31–40 of 671 posts
This is good for smaller developers, but it doesn't really seem to solve the actual problem? All the people who are willing to go to war with Apple and have teeth are making way more than that…
This really slaps down the ability to use that.
Looks nice but it doesn't solve my fundamental problem: 1. I invest loads of time and effort developing an app 2. Apple rejects it -or- 2. Apple approves it 3. I ship a new update 4. Apple rejects the update and now decides my app should have been rejected retroactively. I'm especially concerned about what happened to Hey and others but my customers are demanding smartphone apps and there are still limits to what can…
This really isn't a problem in practice, unless you are going out of your way to try to bend the rules set in place, especially about sales.
Edit: as others have pointed out iSH isn't the best example of this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd hope they've learned from tax law the world around and only apply the 30% rate from the second million...? Edit: just read the sibling comment... that seems... unnecessarily complicated and non-reactive to short term changes...?
I'd hope so too, but it doesn't seem to be worded that way.
Wonder how this will be handled for apps that are shipped on the app store via a 3rd party publisher. The publisher probably does >$1M across all the apps they publish, but each app / developer is likely far under that. If there are no exceptions, it would mean that 3rd-party publishers lose tons of their value proposition.
Looks nice but it doesn't solve my fundamental problem: 1. I invest loads of time and effort developing an app 2. Apple rejects it -or- 2. Apple approves it 3. I ship a new update 4. Apple rejects the update and now decides my app should have been rejected retroactively. I'm especially concerned about what happened to Hey and others but my customers are demanding smartphone apps and there are still limits to what can…
This really isn't a problem in practice, unless you are going out of your way to try to bend the rules set in place, especially about sales.
The correct amount is still 0%, from anyone.
App stores should charge for their service. They aren't making the sales (at least in most cases). They are delivering assets. Charge for the delivery.
I know somebody will start claiming that Apple created the market in the first place. Apple benefits from the large app selection just as much as the developers do - yet the relationship only works one way. Let's delete the App Store and see how well the iPhone does against Android.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except Unreal Engine actually delivers some value for their cut.
The operating system isn’t valuable from your perspective? The payment processing? The IDE? The language?
Everything else is paid for already by the end user of the device (who consciously pay a premium to use Apple's ecosystem), and has no reason to scale linearly with developer revenue.
This is good for smaller developers, but it doesn't really seem to solve the actual problem? All the people who are willing to go to war with Apple and have teeth are making way more than that…
Yes but many of the larger players who are willing to go to war use the 'its not fair on smaller developers' argument against them. This really slaps down the ability to use that.