Telegram CEO Accuses Apple of Destroying Dreams and Crushing Entrepreneurs

[jlc1978]

5% vs 30% .

5% of revenue even if Epic never does a thing and you market, sell, host it yourself. At least Apple provides a valuable set of services and access to a market.

Also if it is pretty simple and while we are discussing hypocrisy why does Apple frequently infringe patents?

For the same reason every other tech companies do with a patent system that is screwed up. Between claims and counter claims it’s a lawyer’s paradise. Patent portfolios are a weapon for offense and defense. It’s all part of the game.

Qualcomm sued Apple and Apple countersued. They eventually settled, is often the case.

As for East Texas, it’s a patent troll’s venue of choice.

 

[KevinN206]

And every other store that sells physical goods.

So why is digital goods treated differently from physical goods? They are both goods.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

5% of revenue even if Epic never does a thing and you market, sell, host it yourself. At least Apple provides a valuable set of services and access to a market.

This is a very odd statement.

Unreal is suite of creation tools which allows developers to create games and other content. It didn't build, maintain and ship five versions by magic.

It's like saying paying for Adobe Creative Cloud has no value. If you need to use Photoshop/Lightroom/Illustrator etc for your work then it absolutely does.

The 5% only kicks in once your game has earned $1 million in revenue also.

 

[webkit]

iPhone 1 came without an App Store, yet it was a success.

Sure, the iphone 1 was at the wrong price point. However, what occured after the price was dropped and carrier subsidies kicked in.

The phones were subsidized at launch as the original $499 (4GB) and $599 (8GB) iPhone prices were with two year carrier contracts. Those prices were then reduced $200 within three months. The following year, the 8GB iPhone 3G launched at an even lower $199 price. This was a significant $400 (or 2/3rds) price reduction from the original 8GB iPhone.

Even with the notable price reductions, it took until around 2011-12 or so for iOS (and Android) to really start to take over the mobile OS market.

 

[genovelle]

I don’t care how much Apple charges, but saying that they shouldn’t complain because Apple built the iPhone - which you and I pay for - is not correct.

You are off there. When Apple originally released the IPhone there was no App Store. They chose to keep APIs private and only allow access via Web Apps. Engineers inside the company convinced Steve Jobs to allow native 3rd party apps. The store is a separate endeavor from the iphone or even the operating system. They didn’t have to offer it, but saw it as a win win for the company and independent developers who were paying 10s of thousands a year plus 70% commission to be on other platforms and the consumer was paying much more too with a limited supply of apps.

 

[genovelle]

This is a very odd statement.

Unreal is suite of creation tools which allows developers to create games and other content. It didn't build, maintain and ship five versions by magic.

It's like saying paying for Adobe Creative Cloud has no value. If you need to use Photoshop/Lightroom/Illustrator etc for your work then it absolutely does.

The 5% only kicks in once your game has earned $1 million in revenue also.

Interestingly, before they began the plan to undermine Apple’s App Store with their publicity stunt, the percentage was 12% and that kicked in at $3000 per quarter. This is a concerted effort to attempt to force Apple to allow them to hijack all the work apple has done to build their for profit platform and make money for free.

 

[quarkysg]

You are off there. When Apple originally released the IPhone there was no App Store. They chose to keep APIs private and only allow access via Web Apps. Engineers inside the company convinced Steve Jobs to allow native 3rd party apps. The store is a separate endeavor from the iphone or even the operating system. They didn’t have to offer it, but saw it as a win win for the company and independent developers who were paying 10s of thousands a year plus 70% commission to be on other platforms and the consumer was paying much more too with a limited supply of apps.

Well, those that do not learn from history will be doomed to repeat it.

If Apple is forced to allow third party App Store for iOS which some is suggesting, there's nothing stopping Apple to have a separate mechanism to support it and charge those that wants to side-load for those rights, and who knows, Apple may want 70% instead of 30%. I don't think any government regulation can force any company to offer free services.

Be careful what you wish for I say.

 

[genovelle]

Are you sure?

Yes! There is always a cost! For instance, many who love Epic Games have no idea that Chinese Conglomerate Tencent purchased 48% of Epic in 2012. Many of the original team bailed because they didn’t like where things we leading. They own
Several smart phone companies as well as streaming services and want to replace apple as a dominant player in these areas. To do so they would have to break Apple’s model for success and getting regulatory entities to do it for them is the current tact. They own 30% of Spotify too, imagine that.

 

[diego]

edit: double posted by accident

 

[diego]

I do not have a strong opinion about the topic of payment methods, but I do know that the Telegram iOS and Mac apps—which I use heavily on a daily basis—are buggy, incomplete, and have pretty mediocre (and in some ways primitive) UX. These problems have nothing to do with Apple's restrictions.

