
I am not owned by Apple for them to control access to. As I’ve said previously, I will entertain monetary offers if Apple would like to set something up. Spotify pays the ADP fee for the development tools. As for everything else, Apple is the one choosing to force developers to go through them for things like distribution.
