nope, this has always been the case. the only thing they relaxed was the fact that you can charge more IAP vs outside of IAP. this used to be not the case and Apple used to require same prices.
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 Subscribers No Longer Allowed to Pay Through App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
nope, this has always been the case. the only thing they relaxed was the fact that you can charge more IAP vs outside of IAP. this used to be not the case and Apple used to require same prices.
Suddenly it's "mutual benefit" but you said earlier "3rd party apps are what made Apple's platform big in the first place."
3rd party apps AND Apple are what made Apple's platform big. Both deserve credit which negates your earlier argument and thanks for agreeing that @sw1tcher's argument about Apple freeloading is not true.
Have a good one. 👋
Except this is how it's operated with all major video game consoles since the 80's. Nintendo/Sega/Sony/Microsoft built consoles + the ecosystems and developers pay a cut to the platform owners for having access to a major customer base to sell their games.
Was it in general or only for eBooks? I know they got in trouble with the antitrust for their "lowest price" clause for eBooks but I don't recall that clause outside of eBooks sales.
Why is everyone so surprised/angry at two companies whose main goals are to reduce costs and increase revenue for themselves? This is what companies do. They aren’t in business to provide a service and not make as much money as possible.
Pick which one you like and support and go with it. No need for everyone to be so angry about it. I know this is the internet and that’s what people do, but find something actually important to be upset about instead of this… if you like Spotify, support it. If you like Apple, support them. It’s capitalism 101.
Pick which one you like and support and go with it. No need for everyone to be so angry about it. I know this is the internet and that’s what people do, but find something actually important to be upset about instead of this… if you like Spotify, support it. If you like Apple, support them. It’s capitalism 101.
these consoles are basically loss leaders which makes it a bit different. the relationship between developers and sony/nintendo/ms feel a bit more symbiotic as well, the console owners do a lot of promotion and marketing for devs.
capitalism doesnt mean we let companies use anticompetitive practices and hurt the free market. for example apple music vs spotify, apple doesnt need to pay the big 30% cut, or spotify isnt able to list their own payment plan within the app. its a huge advantage so basically we are just destined to have the platform owners winning all the primary apps by vritue of vertically integrated services. and i love vertical integration in general, its fine, but itd be nice if they fought a more fairer fight
Does Apple now make $0 on Spotify? Honest question: the company gets no revenue from Spotify for the dev tools and bandwidth?
Nintendo Switch was profitable since day 1 so does this mean developers shouldn't pay the cut?
"Nintendo designed the Switch so it made a profit at the beginning of its lifespan."
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/7918...t-the-nintendo-switch-certainly-is/index.html
Apple has put Spotify on front page of the App Store many times which has 500m *unique* visitors a week. That's more promotion than what console owners can do.
Triple A titles require studios to buy thousand dollar dev kits from console owners (loaner which needs to be returned). Apple requires you to buy a $599 Mac mini to develop (one you can keep and sell). Apple will distribute your app for free and you can sell your subscription outside the app store. Talk about symbiotic.
Your argument isn't quite holding up.
Spotify still needs membership to the developer program, which means Apple gets $99/year for that. That fee covers for the access to the dev tools, documentation, support and the app distribution on Apple's App Store.
Apple will not receive any additional money from Spotify's subscriptions as soon as all subscriptions will be made on Spotify directly instead of through Apple.
Of course indirectly, having Spotify available on iOS does bring additional revenue to Apple as it makes their devices more attractive to some buyers.
So by that logic as I find all of my apps on the web, through review sites, blogs etc I should be able to give them the "finders fee" as you put it, not Apple. I actually like that.
That's obvious. That's why there are many various streaming services. I just pointed out how it will be hard to convert Spotify users to Apple Music. I commented on one of the best features of Spotify while also highlighting a major con of Apple Music. I don't even use either, I have a Deezer subscription.
if courts
if Apple allows side loading apps then iOS app store would look exactly like MacOS App store, with bunch of fake apps.
If people want to side load apps then they can go buy android phones.
and app developers want option to side load apps then why are they complaining about Google App store policies ?
if Apple allows side loading apps then iOS app store would look exactly like MacOS App store, with bunch of fake apps.
If people want to side load apps then they can go buy android phones.
wow I can make a strawman argument like you: "but by that logic, if I tell people about XYZ app I use on Twitter, I should get a 30% cut for every sale!"
🤦♂️
i'm sure me typing up a tweet and writing a blog/review for ad money are the exact same thing as spending billions on designing a new device, paying thousands of engineers for the past decade to develop API/tools/software, hiring several hundred reviewers to review every single app, paying millions per month in data center costs around the world, and etc...
No, if people want to side-load apps they should be able to and it becomes their choice, their responsibility. For everyone else stick to the app store.
This statement of go buy android phones is a nonsense one.
You mean like initially arguing developers didn't know about getting users to sign up outside of IAP and then changing the argument to be about what's best for users or UX as a whole? Yeah...don't worry about that.
