Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 671 posts

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#551

Post by xinsight »

the_other wrote: post #83
gtsteve wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're competing with something Apple is planning to bring out (parental control apps before screen time stats, etc). I don't think I'm competing with Apple at all today, but who knows what they're planning for their next features?

Surely this is true for all developers, at any size? And also just about any product, or service, in any industry? As counterexamples: Apple sell Logic, yet it has numerous competitors, also all fairly successful: ProTools, Live, Cubase, Reaper, Ardour, FruityLoops. Apple give their customers Notes, Reminders and Mail for free , on all their devices (i.e. you don't even need to get hold of apps for these functions),…

Years ago, Apple banned Camera+ for allowing to take a photo with the volume switch (instead of using an onscreen button). It was "too confusing" and against their Human Interface Guidelines. Then they added that exact feature to the default iOS camera app.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#552

Post by gnicholas »

user-the-name wrote: post #24
gtsteve wrote: post #21

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.

Absolutely untrue. Many well-meaning devs who paint entirely within the lines end up in review purgatory due to capricious interpretations of Apple's broad/vague rules.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#553

Post by kinkrtyavimoodh »

ecf wrote: post #436
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apple didn't fear either Epic's lawsuit or Congressional action, or both, they'd never reduce their app store cut, for anyone, ever. This announcement means Apple knows that neither public opinion nor the law is on their side and they're about to lose really, really big. And they're hoping if they can flip this around a bit and get control of the narrative, they can convince regulators they will self-regulate... w…

Apple doesn’t fear Epic’s lawsuit for the merits of the lawsuit itself. Apple fears how Epic can use their devoted base of video game players to create a PR frenzy that turns the lawsuit into a popularity contest.

That is true for all lawsuits.

The more damning implication is that Apple, one of the world's most highly valued brands, a brand name that has historically commanded 50%+ gross profit margins on commodity goods sold as luxury goods, is losing a 'popularity' contest to a video game company. Talk of changing times!

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#554

Post by ponker »

pja wrote: post #173

I’m seeing a lot of positive comments on HN about this: to me it seems to be purely a cynical piece of PR on Apple’s part. They hope to significantly reduce the pressure on politicians to take a close look at their App store practices by significantly reducing the absolute number of developers suffering the full impact whilst taking the minimum possible hit to their revenue. This has nothing to do with “doing the rig…

Flip side: what's so bad about Apple taking 30% of Zynga's iOS revenue? Why is 15% fair to Zynga and 30% not?

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#555

Post by samatman »

fbelzile wrote: post #341
NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to it seems to be purely a cynical piece of PR on Apple’s part. Oh please. Has it ever occurred in the history of the world that the selfish motives of two different parties aligned? i.e. Apple gets good press for helping smaller developers and the smaller developers get increased revenues. It happens all the times, and it's called "good business". You can keep waiting for Apple's App Store executives to cover them…

I agree that this is good news. But let's keep "selfish motives of two different parties" in perspective to the size and power of one side over the other. This program came in after more than decade after the app store was created and when Apple is finally under increased public scrutiny for anti-competitive behaviour. Apple made an estimated $20 billion from the app store last year alone with estimated profits from…

> Why were they able to take 30% and continue to take 15% commission off of all sales? Because the value of the app store is only created via continued practices of anti-competitive behaviour.

Also, because Apple created the most valuable mobile software market in the world, by creating the iPhone, continuing to release top-notch phones year after year, and by creating the App Store itself.

It remains true that iPhone users buy software at a rate that totally dwarfs Android. This could be traced to a number of reasons, but I wouldn't dismiss the App Store monopoly as one of them.

You can describe this as anti-competitive, just keep in mind that you're assuming your own conclusion. You could make the same argument for Apple's refusal to license their OSes for hardware they don't manufacture, I would be similarly unimpressed.

As a user, I would like a stress-free way to sideload apps which don't meet Apple's standards for inclusion on the App Store. Don't see why Apple would want to give away their competitive advantage by letting other stores sell software for their phones, but I could imagine them making side-loading less onerous, that would be nice.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#556

Post by samatman »

pja wrote: post #246
indigochill wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's along the same lines of what Microsoft did when they were being investigated as a monopoly: throw a bone to smaller developers (or in Microsoft's case, kids in school) which actually just grows their market share (in Microsoft's case, kids learn to use Microsoft products and take that to work, in Apple's case, more devs see profitability in the Mac garden). > Apple / Google’s 30% take is the anti-competitive ele…

Appoogle are a duopoly. You can’t get significant sales on mobile phones without going through their respective App Stores, which both charge 30%. What a coincidence! Your comparisons with book publishers are specious: if I write a book today I can go to any of a number of publishers, none of whom have any kind of control over access to readers. Or I can even self-publish and sell direct. Jailbreaking is a complete i…

> which both charge 30%

Well, not anymore they don't.