If Telegram actually released good software, then it might start lending more credence to their arguments. Releasing slipshod products and then complaining about how bad you have it undermines your credibility on all fronts (and yes, this also goes for Apple).

Still a million light years ahead of whatsapp though

 

[genovelle]

Well, those that do not learn from history will be doomed to repeat it.

If Apple is forced to allow third party App Store for iOS which some is suggesting, there's nothing stopping Apple to have a separate mechanism to support it and charge those that wants to side-load for those rights, and who knows, Apple may want 70% instead of 30%. I don't think any government regulation can force any company to offer free services.

Be careful what you wish for I say.

I think apple is preparing a different route all together. The Arcade model for games with a one price subscription may become the model for all apps. They are already testing it with Apple One.

Imagine the Apple MarketPlace for $9.99, $19,99, or $29.99 per month with all you can use 3rd party Apps with off-line access and no in-app purchases. The developers get paid for apps downloaded and monthly usage. And if developers balk, they start building and acquiring apps for the most profitable and most used categories and double down on 1st part apps.

 

[planteater]

Agreed, this was the last barrier. My company has been getting by with just a web version of our app, always pushing out our IOS native version on the roadmap. It has always been good enough so we never felt compelled to do it any sooner.

With this update, I don't think we ever will.

Great. I’m not using an app with its tracking and analytics if a usable site is available.

 

[Admiralbison]

Push to END APPLE’S MONOPOLY APP STORE.

Apple Can only bribe U.S. Politicians like Schumacher to delay tech anti-trust bills for so long.


The European Union and Asia will need to step in again and put the hurt on Apple corporation, because our politicians are too bought off by corporations the likes of Apple.

 

[Abazigal]

Well, those that do not learn from history will be doomed to repeat it.

If Apple is forced to allow third party App Store for iOS which some is suggesting, there's nothing stopping Apple to have a separate mechanism to support it and charge those that wants to side-load for those rights, and who knows, Apple may want 70% instead of 30%. I don't think any government regulation can force any company to offer free services.

Be careful what you wish for I say.

Your comment just reminded me of the court case involving Dutch dating apps.

Apple has made it very clear that they don't consider those fees to be distribution fees, but rather platform fees. This means that even if third party app stores are allowed on iOS one day, Apple is still within their right to charge these App Store owners 27% of revenue (or whatever cut Apple feels entitled to).

Whether this will ultimately hold up to the numerous lawsuits that will surely ensue is up for debate, but suffice to say, Apple has had years to plan for the eventuality that their walled garden gets cracked open, and people hoping to create profitable 3rd party app stores are going to be disappointed.

 

[weckart]

Apple provided a distribution platform with all the goodies for $99. Dev ops-in and agrees to T&C, including commission. Meanwhile in 2021 some devs get very greedy, even those that have made hundreds of millions.

How much has Apple made? How much value has Apple added to the devs' work? How much would the App store be worth without those devs?

We can play this game all day if you like.

 

[quarkysg]

How much has Apple made?

Not trying to challenge you here, but does this have any relevance in the discussion? Are you implying that because Apple already made a lot from the sale of iPhones they no longer are entitled to more profits?

How much value has Apple added to the devs' work?

If memory serves, prior to the original iPhone being introduced, almost all smart phones have tiny (3.5"?) screens with tiny keyboards. Some have a stylus with slightly bigger screens but it's basically a WIMP design. All of them have terrible software distribution channels where software developer basically have to jump thru hoops to try to sell their softwares. Probably OK-ish for large software house, but close to impossible for smaller devs. I would say Apple up-ended the smart-phone industry and brought tons of improvements to the dev's work by introducing a paradigm shift for the entire industry between human-phone interaction and leveraging the Internet as a distribution mechanism.

How much would the App store be worth without those devs?

Pretty much impossible to answer even for Apple itself IMHO.

In an alternate Universe where there's no AppStore for iOS Apple probably will have made the iPhone as desirable as possible for their customers, and I think devs will probably come knocking on Apple's door to get some deals for Apple to include their software into the iPhone/iPads? This alternate reality will probably be even worst for the devs than it is now, as Apple will have held all the cards.

 

[I7guy]

How much has Apple made? How much value has Apple added to the devs' work? How much would the App store be worth without those devs?

We can play this game all day if you like.

Sure. How much would those devs be without the App Store? It’s not chicken or egg. It’s apples app store and those devs opted in and signed the T&C. After a taste of success some got greedy. They could certainly opt out of their agreement with Apple.

 

[genovelle]

Except Apple forbids developers from selling software to their iOS users outside of Apple's store.


Why should Apple profit from other people's efforts?