Last edited by a moderator:
with gaming you have many outlets to make money, steam, mobile, consoles, vr, roblox. noones losing 50% of the market by shutting out nintendo. theres competition there. but if you are an mobile app developer in USA, you are basically beholden to 30% of cut on apple and google play. its highway robbery. I will point towards Steve Jobs when he first created the app store, he said the goal was to break even, because its purpose was to sell the iPhone itself. They asked for 30% to cover payment processing but also the file hosting fees and manual review labor, the latter 2 were quite different in 2007.
When Fortnite was on iOS, they sold their currency outside of Apple (Target/Best Buy/Walmart/Amazon/Epic's Website/etc...). They were not beholden to 30% cut to Apple and Google. Same goes for Roblox. I can buy Roblox currency right now from Target or from Roblox directly and use it in iOS. Apple will not get 30% of that.
I don't recall Steve Jobs ever saying they wanted to break even. The closest quote is: "we don't expect this to be a big profit generator". Perhaps I missed an interview/Apple event where he said this, but I don't remember this at all. But even if he did really say this, Steve was wrong about using webapps as the only way to have third party apps initially on the iPhone.
And speaking of "when he first created the app store", Apple has only lowered their cut from the 30% and have relaxed their rules. They've never increased it or made the rules more strict.
Last edited:
Umm, market cap does not equal monopoly and has NOTHING to do with it. Market share is what makes a company a monopoly or not. furthermore, being a monopoly is not illegal in any market. It is in fact the market that creates monopolies. What is illegal is using your monopoly position to do something anti-competitive to keep your competition down and your monopoly position so you can control the market.
Give me one example of how Apple forced consumers into buying an iPhone? When has Apple ever been in a position to force those same people into choosing an iPhone over a Samsung, Nokia, Blackberry, Motorola? When has Apple ever told a carrrier they could not carry a competitors phone? When has Apple ever told a developer they cannot develop for another platform? When has Apple bought a competing company just to kill competition?
The App Store is not an open market. It is in fact, a closed, proprietary market for selling and distributing applications on Apple’s devices. It does not apply to any other OEM device. It does not harm any other OEM device. Apple cannot control any other OEM device. Apple does not forbid developers from writing apps on any other platform. All they do is control their own devices and how apps are installed on them.
Spotify which has a major share of its respective market is losing money and their “big” fight is to cut costs on 1% of their user base who signed up on Apple’s platform. They probably spent more on their legal fees to sue Apple then Apple makes from collecting subscription fees from Spotify.
Yes, Apple has an unfair advantage on their own platform… that’s how the world works. They spent billions of dollars, developing and maintaining that platform, they should be allowed to use it to help push their own services and apps. After all, consumers buy iPhones, iPads, Macs, Apple watches, not iOS devices.
Last edited:
Bull crap. The biggest and most popular apps and services on iOS also have a web presence, including Spotify.
1% of Spotify’s subscription revenue comes from iOS… so by not paying Apple anything they’ll save 0.3% to 0.15% a month.
Furthermore, people don’t buy hardware based on apps. Spotify is on Android and every other platform. They don’t need to buy an Apple device.
Last edited:
Yeah, except you make it seem as the App Store is the only point of sale. This is about Spotify, which is on every single platform, including Apple’s and also a web page for playing music and subscribing. Apple, just as Ford only control’s the products they make. Ford didn’t make every car on the road, just as iOS isn’t the only platform on the market.
People are trying to turn this into Apple controlling ALL of Spotify’s revenue source, when in fact iOS subscriptions make up about 1% of Spotify’s revenues.
Last edited:
No. Can you sideload apps on your smart TV? No. How about your car infotainment system? Hardware manufacturers get to decide how apps are loaded onto their systems, not the people who buy that hardware. Just because one device allows it, doesn’t mean they ALL HAVE TO. If you want a specific feature, buy the device that provides it. Buying something that does not and wanting it, does not mean it has to happen.
So the statement of “go buy an android” is not entirely wrong, but should’ve said, “go buy a device that has the features you NEED”.
So you’re saying it is unfair that Apple can take advantage of a platform they created, developed, maintain and invest billions and billions of dollars in every year? Not to mention the cost of designing and manufacturing the hardware that platform runs on?
And it’s fair for a company like Spotify, who has their service on every single platform available, to not pay Apple anything?
Is it fair for Microsoft to make computers when they don’t have to shell out for Windows licenses?
Umm, Spotify is just a server. All they do is stream content. What’s their over head? Royalties, bandwidth, server upkeep.
What do you think Apple pays to maintain their platform; hardware, software, services?
Apple pays the same for their Apple Music service; royalties, bandwidth, server upkeep. Plus, they develop the os, they develop the tools, they maintain the App Store, they manufacturer the hardware.
Developer tools, OS, most iCloud services, and most of their applications are free to people that buy their devices.
Why is it wrong for Apple to have an advantage over competitors, who offer their services on competing platforms? If I had a service and only made it available on Apple’s platform, then yes, maybe I would feel I couldn’t compete with Apple on price. But Spotify makes most of their money from their ad based service. Users download that app for free and Apple makes nothing from it.
Having said all of that, I do agree, Apple should drop the rates again.