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?
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.
Telegram CEO Accuses Apple of Destroying Dreams and Crushing Entrepreneurs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What is so good about telegram? why I want more advertising in my chat? I just use signal. it does the same thing.
There is no reason for native apps on the iPhone as far as I’m concerned. I prefer websites where my ad blockers and anti-tracking software works correctly. I know I’m in the minority though.
Taking away my channel's username/handle and putting it on auction seems also like "destroying dreams and crushing entrepreneurs" -- especially when you promised something first and then backed away from that.
I’m not saying Apple’s cut is fair and that regulators shouldn’t be looking into it, but the App Store rules have long been pretty clear and the likes of Telegram (or Spotify) can’t claim good faith when they are caught trying to work around the rules.
Because Apple sells eBooks in their own app.
Nebulous distinction that only exists because of Amazon.
It really amazes me how many developers are willing to write apps with that much of a cut.
I would not care for paying the 30% either but it's not like it's a secret when you start doing business with Apple. I dont like how much eBay charges when I sell things but how else can I reach such a broad audience to get my item sold. They advertise the amount I have to give up and I decide if I want to use the service.
They should charge. I’m usually against their profiteering off everything and it’s not because it’s ‘their platform’ but because you’re literally building the app with a programming language they make and improve actively while hosting an annual event meant to spread that knowledge as they improve on it. Your app can exist because they allowed you to create it, technically. That said, 30% is absurd. Even 10% feels like robbery. Not that I buy anything on the App Store. Apple generally doesn’t get any money from me other than for the physical devices because I hate subscriptions.
How so? Every other app that sells physical goods have the same rules applied to them. If this distinction only existed because of Amazon, then they surely could have negotiated something with Apple for their digital products as well?
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.
Not surprising. Durov has been copying everything that Zuckerberg has been making, so why not this? 
It’s like the “reader app” definition that Apple invented for Netflix.
Apple carves out these exceptions for their friends. Other companies may get to ride on the coattails, but they don’t get exceptions made for them.
Attachments
Not protecting greedy Apple at all, but I would do the same if I were Apple. They created the platform, they own it
Another prompt for everyone to state how they feel about Apple's total control over software installation on iOS, with no one talking to each other or convincing one another of anything.
Wow someone doesn't get it. Go to Walmart or Target right now and try to sell something without their consent, you will get escorted out of the store and if you repeat it you will get arrested for trespassing.
Right now people have options between Apple and Android. Pick which ever works best for you but you need to play by the rules both have.
Have you ever thought about how much it costs Apple to be Apple?
Apple's annual operating expenses for 2021 were $256.868B, a 23.36% increase from 2020
It's the predictable criticism of Apple by a competitor and the very predictable defence by some/many below the line. Let the games begin.
I will just say this, competition and fairness in digital markets and payment services, particularly how they are affected by the policies of the very small number of hardware and software platforms they exist on, will only become more of an interest for legislators and regulators.
Apple, and to a lesser extent Google, aren't really strategic about any of this right now and I think some pretty heavy-handed legislation and regulation will be coming their way. I wouldn't even be surprised if either or both will be broken up at some point.
The market power they exercise is just not sustainable.
I will just say this, competition and fairness in digital markets and payment services, particularly how they are affected by the policies of the very small number of hardware and software platforms they exist on, will only become more of an interest for legislators and regulators.
Apple, and to a lesser extent Google, aren't really strategic about any of this right now and I think some pretty heavy-handed legislation and regulation will be coming their way. I wouldn't even be surprised if either or both will be broken up at some point.
The market power they exercise is just not sustainable.
Said that, the platform would not be as successful without third-party developers creating software for it. Theoretically it should be a symbiotic relationship between Apple and third-party developers and in most cases it actually is, but not always.
That has absolutely no bearing to my point.
The fact that they spend a lot doesn’t mean that everyone else has no right to point out issues with pricing.
Because they built the store, the tools create the apps and pay the rent for the servers and bandwidth for the store.
Apple's pricing is inline with the industry...