Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
👉 When someone feels compelled to resort to ad hominem attacks in online discussions, one should always become suspicious of a lack of compelling arguments.
Here’s a ProTip to avoid looking foolish.

When somebody provides detailed critique of your thinking and then literally likens that “THINKING” to 6th grade economics…

That isn’t an ad hominem.

But I suppose ignoring the detailed critique, and instead flailing and grasping at imaginary logical fallacies is a sign that…

one should always become suspicious of a lack of compelling arguments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
I call this claim bonkers. Please proove it somehow. Apple's R&D is around 7 percent of net sales. That's far less than many other companies like Microsoft, Alphabet, Huawei or Amazon. Samsungs R&D is around the same value (in USD) as Apple's.
Why are you comparing R&D across all endeavors in the company (radically different scope and variety for both), while I specifically compared the software R&D costs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
I think his point is that if Apple is expected to fund the costs of operating the App Store out of hardware profits, what does that mean for android phones who don't have to deal with any said associated costs? Samsung for one doesn't have an ecosystem to maintain; they piggyback mainly off Google's existing one. Are we going to tell Samsung "Hey, since you don't have to invest in maintaining iMessage, maps, Siri, iCloud, satellite calling and since your own App Store is nowhere near the scale of Apple's, you shouldn't be charging your S24 for as much as the latest iPhone?

Do you see how ridiculous these suggestions get when taken to their logical conclusion?
Close. But there’s an important distinction.

Apple’s costs of operating the AppStore are a small fraction of their costs each year in introducing HUGE new features for app developers to use.

More importantly, they are different teams.

Apple can’t really cut AppStore operating/maintenance costs because apps would stop working as well as they do now.

But Apple could very easily cut a TON of app improvement R&D and apps and the store would continue functioning exactly as they do now. The only effect would be that super rapid pace of app improvement would slow.

That distinction is very, very important.

I don’t think people who don’t follow the WWDC Developer State of the Union updates each year truly understand just how much time Apple spends making developer’s apps better and easier to develop.



Like just a couple years ago Apple introduced a huge new Async/Await feature that makes it LUDICROUSLY easy for any developer to write solid and robust multithreaded code. This turned something that was extremely complex and heinously difficult to get right for everybody except the top 2-3% of software engineers (oh the top 10% or so can get pretty close, but the hard to reproduce gremlins will turn you crap white), into something accessible for pretty much every dev, even beginner hobbyists.

You can drop this in with just a handful of hours for a simple app and it will make the app faster with fewer bugs (incredibly hard to reproduce bugs), so much easier for devs and a better experience.

It used to take tons more code of a very non-linear logic. A ton of expertise to get the patterns right.

This is a feature that Apple isn’t the first to implement (others, getting their funding from their own sources, have done this before). But the implementation Apple made took an insane amount of effort and is truly wonderful to use (well documented with dozens of hours of instructional dev-to-dev videos etc.

This was just one of the major new features Apple introduced THAT YEAR. Each year they continue to provide major under the hood improvements and developer conveniences beyond anything hinted at for the features seen in the WWDC Keynote.

Again this is something invisible to folks who don’t watch and follow the State of the Union (then the hundred hours of training sessions all week). This Dev SOTU is the ‘developer keynote’ which happens right after the main Keynote.

Let me tell you it’s like Christmas. Before I became a dev, it was the Keynote that excited me most about WWDC, now Christmas morning excitement peaks when the Keynote ends and the Dev SOTU is about to start. Because every year Apple gives us TONS of cool new gifts.



All this work is NOT something that other hardware-only vendors spend money on and have to finance out of their hardware margins.

That work has to have justifiable revenue, otherwise it would be cut.

Any failure to understand that need for justification of expenditures is absolutely naive of how business works.

Yes of course that work ultimately sells more phones due to a better experience (for Apple and Google), but talking about how much secondary value there is from this work and arguing that that ‘should’ be enough for such profitable companies is absurd on many levels.

