Apple should be "permitted to monetize" exactly as they do with macOS. I don't think they sell macs at a loss, do they?
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.
Spotify, Epic Games, and Others Argue Apple's App Store Changes Do Not Comply With DMA
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This would be valid if it wasn’t for the fact the Mac was, at one point, the most important product for Apple.
Literally the only reason they get away with this on iOS is because it hasn’t been challenged
The EU isn’t trying to regulate commissions and they already spent multiple years looking at iOS.
So this means then that MS should be required to raise the prices of their Xbox consoles, and stop collecting licensing fees for games as well? They should be forced to monetize the Xbox the same way they monetize the Surface line?
I am getting it here.
Regulation - 2022/1925 - EN - EUR-Lex
So a literal reading suggests that Apple is under no obligation to offer both. I initially thought that Apple would go with sideloading + 27% cut, but looking at their current proposed implementation, an App Store with a higher barrier to entry and a core tech fee works too in terms of dissuading developers from leaving the App Store.
I love your posts, and many of your takes a quite humorous. I say that to let you know I don't think you comment haphazardly. However, in this case while I am sure you have a good reason for making the comment, I don't think I agree. Apple should be making choices that are best for their business. If that decision would "foster a lot of nice open-source implementations" then great. If not, great. They don't "owe" anyone anything. They build the better mousetrap, people came. Now people are complaining that it's Apple's mousetrap. So at the beginning it was good and great and everyone was happy. And now that is no longer the case. Apple is still a business taking actions it thinks are in the interest of it being successful.
Tangent: Now that time has passed and the revolution Apple started and everyone happily went along with is now the status quo, the MASSIVE corporations want the rules to change because they deem it "unfair". I wonder how many people who want many of these changes forced onto Apple realize that the number one push for this is by massive companies who are trying to make additional billions in profit and has nothing to do with the average or even above average developer.
You are misrepresenting the quote. If you are doing it to be funny, cool
Otherwise, it is an unfair restatement of the situation, one which you are picking random associations to make a point that doesn't correlate and just makes yours seem valid.
Show me Fortnite running on an iPhone without Apple’s developer tools, frameworks, runtime or the iPhone hardware.
That’s what “from scratch” means.
Thanks for your kind words, I appreciate it.
I believe that companies have a responsibility towards society and towards their users and customers. It’s necessary to call out behavior of companies that goes against the interests of their users, or against a fair market, etc. Whether those who call it out are also big companies with possibly questionable behavior is immaterial to whether the complaints as such are valid.
I guess this is all I’m going to say about that in this thread.
Apple App Store hosts that free calculator for free. Just submit it there. 0 cost.
Almost all who are complaining about technology fee want to release high distribution commercial apps and optimize their gross margins.
(Notable exception to this are free apps whose contents for some specific reason would not qualify for Apple App Store. Those are rare exceptions.)
Show me what Apple has created from scratch then.
iOS or iPhones certainly aren't eligible answers going by that definition, since Apple clearly did not create them "from scratch"- With their Mach-derived kernel and BSD userland components running on an ARM instruction set SoC, I don't see Apple having created them from scratch.
You have a good point there.
If I would be Apple, I would end the annual developer membership fee and replace that with separate review service fees. Or at least rebrand that as "app review serview fee" or something along those lines. This would take the silly "I already paid for all the tools" argument away.
The fact of the matter is that ecosystem business models do not usually price value add based on COGS of the related products, but treat the ecosystem as a whole: some services are free or underpriced to feed the moneymaker part of the ecosystem. In Apple's case, free apps are distributed for free due to them increasing value of the App Store, dev subscription is there to set a bar that protects Apple review team's time, and money is made in large volume apps. This is normal.
Get away with it? You act like running a business is a crime that must be punished at every turn.
AS an EU consumer I don't give a **** about what these mega corps want, but I support Epic et all because a more open app market eco system might benefit me as a consumer down the line
What's the compiled IP in this case? Because as it exists, xcode uses an open source C compiler to turn Swift (an open source language) into an IPA file that can be run on an iOS device, and the only really secret apple sauce is the code signing (which aside from a key, is also all open source). If I could, I wouldn't use xcode at all. It's one of the worst IDEs I've used, and bugs out on me on a daily basis.
it is not. its a tablet, computing device. by definition. We don't call PC's a mainframe. They both compute.
Servers tend not to be laptops. Everything is in a category. We define them. There is a reason you don't have rows and racks of watches powering data centers. And you're not wearing a 2U rack server on your wrist. You don't go home and use a Cray super computer to use a web browser or play video games.
Apple wants to blur the lines between what is a computer and what is a tablet. As they can do many of the same things. But, there is a reason we have full blown towers. You can't do everything on a tablet.
If you want to sell your app on the app store. You can develop for yourself or company and not be on the store.
Again, you can. You don't have to. You also don't pay anything if your app is free.
if it is using core tech that is Apple's IP. Why would they not be entitled to a fee?
If they are not, let's say. Then the $99 a year fee will become a sliding scale. $99 for those that don't sell anything. Just free apps on any store. Then up as any developer sells a product.
They are going to charge no matter what.
Never say never. You are assuming that nothing will come close to the App store based on the current situation. However, things might change. If Apple does not change its behavior and some other store is developer friendly, then things could change.
You and a few others are forgetting Apple's "core technology fee" in that dream boat 3%.
Sounds great doesn't it, 3% instead of 15%?
Did you take into consideration the $0.50 per app installation levy from Apple for non-App Store app installs?
The most common business model is "freemium", try the light version before you buy or buy "stuff" in-app.
15% is a bargain. Hell 30% will seem like a walk in the meadows compared to $0.50 per app installed.
Do you now how many app install convert to paying users even in Apps that convert in the top 10%?
Never said they did. This isn’t an “all sides” situation. Apple is as within their rights to charge for access to their tools as others are to offer access to theirs for free.Show me what Apple has created from scratch then.
If a developer doesn’t like it, they’re welcome not to develop for Apple platforms.