Well no. A developer has a choice. Them deeming it unavoidable doesn't mean choice doesn't exist.
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.
WordPress for iOS Was Blocked From Updating Unless it Agreed to Add In-App Purchases for .Com Plans [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Its only a duopoly if you narrowly define the market as ios and google play. If you use a more expansive definition there are many ways to distribute applications and programs. Especially if you realize the market doesnt just reside in mobile phones
a shop Owner threatened by a mobster for protection money can also close their shop and go elsewhere. 1. That doesn’t change the fact they are being extorted. 2. It would be cost prohibitive for them to do it. And they would not likely maintain their level of livelihood.
You really need to consider this from the point of view of someone who has spent months or years building up a market for an app. It’s not a simple affair to just dump a platform.
Sounds cute. First, you can use a different store on android. Second, many apps, particularly games will work fine on the switch, playstation, xbox, pc, or mac. Heck, many games and apps work just fine as a web site. If you decide to unfairly narrow any market definition down extremely tight, you will always end up with a monopoly.
Nope. Netflix got around this by having users sign up and subscribe on the web. Same with Amazon's Kindle app.
It’s hard to make analogies with B&M stores because most of the App Store apps are free with in-app purchase. Once an app is downloaded to your device is that app still considered part of Apple’s store? For digital goods Apple says yes, unless it’s’ something Apple has chosen to exempt.
For the sake of argument lets say you buy a Keurig coffee machine at Target. And lets say they offer a subscription service where you pay a monthly or annual fee to have a box of pods delivered to your house. Would you expect Target to get a percentage of those subscription sales because the machine was bought at Target? That’s essentially what Apple is doing with IAP. And taking a cut of IAP allows the App Store to be filled with mostly “free” apps where they take a cut of all the micro-transactions inside the app. So rather than consumers paying up front for an app and Apple taking 30% the app is free and they take 30% every time someone spends 99 cents to remove ads or buy coins or whatever.
When the App Store first launched most apps cost something and IAP didn’t exist. I think one can agree that Apple deserves something for having the curated store, app review, hosting apps for download etc. but also think they should come up with a different way of charging developers. One where every developer is paying to be in the store instead of a small percentage paying for everyone else to be free.
The analogy is slightly off, I think.
I think the argument people are making is more along the lines:
"Keurig should receive a share of the monthly pod subscription. Because they developed and built the platform where the pods are extracted on. So they are free to collect any percentage they like from third-party providers of coffee pods."
The problem is, if there are only two or three relevant marketplaces dividing all of the market between them (de facto).
It ultimately boils down to what you make of that .
Some will argue, if Apple build their user base and share of devices in use (without coercing people into using them), as a free enterprise they should be free to set the rules (and fees) on their playing field and market as they please.
Other will argue that smartphones and the apps running on them have become such vital parts of everyday life, a (de facto) duopoly on app markets should be scrutinised - and if necessary regulated - by governments, for greater social good.
Last edited:
You do realise that your grocery store has competition, so their prices reflect the market value of what they do, whereas the App Store is a monopoly within a walled garden. If Apple allowed other App Stores and customers can choose which app store to get apps from, and developers can choose which store to place their apps, then this won’t be a problem.
But Apple’s approach is effectively, “if you want to sell anything to anyone in this city, you can only sell in our mall and nowhere else”. They’ve overplayed their hand, and the consequence is that whilst they win the battle against Fortnite (and WordPress) they’ll lose the war because regulators will move to dismantle the App Store or weaken Apple’s hold in due course.
Impractical, yes; they do need the App Store. But choosing to violate the rules isn’t advisable if they want to stay there 🙂
Based on their case, they don't want to stay on the app store, they want to create their own store.
They tried to negotiate first to just bypass the payment processor but Apple did not want budge because supposedly "We treat every developer the same." 🙄😂 (Apple gives a preferential cut to Amazon in case you didn't know).
Last edited:
Apple’s not going to negotiate any agreement that would allow a random developer to create their own App Store.
Not their own app store, just bypass the payment processor.
Epic Games Sought Side Deal for Fortnite Prior to Lawsuit, Apple Says in Court Filing [Updated]
Earlier this week, Epic Games levied a lawsuit against Apple after Apple pulled popular game Fortnite from the App Store for defying Apple's App...
www.macrumors.com
Many of those apps aren't really free with IAP. That's just the trick to get you to download it. It would be like a game being sold as "free" but you have to buy an IAP AKA license key to play. I'll admit it's not all but the vast majority of apps with IAP really don't do anything useful without it
Well you said Epic doesn’t want to stay on the App Store 🤷♂️Not their own app store, just bypass the payment processor.
Epic Games Sought Side Deal for Fortnite Prior to Lawsuit, Apple Says in Court Filing [Updated]
Earlier this week, Epic Games levied a lawsuit against Apple after Apple pulled popular game Fortnite from the App Store for defying Apple's App...
If they use their own payment processor, would they still be ok with paying Apple their 30% revenue share for being on the App Store? Why would they want to do their own payment processing when apple already provides that?
Fixed the comment. I didn't have to specify all the details if you knew the details.
Based on their case, they don't want to stay on the app store, they want to create their own store.
They tried to negotiate first to just bypass the payment processor but Apple did not want budge because supposedly "We treat every developer the same." 🙄😂 (Apple gives a preferential cut to Amazon in case you didn't know).
Sure I know the details, but I can’t read your mind well enough to know what you mean unless you write it.
All developers, including Amazon, must follow the same rules and restrictions. That doesn’t mean they all get the same revenue sharing arrangement.
Umm Apple didn't do anything. Epic games purposely changed their app so it would violate both Apple and Google app store policy. They did this knowing it would get pulled from both app stores and had their lawyers ready with a lawsuit right after. They also did exactly what CCP does and established a 50 Cent Party to run propaganda on the issue. I'm not sure what you expect Apple and Google to do about PR? They can only say so much due to being sued.
You’re right, it doesn’t change the argument, because you are setting up a straw man to begin with. Apple offers one approach, Android offers another. If you don’t like Apples, go to Android. It doesn’t matter that Apple only offers one way to get apps on iOS, that’s the design. It’s not, and should not be, illegal, because you have choice. Just because you don’t LIKE the choice doesn’t mean a thing.
It’s absolutely normal. Nintendo decides what games can be on their platform. Sony and Microsoft do the same.
WalMart decides what products it allows to be sold in its stores.
In all those cases if you don’t like a particular companies approach you are free to choose a competitor.
Apple is neither morally nor legally obligated to allow ANY apps on the iPhone, that they choose to do so is a business decision.
You are free to choose a phone that allows you to install apps from multiple stores. You have that knowledge up front. Just because you want something doesn’t mean Apple (or anyone) is obligated to do it that way.
And Apples rules about IAP have been there from the beginning. The rules were not changed on them, and WP was in fact violating the rules. Fortunately for them there was an easier way to resolve it, but it doesn’t change that WP broke the rules. It’s not extortion when you agree to the rules before hand and they are the same for everyone to begin with.
The wordpress app has on the app store for years.
Did they have to wait until the exact month where they're under scrutiny by multiple governments and corporations for their (alleged) anti-competitive behaviours.
Whether they're in the right or wrong, it's hardly a good timing