Not the least of which is that it reduces down to the facile argument that “profitable companies should make less profit, but still employ just as many people and do just as much cool work.”
 
Last edited:
MrTemple said, that Apple has exceptionally high R&D costs to recoup, and that therefore lower income from the services division would lead to cost cuts that would affect users and developers of Apple products. I don't buy this claim, because Apple's R&D costs are not very high if you put them into perspecitve.

No! Not services. Not at all that’s a completely separate team doing COMPLETELY different work from what I’m talking about, and what Apple charges for.

Services expenses are essential to keep the same experience.

I’m talking about the enormous teams making features for app developers. See my above post for more details.

So many of you lump these costs and charges together without realizing it’s like lumping retail Genius Bar expenses in with server farm cooling expenses. Just COMPLETELY different costs, benefits and teams doing the work.

These costs happen to be vertically integrated in Apple/Google (not Samsung et al), but still need to be justifiably profitable or they will be cut to make higher profit margins.

This is business 101 here.

I think this lack of understanding explains so much in these discussions.

99% of people here don’t understand these two facts:

1. There’s a massive team at Apple doing this work that pretty much only ends up inside the apps of third party developers. (Different from iOS feature updates seen in the Keynote.)

2. This work could be completely cut TODAY without apps or the developer experience ever getting worse (just apps never getting better which they CONSTANTLY are whether you can notice it or not).


I’d love to see some people arguing here really look at those two points. And as a thought experiment, assume they are true, then analyze their own thoughts under this ‘new’ information.
 
Last edited:
1. There’s a massive team at Apple doing this work that pretty much only ends up inside the apps of third party developers. (Different from iOS feature updates seen in the Keynote.)

2. This work could be completely cut TODAY without apps or the developer experience ever getting worse (just apps never getting better which they CONSTANTLY are whether you can notice it or not).
You're impressed by the libraries and the SDK that Apple provides to make your apps. But isn't that something that Android and any other OS have to provide too? It's technically required for any app to work in my understanding. Heck, even open source and libre operating systems based on Linux have them. I don't think that alone justifies Apple's tight grip on the App Store.

If they think their tools are so valuable to developers, then they should just charge directly for them. Problem solved.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: wbeasley
You're impressed by the libraries and the SDK that Apple provides to make your apps. But isn't that something that Android and any other OS have to provide too? It's technically required for any app to work in my understanding. Heck, even open source and libre operating systems based on Linux have them. I don't think that alone justifies Apple's tight grip on the App Store.

No. Wrong. Bad assumption.

A fundamental part of the OS is needed for apps to install and open as a ‘white box’.

But that is OLD functionality of the OS and maintaining that as iOS changes is a TINY portion of the ongoing work.

This isn’t “can the app function without this” code and APIs.

This is “can a developer save literal years, usually decades of work with these convenience APIs”.

The depth and breadth of this lightyears beyond the open-source efforts you mention (which themselves take an insane amount of volunteer time to create).

Look up the new features announced each year at the WWDC Developer State of the Union presentation. For a developer this is FAR more exciting than the WWDC Keynote. It’s like Christmas where our jobs and our apps get better for an insanely minimal amount of work. (See above for one example of this with the enormously complex and costly feature Apple provided, async/await, itself only part of the features provided that year.)

This is Apple’s shared-effort part of their shared-effort, shared success model.

There is a stupidly huge team of devs who’s only job these past 15 or so years has been to make devs lives easier and help them make better apps.

This is WAY BEYOND what is required to let that dev run a fully custom app in the App Store.

Every single one of your favourite apps relies on MOUNTAINS of Apple code (beyond what is necessary to install and run!) to save the developer honestly impossible amounts of work to achieve near the same quality of app.

Any developer can strip out that non-necessary code and roll their own solutions (netcode, crypto, file management interfacing with the file system, state management, settings management, internationalization, accessibility, device size/rotation adaptability, dark mode, battery saver, network saver, rendering, animation, etc, etc. The list can go on another 10 pages) .

