Spotify, Epic Games, and Others Argue Apple's App Store Changes Do Not Comply With DMA

[Ubuntu]

"Core Technology" There it is. Put up or shut up. Either STOP USING Apple's developers' work, or PAY FOR IT. 🤷‍♂️

iOS dev here who literally could never make a penny without standing on the shoulders of thousands of Apple iOS devs, who’ve put in uncountable years of effort into areas I basically have zero experience or expertise in. 👋

Most people claiming Apple's cut is unearned don’t know what “import Foundation” does at the top of literally every iOS code file in literally every AppStore app. (Hint: It's not necessary to get an app into the App Store!)

Ditto for:

import UIKit
import SwiftUI
import CryptoKit
Button()
let task = URLSession.shared.dataTask(with: session)
etc, etc, etc…

Literally 💯 of iOS apps use code written by Apple to do a staggering amount of their work.

ZERO apps roll their own custom code instead of using the mountain of frameworks and APIs that Apple has built and perfected (complete with expected features like free dark mode, rotation, language, compat across device, accessibility size, backgrounding, persistence, etc, etc, etc features).

ZERO apps do this because it would cost 10-20x as much to develop, and nobody would pay for the lesser experience.

Even the simplest app would take literal years more development, and STILL not achieve anything close to feature parity by dropping in Apple’s code with zero effort.

Oh, and when iOS updates with new features, or a new style? INSTANTLY that app needs massive work to retain feature parity with other apps that did zero work to match style or make use of many new features. (Sometimes a TEENY bit of work to make a huge new feature work if you want.)

Show me an app developer who doesn’t lean HEAVILY on Apple’s developers’ work, and I’ll show you somebody who gets to talk about the “outrageous” price Apple charges for their work. 🙄

You’re completely ignoring the fact that Apple also needs those developers.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

"Core Technology" There it is. Put up or shut up. Either STOP USING Apple's developers' work, or PAY FOR IT. 🤷‍♂️

iOS dev here who literally could never make a penny without standing on the shoulders of thousands of Apple iOS devs, who’ve put in uncountable years of effort into areas I basically have zero experience or expertise in. 👋

Most people claiming Apple's cut is unearned don’t know what “import Foundation” does at the top of literally every iOS code file in literally every AppStore app. (Hint: It's not necessary to get an app into the App Store!)

Ditto for:

import UIKit
import SwiftUI
import CryptoKit
Button()
let task = URLSession.shared.dataTask(with: session)
etc, etc, etc…

Literally 💯 of iOS apps use code written by Apple to do a staggering amount of their work.

ZERO apps roll their own custom code instead of using the mountain of frameworks and APIs that Apple has built and perfected (complete with expected features like free dark mode, rotation, language, compat across device, accessibility size, backgrounding, persistence, etc, etc, etc features).

ZERO apps do this because it would cost 10-20x as much to develop, and nobody would pay for the lesser experience.

Even the simplest app would take literal years more development, and STILL not achieve anything close to feature parity by dropping in Apple’s code with zero effort.

Oh, and when iOS updates with new features, or a new style? INSTANTLY that app needs massive work to retain feature parity with other apps that did zero work to match style or make use of many new features. (Sometimes a TEENY bit of work to make a huge new feature work if you want.)

Show me an app developer who doesn’t lean HEAVILY on Apple’s developers’ work, and I’ll show you somebody who gets to talk about the “outrageous” price Apple charges for their work. 🙄

Ever heard of macOS? No core technology fee to release an app there.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

We knew they wouldn't be happy with Apple's changes to meet DMA compliance. But this is a bit too late in the process for anything but continued scrutiny. But that applies to both sides also.

It’s not, all the EU has to do is say “yeah, you’re not complaint” and fine them until they are.

 

[mrochester]

Ever heard of macOS? No core technology fee to release an app there.

Correct, Apple does not charge a core technology fee for macOS. It does for iOS.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Completely separate issue from the payment cut.

