211–220 of 338 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does the marketplace do for a subscription app after it's installed? Even if you think Apple deserves some money for referrals / customer acquisition, 15% of lifetime revenue can't be a number you think is fair for that.
How do you estimate the (non-)fairness of a distribution channel?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just throwing this idea out here, but maybe game consoles and retail stores are also operating unethically?
Wow so now retail stores that have literally been around in one form or another for thousands of years are unethical?
It's not the concept of retail is somehow unethical, but certain stores are certainly less ethical (in how they treat employees, customers, environment, etc) than others, and some of those stores are very widespread.
Also the thousands-of-years argument holds up pretty poorly for a lot of things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They charge 30% because they've amassed 1 billion extremely valuable users who are willing to spend money on apps in their marketplace. This is almost the textbook definition of extortion. "Hey, wouldn't it be a shame if you lost access to all these potential customers? You better give us 30% of your revenue."
You are paying to access the pool of customers. You never had the pool to begin with so you aren’t paying to not “lose access”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sideloading on Android is a PITA by default, but it's enough of a backstop that some developers like Tinder and Epic have been able to give Google the middle finger. There are cases where 30% of revenue makes sense. For cheap, purchased apps it's a good deal because the cost of running that infrastructure is comparatively high. However, once you hit a certain volume of sales or move into subscriptions, the value of t…
And as far as Epic, sloppiness by third party developers is a great reason for the App Store. https://www.cnet.com/news/just-as-critics-feared-fortnite-fo... Edit: Most retailers do choose their own markup. Ironically, Apple got sued for working with book publishers where the book publishers set the price and Apple chose the markup. However, the book publishers wanted this arrangement because Amazon was selling ebook…
Some people here seem to be responding to all of this inappropriately. The simple fact is that Apple is injecting itself as an intermediary in the payment process and extracting a preposterously oversized commission for no meaningful added value. And it's easy to see that Apple knows what they're doing is wrong. They strictly prohibit developers from signaling that there's an extra cost for purchases made through App…
I don't disagree. But you do realize you could also be describing the credit card market?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unless your app takes users outside of the app store to purchase stuff(including the subscription itself) without in app purchases. Where did Hey take users outside of the app?
'Hey' itself may not be doing this right now, I don't know. I was referring to: > 3.1.1 In-App Purchase: If you want to unlock features or functionality within your app, (by way of example: subscriptions, in-game currencies, game levels, access to premium content, or unlocking a full version), you must use in-app purchase. Apps may not use their own mechanisms to unlock content or functionality, such as license keys,…
I don't have one to test it though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is "reading my email from the hey server" different from "reading a video from the netflix server"? Neither app functions without a separate, non apple subscription. The main criticism of Hey, from apples perspective, is that the app doesnt just work when you download it, but the same applies to netflix. I personally think Hey could get around it by adding some other kind of feature to the app, like a way to read…
Read the full statement that Apple gave to Hey and the media [1]. If Hey made their email client a standard works with any email account then it'd be fine without in-app purchases. The specific Hey service could be purchased outside the App Store if they want to avoid giving Apple a cut. [1] https://twitter.com/markgurman/status/1273719726196187136
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most can agree the OS should sandbox apps appropriately, and allow access via permissions and such. But like most things, it can be taken too far. The fact is you can't buy a console or iPhone of the shelf and easily (or legally) run your software on it without special permission from Apple or Sony etc. The distinction is video game consoles are not general purpose. Just like nobody is going to write an essay…
But when they force a change to a product and company in arbitrary ways to suite their whims that's pretty concerning because it's a sign they are abusing their power in a very historically been-done-before way. You mean how Walmart forced the music industry to edit CDs or they wouldn’t sell them or how they force manufacturers to sell crappier versions of their products to meet a price point? Or do you mean again ho…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't Superhuman using TestFlight to get around the App Store problem? That was the case last I heard of it.
I believe Superhuman added the in app purchase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If MS charges 30% for doing almost nothing but putting an XBox game in the store, that's also a scam. I don't know enough about it to know if they provide other services like matchmaking, etc. for that. The rest of those seem reasonable to me. The publisher is basically your marketing budget, right? Retailers' shelf space has a cost and is limited physically. They could be using the same space to sell literally anyth…
Do you feel SASS companies are also unethical because the marginal cost of a customer is 0? And then the publishers also have to pay MS for DLC. I think MS still charges for delivering patches through MS Live. They might have dropped it.