After 10x the development time, they would have an app with not even 1/10th the expected functionality of a good app, and users would certainly not pay near as much for it.

if this is news to you, which it seems to be for many of you any, perhaps it’s time to reexamine your thoughts on this issue.


If they think their tools are so valuable to developers, then they should just charge directly for them. Problem solved.

That model would be poison for the ecosystem. It would not be viable.

(Through they are now offering this sort of model as an opt-in in Europe. But shocker… it’s still gonna cost devs a lot of money if they make a lot of money off it!)

Who are you to say HOW a company gets to realize revenue for its work product?

Honestly do you think your proposed business strategies are well considered (on your first day learning a bit more about the business you know little about and had a lot of incorrect assumptions)?

What is your motivation trying to find a THIRD way for Apple/Google to monetize all that effort?

I suggest to you that the sense of injustice at Apple/Googles cut (a fraction of the cut many businesses take for even less contribution to the final product) is based on insufficient and incorrect information. And it feels like your attempts to find SOME way for this model to be NOT OK, has more to do with a sense of inelastic thinking than with any sort of rational business sense or even sense of true fairness.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
if this is news to you, which it seems to be for many of you any, perhaps it’s time to reexamine your thoughts on this issue.
That developing is a good experience on Apple's platforms is a nice thing. And I'm sure it contributes to their success. I just don't get why they would decrease this effort just because they can't monetise the app store the way they intended. It's still vital for Apple to attract developers to make the iPhone a great product.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: wbeasley
That developing is a good experience on Apple's platforms is a nice thing. And I'm sure it contributes to their success. I just don't get why they would decrease this effort just because they can't monetise the app store the way they intended. It's still vital for Apple to attract developers to make the iPhone a great product.

Okay, can you step back for one second and notice how telling this bolded section is?

You don't get why a business would scale effort back to meet a new profitability equilibrium when revenue is massively cut.

Certainly there would still be knock-on effects for hardware sales. More than there is now? No. So you're massively cutting revenue. You then have to look at how much the knock-on benefit would drop if you cut this 'nice to have' development in half. Or even by 90%.

(And cutting this revenue will have another knock-on effect. Apps would not be as good. Or they'd have to charge the little players who can get all this for free if they don't charge money. That would raise prices of almost every app you own and would wipe out every single 'garage hobbyist' app developer, killingl the ecosystem that Apple/Google have built. An ecosystem you may not appreciate is unique and never existed before mobile apps, people just didn't pay for software, and software has NEVER been as easy and accessible to develop. You truly cannot comprehend how much harder it was to make a simple app 15 years ago than it is now. The level of expertise needed was off the charts compared to now. And that's just to make a crappy app from 15y ago!!)

Remember these are costs (and revenue!) that Samsung et al have basically none of (they spend a tiny fraction of the phone software R&D money that Apple/Google spends).

Google and Apple are CONSTANTLY doing this profitability equilibrium math. They are constantly growing and shrinking these teams. In a company 1/10,000th the size of Google/Apple you have to do this math on EVERY dollar spent.

This is Business 101, my friend.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
You don't get why a business would scale effort back to meet a new profitability equilibrium when revenue is massively cut.
The services revenue category is relatively new. Was the Apple plaform bad to develop for before the App Store existed? I have been observing them for a long time, and they always took great pride in their SDKs for developers.

I'm questioning the causality between services revenue and SDK quality. That's all.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: wbeasley
The services revenue category is relatively new. Was the Apple plaform bad to develop for before the App Store existed? I have been observing them for a long time, and they always took great pride in their SDKs for developers.

I'm questioning the causality between services revenue and SDK quality. That's all.
Woah, woah, whoah! This has absoultely nothing to do with services. That is a completely different part of apple software development, different teams, different silo, and has absolutely nothing to do with what's being discussed here.

I'd wager my eye teeth that the R&D expenses for services are 100% funded by the services revenue as well, with none of the percentage fee of apps going into that budget at all.