And one that is absolutely necessary, for entirely different reasons. Mostly how many millions of completely non-tech people would get scammed blind and causing god-awful trickle effects on to their family members, after hundreds of milllions of people would be trained by Spotify, Netflix, MLB, and the dozen other apps that sideloading and clicking through those warning screens is a perfectly acceptable way to install an app from wellsfargo.bank.ru? 🙄

These people have nowhere near–NOWHERE near–the same level of tech competence as somebody who's ever sideloaded an app on Android, or installed an app on a personal computer.

You absolutely cannot underestimate the people with single-digit tech IQs.

People already use android my dude

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Correct, Apple does not charge a core technology fee for macOS. It does for iOS.

Does macOS not have Apple APIs?

 

[AppliedMicro]

But you have no interest in Terms and Conditions...

So if it is so easy to just drag and drop to sideload, why would you care about any Apple T&Cs?

I already told you: it’s not about me. It’s about „developers far more skilled and knowledgeable than I am (i.e. Spotify and Epic).“

👉 I believe it’s right (and Apple should be mandated) for them to be able to offer their apps for installation. Let users download apps straight from the source - as in the developer’s web site. Proven business model that has fostered innovation and competition for decades.

Spotify and Epic are hardly more skilled or knowledgeable. They just dont want to pay like other devs

I think they‘d be happy to pay like other devs, such as Amazon for their shopping app, AliExpress, Uber, Doordash, Booking.com, and flight or train booking app.

Yes, let them pay the same as other devs! I fully support them enjoying the same terms and conditions. Without anticompetitive discrimination of certain products or services offered - that Apple has chosen to compete with.

I also support any legislation that mandates Apple have non-discriminatory terms and rules for in-app transactions - to finally let all developers pay the same.

It’s just fair - that’s why there is a Coalition for App Fairness.

 

[mrochester]

Does macOS not have Apple APIs?

I’m not sure what point you’re making. That Apple doesn’t monetise use of its APIs on macOS does not preclude it from monetising its APIs on iOS. It’s perfectly ok for Apple to pick and choose for what, and how much, it charges for things.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Xcode is free. The developer fee is quite low (and per org, not even per seat, unlike MS) and serves mostly as a barrier to keep the store from being overwhelmed with junk apps. If you publish a free app, then you only pay that nominal fee. I would also point out that companies like Epic and Unity also charge fees to developers. They use different fee structures, but you still need to pay if you make money using their tools. Apple's commissions are inline with the rest of the industry.

For all the Apple detractors, how should they be permitted to monetize? Or should they be forced to sell data like Meta and Google and give away everything for "free"?

Xcode isn’t free, it requires a Mac.

You and I must use different App Stores because mine is overwhelmed with junk

 

[CraigJDuffy]

I’m not sure what point you’re making. That Apple doesn’t monetise use of its APIs on macOS does not preclude it from monetising its APIs on iOS. It’s perfectly ok for Apple to pick and choose for what, and how much, it charges for things.

The justifications of “Apple needs to charge this fee because XYZ” or “iPhone would be a lawless hellhole and a serious security risk” all fall apart when you remember that macOS exists.

You’re right, it’s their choice to pick which APIs to monetise. However, that will come with arguments of “unfairness” and “anti-competitiveness” because of their inconsistent approach to this. As a macOS developer I can write code using the same apis on iOS and release it on macOS free of charge but if I want (literally the same) app to run on iOS I have to pay per user? While already paying a developer program to a apple for “access to all tools” that I need to build my app?

 

[mrochester]

The justifications of “Apple needs to charge this fee because XYZ” or “iPhone would be a lawless hellhole and a serious security risk” all fall apart when you remember that macOS exists.

You’re right, it’s their choice to pick which APIs to monetise. However, that will come with arguments of “unfairness” and “anti-competitiveness” because of their inconsistent approach to this. As a macOS developer I can write code using the same apis on iOS and release it on macOS free of charge but if I want (literally the same) app to run on iOS I have to pay per user? While already paying a developer program to an apple for “access to all tools” that I need to build my app?

