I don't agree. While no dev wants to host an app for $0, there are apps that do just that, with the hopes of the consumer buying additional functionality for additional $$$. I'm not discussing netflix, epic, or other apps of that ilk, but the small business independent developer.
You are forgetting the dynamics of the entire system. In your hypothesis, if every app and digital service was offered free, that would translate to the value of the device, iPhone … that is, its price would go up. Now, the money would not end to devs, but those of course gave it free anyway so nothing to complain about. Of course the economics of this would be unsustainable, for everyone but Apple.
As for your example now, what you describe is the Freemium model. The Freemium model is mandatory for apps using the App Store in-app-purchase/subscription device. That is, you need to offer a free tier.
There are apps indeed that are fundamentally ”free”, case in case Facebook, Tiktok … “Free” because their business model is around targeting you with Ads. That is you make yourself available to be an Ad Target in exchange of using the app, asking you for data make you a more efficient target (turn you into a better money converter).
Anyway, you seam to be the most reasonable person I discussed this matter on the forum, even though we come to totally different perspectives and do not convert to the same point. I’m spending far too much time on this forum, so to close this matter as far as I’m concerned …
I’m not a supporter of Epics cause. As far as I’m concerned when it comes to games, Apple is not doing anything different than console gaming does. A game is an App and that is what the App Store as far as I’m concerned is set out to sell. I’m looking at other genres.
Still, there are some things that here that go beyond the scope of the App itself as an object, buying digital content, digital information: say costumes, new maps, access to special weapons, bitcoins, whatever digital information and form. A bit like the iPhone, you add apps without changing the device, your not adding new features to the device itself, its original capabilities allow for that.
This where the game space touches with other spaces in the digital industry.
I don’t think Apple should be allowed to charge for digital content, hosts or distributes nothing of that, much like say Best Buy does not charge Apple for whatever its aided to the iPhones it sells, if not accessories, it stores and distributes nothing of that. Imagine Best Buy as the only Store in America. This should be regulated IMHO, not just for Apple but for all App Stores.
One example between millions, take an App like Tinder. Fundamentally it transacts information (Digital content). The App itself is basic in functionality, minimal in size (low host and distribution hosting costs unlike a game). Yet its #1 on the Top Grossing Apps. Take the demands they imposed on Stadia and xCloud … these businesses do not serve Apps in any form, neither what they serve is anywhere served by the App Store
This examples shows the limitation of the App Store approach to shape the secure digital market place of the future.
The crux of the matter is that with the current paradigm used by these App Stores, inspired by retail stores, yet with totally different dynamics, makes it very difficult if not impossible to put into practice the difference between an app and the information it serves and transacts. How can the current digital store distinguish between content / service and the apps they store and sell in order to charge only for the App?
It requires a change in paradigm. And there is one already in use in other fields in the industry. Take for instance iCloud. The iCloud stores your files. The files itself might be worth anything, a billion, but their are yours not Apple’s to transact. Same with devs and their apps. So charge for hosting / storage and distribution resources. Take the Azure or Amazon Cloud. They technically host entire business, they charge for hosting / resources no what the business transacts, even if they could would not be acceptable … so why is it acceptable in an environment such as the App Store? Is it because it has Store in the middle? You see cloud services also have catalogues.
This same paradigm can be applied to App Stores to solve the problem of defining the boundaries of what the infrastructure provides and what the App / Business provides as value . Instead of charging based on what the App does, charges for the stores resources it consumes. This can be applied in parallel with the current model. Say, companies that need to use the entire App Store stack, ok proceed as now. I can see a lot of small companies finding value in the current model, especially the universal billing aspect of it. But companies, that made up to a maturity level where its cost out weight the benefits of the entire App Store stack in their context, than provide other App Store plans at their disposal.
The current App Stores business model is totally arcane, with the added problem of charging for goods, case in case digital content / not apps, that do not store, distribute or sell. But how can it in do differently in the current paradigm? Take the totally stupid policy of … “look if you sell an one to one digital meeting/class, we don’t charge, but if you sell a one to many, or many to many we do” … It’s totally arbitrary if not unffair based on this single ability: It’s the only way users have to install and update apps, 50% device market share in the US. It stiffs innovation, and motivate look alike products.
Now don’t think regulators should dictate of course how Apple should solve this problem, neither am I. But they can set up policies / regulations that tech companies operating as App Stores need to comply. Is up to them/us to reflect and find solutions compliant solution … heck innovate the App Store field out the inspiration of traditional retail store practices with a travesty, and create something adapted to the fluid reality of the digital landscape.
