I couldn’t care less
virpp.com
It’s a 30% saving if you subscribe on YouTube’s website compared with IAPYou spent a lot of time arguing the 30% benefit, probably because it makes the issue seem more serious, but now it really doesn’t matter if the savings are a lot less.
I would care about Spotify’s profits if they paid artists more and you cant blame the IAP fee for that since Spotify doesn’t have one. Considering their revenue in 2023 was 2.3 Billion and their net income was 1.2 Billion, Spotify doesn’t need your concern to be very profitable. In fact, as Spotify became very profitable they have never given musicians more.
Music Streaming Payouts Comparison: A Guide for Musicians — VIRPP
"Explore 'Music Streaming Payouts Comparison' for platforms like Spotify, Apple Music & more. Discover how much artists earn per stream
I dont have a problem allowing a link to YouTube Premium’s website in the same way I don’t have a problem taking advantage of coupons in the supermarket. But I’m not going to set up a bunch separate user accounts for all the apps on my phone which aren’t large and/or regularly repeating expenses, just to save less than a dollar. It’s simply not worth the hassle.
Also. 15% for a purchase from a small developer (under 1M revenue) is less that what stores charge in shelf fees and payment processing costs.
It’s only 30% now, the difference will rapidly dimish just like e-commerce payment handling fees have increased for no real reason. 30% is the temporary carrot corporations are dangling in front of people.
It depends on how you look at it
No longer talking about 30% eh?
It’s a 30% saving if I subscribe to YouTube premium on the website
30% is a temporary amount, a carrot dangled in front of people now. Corporations will reduce that price difference rapidly because there is no way they are going to pay for the administrative costs themselves; it will be eroded by the fees they love making us pay for.
Still with the restrictions, they are doing MORE than just fine. So clearly it's not an impediment to their success. The complaint that they can't compete with Apple Music on iOS due to Apple being able to "not" charge themselves the 30% as they do others. Did not prevent Spotify from getting customers to sign up via a separate website, manually. Nor did that affect Netflix either. Reader app or not. It would have worked out just the same.
Statement matters none the less. You're not forced into anything your not already, in the year of 2025. Fully aware of. And even if anyone wanted to to claim ignorance to anything Apple/iOS/etc. They can at any time switch to another platform. They have the ability to resell their phone or if they didn't have it too long (less than a month). They could give it back to Apple for a full refund. Zero harm done.
If it’s not going to have that much of an impact then why is Apple fighting it in the courts
Well it depends because if Spotify can now offer promotions through a payment link then that will make a difference if the product is good so then that will affect Apple Music
You exaggerate the extent of the importance of Spotify.
I only know of one person that used Spotify. Spotify has never provided enough of an incentive to use their service.
There have been only a few compelling third party applications.
Well there are rather a few more than one person using Spotify, whether you know them or not, so that’s an odd statement to make.
Not that many as it used to be back in the day. Now that I closed all my social media accounts the only 3rd party apps I use is banking and messaging apps. I don’t play mobile games so I don’t care if they exist or not. And Spotify compression is terrible so I use Apple Music lossless on my HiFi setup. Even password management doesn’t require a 3rd party app anymore. So for my personal use iOS is practically self sufficient.