Kind of undermines your cartel argument, if you think about it. Clever on Apple's part...

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#557

Post by ocdtrekkie »

zepto wrote: post #401
anchpop wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TenCent has a stake in Epic but Tim Sweeney still is the majority shareholder

Epic has a 40% stake, and controls Epic’s access to the Chinese market. There may be other rights attached to their share. Sweeney may technically still have the majority vote, but he can’t do anything they seriously oppose, or not do anything they are strongly in favor of without facing serious consequences.

This is entirely false. Because while Blizzard, the NBA, and every other "American" company was busy sucking up to China in the last year, Tim Sweeney blatantly stated players in his games should feel free to support Hong Kong.

Epic didn't bow to China like other American companies did. And Epic didn't even stay silent. Epic made a clear statement in opposition to China.

That should've put to bed any of this silly "it's controlled by China" nonsense. Tencent just likes having a good stake in a company that prints money.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#558

Post by ocdtrekkie »

zepto wrote: post #446
psahgal wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct that Epic Games made 5 billion dollars in revenue in 2019, according to Venturebeat [1]. However, Apple Insider reports that Apple made 59.7 billion dollars in revenue in their third fiscal quarter (March, April, and May) of 2020 [2]. Epic's definitely not a little guy, but compared to Apple, it looks more like a respectable medium-sized company. I find Apple's revenue numbers and market value truly s…

Apple is the largest company in the world and sells the most successful product in human history. Of course nobody ‘compares’. But compared to almost any other iOS developer Epic is a giant.

And Epic isn't asking for a benefit for themselves: They're using those billions to fight for not just themselves, but thousands of smaller developers. Over two hundred of them joined Epic's little "app dev union" of sorts recently.

Yes, Apple sells one of the most successful products in human history... and they also illegally use that power to control the market and extract revenue from thousands of other companies who have no choice but to do business with them.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#559

Post by mrtranscendence »

threepio wrote: post #536
pja wrote: post #173

I’m seeing a lot of positive comments on HN about this: to me it seems to be purely a cynical piece of PR on Apple’s part. They hope to significantly reduce the pressure on politicians to take a close look at their App store practices by significantly reducing the absolute number of developers suffering the full impact whilst taking the minimum possible hit to their revenue. This has nothing to do with “doing the rig…

Unfortunately — because I am a longtime Apple user & developer — I have to agree that this is a cynical gesture designed to deflect regulatory scrutiny. Moreover, I expect that this announcement is mostly paving the way for Apple to force all Mac OS apps to be distributed via the Mac App Store (as they do on iOS). The optimist in me doesn't want to believe it. But this is probably consistent with Apple's economic inc…

I disagree with the assumption that restricting Macs to the MAS would be profit-maximizing for Apple. The context and expectations are different, and such restrictions -- hobbling many uses of macOS -- would drive developers away from Macs to competing platforms. I'm not even sure what those restrictions would look like; can I not execute arbitrary Python code? Can I not install Python packages from PyPI? (And how are they going to stop me, exactly?) Can I not use clang to compile a C project? To what extent can MacOS really be locked down in a way that doesn't drive away any developer who's not making iOS apps?

And if the Mac software scene stagnates, Apple eventually loses their core constituency.

Re: Apple Announces App Store Small Business Program

#560

Post by samatman »

psahgal wrote: post #384
api wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does Nintendo, etc., charge to develop and distribute for a console? Captive platforms are not new. iOS devices are consoles.

This IGN article from 2019 has a good summary of how much each digital storefront takes in revenue cut! https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut... Nintendo also takes a 30% cut, although it used to be 35% for WiiWare games. This does NOT include the cost of acquiring development hardware, which usually sets you back $1000 at most. 30% is actually the industry standard; Steam takes 30% and Epic Ga…

> there are really only two options: Android or iOS

Now, you subtly moved the goalposts here. I'm not even saying you did it on purpose, just drawing attention to it.

Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, are hardware manufacturers with integrated, proprietary software stacks, just like Apple. Androids are made by dozens of manufacturers, and you can side load, use the App Store of your choice, and so on.

The fact that Play Store does the lions share of business is the sum of: doing a great job, and nudging users in that direction through various defaults. Fact is, you can load what you want on an Android, and to me that undermines the case for forcing Apple to do likewise.

I'd still like the ability to sideload apps on my iPhone, and think it's worth pushing on Apple to get there. But as long as there are general-purpose phones available for purchase, and there are, I don't see the anticompetitive argument in the iPhone being a console: either put up with it or don't buy one.

I'm drawing a distinction between a bad business decision which customers should push Apple to change, and anticompetitive behavior which governments should force Apple to stop engaging in. I don't see the case for the latter.

Post reply on HN