Developers decide how much their apps or IAPs cost at the App Store. They can freely set their margins.
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 Sides With Epic Games in Battle Against Apple's App Store Fees
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Developers decide how much their apps or IAPs cost at the App Store. They can freely set their margins.
this is ****ing petty 7th grade drama. you don't wanna have your money taken? don't sell on the platform then. suck it up buttercup.
I'm sure Ma Bell tried that kind of argument before the breakup in the early 1980s. "If you don't like us, then start your own phone company, run your own phone lines, sell your own phones, and convince all your friends/family to use it."
It's ridiculous that Apple only allows users to install apps via their own app store. That's the definition of a monopoly. If a developer wants any shot of being profitable, especially in the US, they have to target iOS. They can't simply not target the platform or create their own.
Jesus, can we quit with this nonsense about Apple being liable if someone downloads a crappy app from a non-App Store source? Is there any case law to reflect that?
Besides, security through obscurity isn't security at all. If Apple is relying on app review — even in part — to prevent security incidents on iOS, that says a lot more about the quality of Apple's software than those seeking to exploit it (for good or bad).
This incident alone shows how insanely easy it is to sneak something past app review, and they should be glad that it was something as relatively harmless as enabling another payment option. There's little reason that far worse couldn't be accomplished the same way Epic did what they did.
While I find the production value of the '1984' punk, and the entire orchestrated PR stunt, pretty well executed, I can't help but wonder the effect it will yield. Has this now ensured Epic Games will never be on an Apple platform again? Do they care? Does anyone?
Would you like to be able to buy from just one grocery store? To study in the only university with the only careers they offer? Would you like to watch the tv stations the only cable operator allow?
You lack of awareness and experience big time. If you give the control to just one entity, that entity will eliminate competitors with better proposals/ innovation.
Again... you went to the university, you paid your university and now the university (based on your mentality) can come and charge you from te money you are making in your career because "they created the ecosystem".
That’s rich of Spotify considering for years artists complained Spotify was ripping them off.
Match Group has also joined Epic’s side. Again, hypocrisy. Match Group’s dating apps have been widely accused of using fake accounts, inauthentic traffic and fake personal messages to lure lonely people into paying for subscriptions and higher access.
Match Group has also joined Epic’s side. Again, hypocrisy. Match Group’s dating apps have been widely accused of using fake accounts, inauthentic traffic and fake personal messages to lure lonely people into paying for subscriptions and higher access.
Again.....so many people still hold that nonsense claim of “if you dont like it then go”. A complete and total customer mindset thinking, which doesn’t lineup with how business operates at all.
I’m gonna grab a popcorn and sit down watching this drama unfold. There is no absolute right or wrong here. If things changed, ok. If not, then suck it. When will developers charge 30% more on iOS than on android to pass THAT to customers? Oh wait, what would happen if DEVELOPERS did pass the 30% cut to customers in the first day App Store was created? How about that idea? I think it is great to FORCE customers to decide which platform they want to go.
I’m gonna grab a popcorn and sit down watching this drama unfold. There is no absolute right or wrong here. If things changed, ok. If not, then suck it. When will developers charge 30% more on iOS than on android to pass THAT to customers? Oh wait, what would happen if DEVELOPERS did pass the 30% cut to customers in the first day App Store was created? How about that idea? I think it is great to FORCE customers to decide which platform they want to go.
Unless you're competing with an existing service, at which point your realistic options are to price yourself at the same price as or cheaper than any competitors. This is where the 15/30% cut becomes an issue for apps like Spotify because IAP forces them to either accept the revenue cut (which may cause them to go below their breakeven price or cut features to avoid losing money) or price themselves over a competitor — in this case, this would include Apple's own Apple Music which doesn't face this revenue cut at all — which will push people to the competition.
Idiotic? Grow up.
You are portably not aware that if an Apple customer is harmed by an application used on an iPhone, and that customer retains an attorney to seek compensation for negligence, any good attorney will go after both the app creator and Apple (having the deepest pockets).
Literally no-one cares that you're in love with Apple
The longer this goes on, and especially if Epic can get any fellow giant companies to join them, Apple's going to start alienating more and more customers. In the case of Epic/Fortnite, this includes a historically significant demographic to Apple: kids through young adults.
