I don't think it changes much. Apple was already getting zero from Spotify, Netflix, Kindle, and other big name apps before this, and they are still getting zero. Other than their pride and reputation, nothing is different.
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 Updates iPhone App With Out-of-App Payment Options in U.S.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think it changes much. Apple was already getting zero from Spotify, Netflix, Kindle, and other big name apps before this, and they are still getting zero. Other than their pride and reputation, nothing is different.
Apple will not lose $0,01 about this. We, the consumer will be the ones who will pay for it through increased prices of iPhones and iPads.
If only 6 people needed the button, this begs the question of why was Apple so against allowing Spotify to place a button on their app?
You know that Spotify pays the smallest royalties to the artists, don’t you? And you are still happy to use Spotify? What does it say about you? Greedy or not?
what’s it say about the artists/companies who do the deals with Spotify? Plenty of blame to go around.
I use Spotify because of the UI and the social aspect...I can't stand Apple Music's layout. What Spotify and the artists and labels negotiate is between them, not me. So to answer your question, not.
I use Apple Music because I think it’s better. However what Spotify pays their artists is as relevant to me about what the fees and commissions are. Neither affect me, and before it is said YouTube is an example. I’d rather pay more and use the App Store than have my cc info all over the place.
Free Spotify you are the product.
It's junk. I had nothing but issues with it. I'd much rather use Amazon Music or Apple Music. They both actually connect with CarPlay.
You are one of the very few people on this forum that gets it.
The problem is not the fee. The problem is not the rules. The problem is that Apple both created a marketplace and competes within that same marketplace, but gives itself preferential treatment.
If Apple had fully spun-out App Store as a separate and independent business, I don't think any of this would have been a problem.
Sure, I do. I talked about how stupid the headset AR/VR junk is. About how Siri is an absolute moron. I could go on and on.
Well, yeah. Why wouldn't they? None of it would exist without them and, like you said, it's theirs.
Exactly! I would probably have more respect for Spotify if they announced that the AppStore commission equivalent would be going to artists now. That I would respect! Otherwise, Spotify is no more than just a parasite on artists and Apple platform.
Maybe music delivery should be a prohibited App Store category and Spotify should be kicked out of the App Store to eliminate that competition. After all Spotify delivers its digital services in a variety of ways.
How would Apple account for a 30% commission on its books?
While it may be less than what Apple pays, they're not the smallest from what I am seeing. Part of that is due to Spotify having both paid and ad-supported tiers.
Apple has a 75% profit margin on services and the App Store is why Apple can sell 100s of millions of iPhones every year. They will be fine, and this is their own fault anyway: lying under oath and choosing a 27% margin for alternative payments not based on hosting costs, app review, and a reasonable reward for building the platform (which the judge originally said they could do); but instead based the rate on disincentivizing any developer from ever pursuing this option (which went against the entire intent of the ruling).
Suggesting this for an app like Spotify is even worse because Apple has a competing service (Apple Music) that doesn’t have to pay such fees so they’d be leveraging their App Store dominance to artificially advantage their service over a competitors. Which is classic anti-trust.
Have you considered becoming a judge? Google, Microsoft, and Apple would love to have you.
Like in Europe where they have to do that and still whine and still charge Epic? If they’d done the right thing from the start they weren’t forced to do it now kicking and screaming…
Those who are defending Apple:
How many of their developers do you think now despise Apple?
Most I’d say.
How many do you think like Apple and feel that they’re a great partner?
How many devs are going to help Apple either any new products or help them make Siri better?
Barely any I’d say.
It’s a big problem when you’re a platform owner and it seems like barely any of your partners want to work with you and would jump ship at the first sign of weakness from Apple.
How many of their developers do you think now despise Apple?
Most I’d say.
How many do you think like Apple and feel that they’re a great partner?
How many devs are going to help Apple either any new products or help them make Siri better?
Barely any I’d say.
It’s a big problem when you’re a platform owner and it seems like barely any of your partners want to work with you and would jump ship at the first sign of weakness from Apple.
Please tell me this article doesn’t mean the MacRumors RSS feed is about to turn into a list of apps that have updated like this… (If history serves, it does mean that.)
Again with uncritically repeating PR spin. What choice does this give consumers? They didn’t have IAP yesterday. They don’t have it today. The only “choice” now available to consumers under Spotify’s scheme is whether to click a link from within the app or open a browser and search/enter the URL directly.
For the record, I am not against the changes mandated by the injunction. But if the point is to compete against IAP, then compete against IAP by, you know, giving consumers that choice (with the higher price! I get that part!). Spotify only offering one way to pay is the literal opposite of choice.
Spotify said:
Again with uncritically repeating PR spin. What choice does this give consumers? They didn’t have IAP yesterday. They don’t have it today. The only “choice” now available to consumers under Spotify’s scheme is whether to click a link from within the app or open a browser and search/enter the URL directly.
For the record, I am not against the changes mandated by the injunction. But if the point is to compete against IAP, then compete against IAP by, you know, giving consumers that choice (with the higher price! I get that part!). Spotify only offering one way to pay is the literal opposite of choice.
I have a real problem with Apple having chosen such a petty response.
Certainly not going to help them with trying to get VisionOS going anywhere
Yes, it so much safer dealing with a banks directly on the web. Why not always use their website if you think it is so much safer dealing with them directly? After all, as of today, the UK government only lists 15,616 unregistered and unauthorized financial websites on the Financial Conduct Authority website.
FCA Warning List of unauthorised firms
Search our Warning List to find details of unauthorised firms and individuals that we’re aware of that aren’t allowed to operate in the UK. First published: 02/04/2016 Last updated: 20/05/2025 See all updates
Yes, it so much safer dealing with a banks directly on the web. Why not always use their website if you think it is so much safer dealing with them directly? After all, as of today, the UK government only lists 15,616 unregistered and unauthorized financial websites on the Financial Conduct Authority website.
FCA Warning List of unauthorised firms
Search our Warning List to find details of unauthorised firms and individuals that we’re aware of that aren’t allowed to operate in the UK. First published: 02/04/2016 Last updated: 20/05/2025 See all updateswww.fca.org.uk
I do typically use the websites. I do almost no financial management on my phone.