Apple is vertically integrated, but again EVERY dollar spent has to have a justification from MORE than a dollar in revenue (if not immediate, then relatively near-term).
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
Was the Apple plaform bad to develop for before the App Store existed?

Oh my god, yes!!

Even 5y into the app store it was terrible (compared to today). It was in many ways better/easier than other platforms at the time, but in many other ways worse/harder.

It required MINDBOGGLING more expertise and time to develop a crappy app from 15y ago that did 1/10th as many of the features you probably don't even realize all apps do (like behave properly when backgrounded, store your data to pick up where you left off, and truly 87 other things you probably don't see).

Because all those convenience apis didn't really exist yet. They were just realizing revenue from apps to start paying for these features (which many take several years to develop).

Honestly look up how a programmer has to deal with something as trivial as dates. Say, find a date 6 days from another date.

You think that's as easy as adding 6*24*60*60 seconds to the first timestamp? Oh poor child no. No, no, no.

Look into the complexity of dates and calendars and it will turn your crap white. It used to be absurdly difficult to do it well. (For ONE locale! Look into the differences between locales and your white crap will scuttle under the bed and cry.)

If you needed to have consistent date manipulation it was a nightmare. It took absurd amounts of research and a ton of coding to do the simplest thing (say make this appointment repeating every Wed at 5pm, THAT is far more difficult than you can imagine, it goes well beyond simply checking for leap days, especially if you want it to be robust).

Apple recently gave us a convenience api that makes NONE of that knowledge or expertise necessary. It took a ton of their time, but now we just say, essentially 'give me a date one week from this date' or '1pm on the second weekday of the month 6mo from now for the user's current calendar locale'. I cannot stress how difficult that would be to do properly with custom code (you would almost certainly drop in a library built by somebody else's volunteer work, which probably would be full of bugs, possibly be insecure, likely have little or no documentation, or worse, wrong documentation, wouldn't have the same locale abilities, and perhaps would only have a non-commercial license. Actually you'd have to spend quite a few hours determinign which of 5 different public libraries might have the right balance of those trade-offs. Honestly this process of finding and using third party frameworks is FRAUGHT.). Like I said... 👻💩

Aside, don't take my word for it, check out what Paul Hudson from HackingWithSwift has to say:

You see, working with dates is hard. Like, really hard – way harder than you think. Way harder than I think, and I’ve been working with dates for years.

(And if you're interested in learning Swift and building an app, believe me it's the PERFECT time for it, because Apple has made it so incredibly easy. And Paul's Hacking With Swift is a wonderful place to start, even if you couldn't tell the difference between a Double and an Int, and have never done any programming in your life. Check out his "Unwrap" app which is a fun teaching tool for many of the very earliest programming concepts. If you find it fun, which you might!, his 100 Days of Swift course will get you building an app that actually does something within a few hours. It truly is miraculously more easy now!)

Back on topic...

Now the calendar convenciences were to be fair a relatively tiny amount of effort for apple. Probably not much more than 1,000 dev hours to design, implement, unit test, document, and prepare WWDC presentations for. So, likely this TEENY feature cost Apple no more than half a developer year, say in the ballpark of $50k (though probably that's low, because a large part of the design and architecture of even such a simple feature would be done by a very senior architect who makes a WHOLE lot more than $100k a year).

But hoo baby, does it save so much grief from app developers. So much so, that we all quit using our own brittle logic or external frameworks and just use Calendar.current to add/modify/construct dates and date components.

And most importantly this is nowhere near required to make an app work well in the AppStore. This is an invisible convenience that makes developers lives TONS easier and very slightly improves quality of apps.

And EVERY YEAR Apple puts many convenience features like this that probably have 10-20x that amount of effort. Usually one or two a year which have 100-200x that effort (like Async/Await).

If you don't believe this. If you don't get some inkling of the sheer scope of this work. I encourage you to watch some WWDC videos from the past year. Come back here and report at exactly 3pm on the second weekday of next month as measured in Manila. 🤣
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: wbeasley
Oh my god, yes!!