Long term, Apple needs Epic more than Epic needs Apple.
Apple doesn't charge a developer (or customer) anything if they decide to leave the App Store. Just like I'm not paying anything to the university after leaving it. If I decide to stay in a university, of course I'll pay the university's fees. Universities don't let people dwell in their dorms and take advantage of their education system for free. Why should Apple?
You play by the university's rules as long as you are there and use their services.
Last edited:
With some of the insane examples I’ve read here, I’m fascinated how you chose mine to debate. ‘Consider’ was the first, and key, word of my scenario. I wasn’t looking for an ego stroke of being ”right”. I use an iPhone because of its user ecosystem, not in spite of it. And that is what is at the heart of this entire war of the worlds.
Here is how buying a Zelda game might work:
If you buy a game at GameStop, they take 30%. If you buy a game on Amazon, they take 30%. If you buy a game through the Nintendo eShop, they take 30%.
You cannot buy or play said game on Xbox or Playstation at any of those stores.
How is Apple the anomaly?
People have been saying things like that since Snow Leopard, still hasn’t happened. Why would Apple Silicon Mac change that?
The fact is, there are ways around the App Store requirement without actively and explicitly breaking the rules. For example, Epic Games can set it up so that the only way to buy V-Bucks is on the desktop, but the VBucks is tied to your account so you have access to it on any device. Tons of companies do this already - they don't advertise their premium version on the iOS app but their customers know that if they want premium they can purchase it on desktop.
Unfortunately, what incentive is there to brainstorm and find a working solution when you can run crying to Big Brother the Government and expect help because you rile up the public with incendiary and provocative words like "monopoly" and "stifling the competition". The courts are supposed to be impartial but we all know they respond to public sentiments, so any decision coming out of this isn't justice but more like a PR exercise. Playing victim is what these companies are masters at. Too bad we all know that they wouldn't hesitate to do the exact same thing Apple is doing if the positions were switched.
Unfortunately, what incentive is there to brainstorm and find a working solution when you can run crying to Big Brother the Government and expect help because you rile up the public with incendiary and provocative words like "monopoly" and "stifling the competition". The courts are supposed to be impartial but we all know they respond to public sentiments, so any decision coming out of this isn't justice but more like a PR exercise. Playing victim is what these companies are masters at. Too bad we all know that they wouldn't hesitate to do the exact same thing Apple is doing if the positions were switched.
The fact is, there are ways around the App Store requirement without actively and explicitly breaking the rules. For example, Epic Games can set it up so that the only way to buy V-Bucks is on the desktop, but the VBucks is tied to your account so you have access to it on any device. Tons of companies do this already - they don't advertise their premium version on the iOS app but their customers know that if they want premium they can purchase it on desktop.
Unfortunately, what incentive is there to brainstorm and find a working solution when you can run crying to Big Brother the Government and expect help because you rile up the public with incendiary and provocative words like "monopoly" and "stifling the competition". The courts are supposed to be impartial but we all know they respond to public sentiments, so any decision coming out of this isn't justice but more like a PR exercise. Playing victim is what these companies are masters at. Too bad we all know that they wouldn't hesitate to do the exact same thing Apple is doing if the positions were switched.
Unfortunately, what incentive is there to brainstorm and find a working solution when you can run crying to Big Brother the Government and expect help because you rile up the public with incendiary and provocative words like "monopoly" and "stifling the competition". The courts are supposed to be impartial but we all know they respond to public sentiments, so any decision coming out of this isn't justice but more like a PR exercise. Playing victim is what these companies are masters at. Too bad we all know that they wouldn't hesitate to do the exact same thing Apple is doing if the positions were switched.
Because they introduces multiple security measures in Mojave and Catalina to discourage people from downloading random apps from online sources outside of Mac App Store and run those random apps without much hiccups?
Anyway, this is kinda off topic here.
Your first example breaks down because it's retail vs digital retail. 30% is justfiable because GameStop need to pay rent to the mall, salaries to it's employees, etc. So it covers their costs and they get to make a little profit too. Amazon also has similar costs shipping a physical product. (Wharehousing, shipping costs etc)
In your last example, Nintendo is in the same boat as Apple here and have been criticized for their profit gouging too.
If you want a more fair digital market, you should compare to Humble Bundle or Steam, not exorbitant rent seekers.