Any service or product charged for is by definition ‘unfair‘ and ‘anti-competitive‘. To Apple, the developer gets more value out of iOS, hence the cost is higher than it is for macOS. These are simple, basic market principles at work.

You also have to be careful with enacting price regulations because of a) unfair/unreasonable restraint on trade and b) all prices going up rather than all prices going down. If Apple were forced to charge the same price for use of its APIs then they’d simply start charging a CTF for macOS.

Imagine a world where every product/service created and sold had to be sold at the same price, all of the time, everywhere? No company would be able to compete on price, there’d be no discounts anywhere, thousands of companies would go out of business because they’d no longer be able to incentivise customers to patronise them.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Any service or product charged for is by definition ‘unfair‘ and ‘anti-competitive‘. To Apple, the developer gets more value out of iOS, hence the cost is higher than it is for macOS. These are simple, basic market principles at work.

You also have to be careful with enacting price regulations because of a) unfair/unreasonable restraint on trade and b) all prices going up rather than all prices going down.

I assure you it’s Apple that gets the value out of Developers. Not the other way around

 

[Hails09]

Do these companies expect Apple to be giving away their goods for free? iOS is *not* open-source technology.

What are you talking about
Every developer has to pay a yearly fee to Apple.

 

[mrochester]

I assure you it’s Apple that gets the value out of Developers. Not the other way around

Well the developers get to make iOS apps and sell to iOS users. Without that they wouldn’t be able to reach those iOS users. That’s the value to the developer.

It’s difficult to measure how much better/worse off a company like Spotify would be without an iOS app. We know that Epic lost a lot of money by not having a fortnight iOS app.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Well the developers get to make iOS apps and sell to iOS users. Without that they wouldn’t be able to reach those iOS users. That’s the value to the developer.

It’s difficult to measure how much better/worse off a company like Spotify would be without an iOS app. We know that Epic lost a lot of money by not having a fortnight iOS app.

Okay, but now remove all 3rd party apps and developer fees. How’s apple doing?

 

[mrochester]

Okay, but now remove all 3rd party apps and developer fees. How’s apple doing?

But why would we need to imagine that scenario? Any developer that leaves iOS will very quickly be replaced by another.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

But why would we need to imagine that scenario? Any developer that leaves iOS will very quickly be replaced by another.

To show the value developers bring to the platform. Developers will be less likely to join the platform if apple continues to be so anti-developer.

The consumer suffers.

 

[Jensend]

No I won't because I don't think any other app store will come close to -the- app store.
3%? Who? No one. Time will tell...
Sure integrate PayPal and lose 6%, then get screwed by refunding scam artists. Apple deals will all that too for 15%.

Don't forget, and non-developers often forget this bit, that for every app store you publish on the more over head is created for you.
Not a problem if you are a big company with many minions but it's time consuming for the lone developer like me.
I was coaxed by Amazon into trying their store for a AWS voucher. Is wasn't worth my time in the end.
Not only the setup but integrating a new variant of my Android app to handle Amazon in-app payments.
Play Store is poor in revenue compared to App Store but the Amazon store was a magnitude worse than play.

Not giving away details of my little cash cows on here for others to see, compete with or negatively review if they don't like my comments on here.

There are reasons beyond the cut Apple takes for wanting alternate app stores.
My primary computing devices are a Google Pixel phone, an iPad, a MacBook Pro, and a Windows 11 PC.
When I buy games on Steam, I can play them on my MacBook and my PC. Why can't I do the same with my phone and my tablet? Maybe all four?

Apple won't carry some kinds of apps, including emulators and some adult content, including games that are less explicit than what is allowed on streaming video apps in the App Store. Some countries may have restrictions on apps that Apple would otherwise allow.

 

[wbeasley]

I already told you: it’s not about me. It’s about „developers far more skilled and knowledgeable than I am (i.e. Spotify and Epic).“

👉 I believe it’s right (and Apple should be mandated) for them to be able to offer their apps for installation. Let users download apps straight from the source - as in the developer’s web site. Proven business model that has fostered innovation and competition for decades.