Even 5y into the app store it was terrible (compared to today). It was in many ways better/easier than other platforms at the time, but in many other ways worse/harder.

It required MINDBOGGLING more expertise and time to develop a crappy app from 15y ago that did 1/10th as many of the features you probably don't even realize all apps do (like behave properly when backgrounded, store your data to pick up where you left off, and truly 87 other things you probably don't see).

Because all those convenience apis didn't really exist yet. They were just realizing revenue from apps to start paying for these features (which many take several years to develop).

Honestly look up how a programmer has to deal with something as trivial as dates. Say, find a date 6 days from another date.

You think that's as easy as adding 6*24*60*60 seconds to the first timestamp? Oh poor child no. No, no, no.

Look into the complexity of dates and calendars and it will turn your crap white. It used to be absurdly difficult to do it well. (For ONE locale! Look into the differences between locales and your white crap will scuttle under the bed and cry.)

If you needed to have consistent date manipulation it was a nightmare. It took absurd amounts of research and a ton of coding to do the simplest thing (say make this appointment repeating every Wed at 5pm, THAT is far more difficult than you can imagine, it goes well beyond simply checking for leap days, especially if you want it to be robust).

Apple recently gave us a convenience api that makes NONE of that knowledge or expertise necessary. It took a ton of their time, but now we just say, essentially 'give me a date one week from this date' or '1pm on the second weekday of the month 6mo from now for the user's current calendar locale'. I cannot stress how difficult that would be to do properly with custom code (you would almost certainly drop in a library built by somebody else's volunteer work, which probably would be full of bugs, possibly be insecure, likely have little or no documentation, or worse, wrong documentation, wouldn't have the same locale abilities, and perhaps would only have a non-commercial license. Actually you'd have to spend quite a few hours determinign which of 5 different public libraries might have the right balance of those trade-offs. Honestly this process of finding and using third party frameworks is FRAUGHT.). Like I said... 👻💩

Aside, don't take my word for it, check out what Paul Hudson from HackingWithSwift has to say:



(And if you're interested in learning Swift and building an app, believe me it's the PERFECT time for it, because Apple has made it so incredibly easy. And Paul's Hacking With Swift is a wonderful place to start, even if you couldn't tell the difference between a Double and an Int, and have never done any programming in your life. Check out his "Unwrap" app which is a fun teaching tool for many of the very earliest programming concepts. If you find it fun, which you might!, his 100 Days of Swift course will get you building an app that actually does something within a few hours. It truly is miraculously more easy now!)

Back on topic...

Now the calendar convenciences were to be fair a relatively tiny amount of effort for apple. Probably not much more than 1,000 dev hours to design, implement, unit test, document, and prepare WWDC presentations for. So, likely this TEENY feature cost Apple no more than half a developer year, say in the ballpark of $50k (though probably that's low, because a large part of the design and architecture of even such a simple feature would be done by a very senior architect who makes a WHOLE lot more than $100k a year).

But hoo baby, does it save so much grief from app developers. So much so, that we all quit using our own brittle logic or external frameworks and just use Calendar.current to add/modify/construct dates and date components.

And most importantly this is nowhere near required to make an app work well in the AppStore. This is an invisible convenience that makes developers lives TONS easier and very slightly improves quality of apps.

And EVERY YEAR Apple puts many convenience features like this that probably have 10-20x that amount of effort. Usually one or two a year which have 100-200x that effort (like Async/Await).

If you don't believe this. If you don't get some inkling of the sheer scope of this work. I encourage you to watch some WWDC videos from the past year. Come back here and report at exactly 3pm on the second weekday of next month as measured in Manila. 🤣
The thing is, iOS APIs sell hardware, If the software developers suffer then Apple will suffer hardware sales.

And there are other SDKs that can build iOS apps if you let them.

If this is a hard thing for Apple then they need to earn the revenue from the developers by offering value equivalent to 15-30% of their revenue. If they can’t do that then developers will leave to better options. And if Apple is unwilling to invest in the functionality of the OS then it will lead to customer leaving alongside the developers.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.