Developers can develop their apps using web based or any other tech that has its own APIs and Servers that can be accessed without using Apple technology and API and use a free App to allow access to their servers. They would be responsible for acquiring users on their own like Netflix etc and not using Apple’s platform marketing umbrella to grow their company. Apple makes nothing in that case, because they are not partnering with Apple to make grow their business.

 

[I7guy]

Except Apple forbids developers from selling software to their iOS users outside of Apple's store.


Why should Apple profit from other people's efforts?

Think what you’re referring to is the redirection relating to commission, sone of the t&c has recently been modified.

Nothing stopping any dev from setting up a website and going from there and even linking to their app.

 

[d686546s]

Sure. How much would those devs be without the App Store? It’s not chicken or egg. It’s apples app store and those devs opted in and signed the T&C. After a taste of success some got greedy. They could certainly opt out of their agreement with Apple.

Everyone in this equation is to some extent greedy. Why we should call it out for developers but not Apple, or vice versa, is not really clear.

Either we judge people's motivations or not, but we can't have it both ways.

 

[Abazigal]

How much has Apple made? How much value has Apple added to the devs' work? How much would the App store be worth without those devs?

We can play this game all day if you like.

I can share a personal anecdote of when I first signed up for the fantastical app on my iPhone. I downloaded it from the App Store (authenticated with Face ID), created an account via "Sign in with Apple", and subscribed through iTunes. And in the second year, the dev gets 85% of my subscription money.

I feel the value here for a smaller developer is that the App Store allows them to compete on a more even footing with larger developers. They all share the same visibility. Apple provides the tools to facilitate the transaction between the dev and the customer, and I think that's what the 15/30% cut is meant to represent. Yes, the app is all the dev's sweat and tears, but without Apple streamlining the process from paying an app to downloading it to creating an account, fewer customers would have bothered purchasing it because of all the steps involved.

And I think this is what Apple doesn't quite get enough recognition for. They help grow the overall pie by providing a safe and secure marketplace for people to transact in, and the end result is that more people do end up buying apps compared to if there were no App Store and people were expected to say, download individual apps from standalone websites. It's easy to buy and download apps using biometrics (face / Touch ID), you have APIs like ATT and sign in with Apple providing better privacy, you can view and manage your subscriptions in one place, and the absence of piracy means more people purchase apps the honest way compared to say, sideloading on Android.

Likewise, because Apple has the best users (defined as those with more disposable income and a higher propensity to spend), it's not really an option for app developers to simply pack up and ignore the iOS market altogether. That's why companies like Facebook are still sticking around, and why they are badmouthing Apple every chance they get. They know this is their last chance to reshape the App Store mechanics to their favour.

At this point, I think devs need the App Store more than Apple needs them.

 

[d686546s]

Your comment just reminded me of the court case involving Dutch dating apps.

Apple has made it very clear that they don't consider those fees to be distribution fees, but rather platform fees. This means that even if third party app stores are allowed on iOS one day, Apple is still within their right to charge these App Store owners 27% of revenue (or whatever cut Apple feels entitled to).

Whether this will ultimately hold up to the numerous lawsuits that will surely ensue is up for debate, but suffice to say, Apple has had years to plan for the eventuality that their walled garden gets cracked open, and people hoping to create profitable 3rd party app stores are going to be disappointed.

That's a fair point, although worth keeping in mind that those apps are still being distributed through the App Store and I think Apple, in that case, is entirely justified to expect some kind of compensation. I think we can agree or disagree on whether 27% is appropriate, and to me it feels like Apple is a bit petulant and vindictive, but that's beside the point.

I think the biggest risk for what you're describing is regulatory backlash. The most likely scenario is that the walled garden comes down because of government action. Government is not often the fastest or most targeted, but I'd be surprised if a significant revenue participation for an app distribution model that happens entirely outside of Apple's app distribution platform would go down too well.

 

[BootsWalking]

Developers can develop their apps using web based or any other tech that has its own APIs and Servers that can be accessed without using Apple technology and API and use a free App to allow access to their servers. They would be responsible for acquiring users on their own like Netflix etc and not using Apple’s platform marketing umbrella to grow their company. Apple makes nothing in that case, because they are not partnering with Apple to make grow their business.

Like using a free web-based API that Apple's own Webkit doesn't support? Oopsie - Apple forbids the use of any browser that's not based on Apple's Webkit engine.

 

[schlitzz]

You build it on third party developers. Without their apps, what is the point of your platform?

Without the platform, there’s nothing for them to do.

 

[.wojtek]

It’s called the Apple Store. It’s owned by Apple. Apple decides the policy of their store as any other business decides how to run their business. Telegram is a seriously flawed product and has only itself to blame for its problems. Patel is another whining Zuckerberg clone.

My dear, my innocent soul, are you familiar by any chance with the term “monopoly”?