I think they‘d be happy to pay like other devs, such as Amazon for their shopping app, AliExpress, Uber, Doordash, Booking.com, and flight or train booking app.

Yes, let them pay the same as other devs! I fully support them enjoying the same terms and conditions. Without anticompetitive discrimination of certain products or services offered - that Apple has chosen to compete with.

I also support any legislation that mandates Apple have non-discriminatory terms and rules for in-app transactions - to finally let all developers pay the same.

It’s just fair - that’s why there is a Coalition for App Fairness.

Apple taking a cut for in app purchase of skins and upgrades is NO different to buying voucher cards at retail. No different. It’s not discriminatory for Apple to do this.

Other apps that let you buy goods are order fulfillment processes. They don’t change the app in anyway. No skin. No upgrade. A product or service is delivered to you.

 

[wbeasley]

There are reasons beyond the cut Apple takes for wanting alternate app stores.
My primary computing devices are a Google Pixel phone, an iPad, a MacBook Pro, and a Windows 11 PC.
When I buy games on Steam, I can play them on my MacBook and my PC. Why can't I do the same with my phone and my tablet? Maybe all four?

Apple won't carry some kinds of apps, including emulators and some adult content, including games that are less explicit than what is allowed on streaming video apps in the App Store. Some countries may have restrictions on apps that Apple would otherwise allow.

Why can’t you play Steam games on consoles? Because Sony and Nintendo don’t want you to. It’s their device. Their rules. And Apple has the same protection on iOS devices. Computers have always been treated differently. IOS are powerful tools indeed but they were built to perform mobile tasks better.

You have a choice if you want open mobile apps. Android.

 

[mrochester]

To show the value developers bring to the platform. Developers will be less likely to join the platform if apple continues to be so anti-developer.

The consumer suffers.

And the fact that that doesn’t happen suggests that developers do see the value. There’s no point in imagining this hypothetical world in which developers leave the iOS platform en-masse due to them not seeing the value in the platform, because that’s not the reality!

Right now developers get value from iOS, hence there are loads of them, hence they don’t leave the platform, hence more people develop for the platform.

 

[mr.vince]

I don't see any of these companies creating anything from scratch, just trying to opt out of the payment part. They use Apple's frameworks, Xcode, and iOS itself.

So why is there a fee to be in the developer program then? Last time I looked into this it stated that the fee was there to compensate Apple for its expenses in regard to frameworks, Xcode and iOS itself. Guess what, it even applies to developing for the Mac. No need to go through the app store… pay your dev fee and that’s it. Why is this different for iOS, which uses the same dev account with the same basic terms…?

 

[mrochester]

So why is there a fee to be in the developer program then? Last time I looked into this it stated that the fee was there to compensate Apple for its expenses in regard to frameworks, Xcode and iOS itself. Guess what, it even applies to developing for the Mac. No need to go through the app store… pay your dev fee and that’s it. Why is this different for iOS, which uses the same dev account with the same basic terms…?

Because Apple decided it was different?

 

[Jensend]

Why can’t you play Steam games on consoles? Because Sony and Nintendo don’t want you to. It’s their device. Their rules. And Apple has the same protection on iOS devices. Computers have always been treated differently. IOS are powerful tools indeed but they were built to perform mobile tasks better.

You have a choice if you want open mobile apps. Android.

I'm not really a fan of console hardware either. But if there were only two viable competitors in the monitor/TV videogaming space, I might be more open to force them to open up to some degree, but there are six significant options: Nintendo, Xbox, PlayStation, Windows, Mac, Linux. On three of those platforms, developers don't have to get permission to sell their games.

 

[mrochester]

I'm not really a fan of console hardware either. But if there were only two viable competitors in the monitor/TV videogaming space, I might be more open to force them to open up to some degree, but there are six significant options: Nintendo, Xbox, PlayStation, Windows, Mac, Linux. On three of those platforms, developers don't have to get permission to sell their games.

Right, so the solution is more competitors in the market, not the DMA.