Earlier quoted context omitted.
No ones forcing you to buy an iPhone; if this is really bothering you, go to Android or petition Microsoft or Amazon to start up their phone efforts again.
The problem with that is that this isn't just about end-users. Apple is being unfair to developers too, and just leaving iOS isn't a viable choice for them. Apple has a 50% market share in the US, so any American company who cut ties with them would instantly lose half of their customer base, since most people won't buy a new phone over a single app.
Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
691–700 of 851 posts
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#692Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they want? I’m not sure why you think you have a right to dictate private policy on a private platform.
> I’m not sure why you think you have a right to dictate private policy on a private platform. Well, because it is illegally anti-competitive, and the courts already ruled against microsoft, regarding web browsers. So thats why. It is because of anti-trust law.
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#693Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they want? I’m not sure why you think you have a right to dictate private policy on a private platform.
If you buy a Camry and then become an Uber driver, should you have to give Toyota a cut of your earnings?
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#694Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't seem quite right. Users Will Pay: $100 Dev Profit per $100: $60 Apples Cut/Profit: $30/$29.99 Dev Cut/Profit: $70/$42
Dev pays $99 each year for apple subscription. So until you make certain numbers, you are loosing money.
For decades, developers were lucky to see 50% of the retail price. More likely they'd see 20-40% after the retailer and distributor took their cut. And then this 20-40% has to pay some very expensive licenses for software development tools (we forget that these tools used to be commercial software) as well as licence fees for any toolkits you might have used (such as Unreal Engine).
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#695Earlier quoted context omitted.
Invoice developers for using their intellectual property? How dare Apple expect a revenue share from developers who use their tools and libraries. Companies that make tools and libraries should be forced to give them away for free. Like Unreal Engine. Completely free, no exceptions.
...why?
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#696Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would be true if they listed "alternative store_s_", but what they actually did is add itch.io to their store in a token way once they started the lawsuit in order to say "Look, we have no problem working with other stores". It's a stunt for the lawsuit. Even the Itch founder who signed the deal said they basically found it bemusing and an effort to gain legal leverage without really doing anything else. It'd be…
I bought The Division 2 after seeing a promotion on the Epic store. To install it, you have to install the Ubisoft store Uplay, which is launched through an integration with the Epic store. After playing that game, I saw promotions for Assassin's Creed Odyssey on Uplay, and purchased it. I later went on to purchase many other games on Uplay. In short, Epic allows Ubisoft to sell games on its store, for which they pre…
On the Apple side, it's ok for applications to require the user make an account on services like Uplay (I believe several Ubisoft games require this; and Fortnite requires the Epic equivalent). You can then use that account to buy stuff on the stores. It's not an exact parallel because there are no (non-jailbreak) external app stores on the iPhone, but it's a close parallel.
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#697Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's clear that any change to the equilibrium would have winners and losers. We can scope out who those are likely to be: free applications which provide some useful educational service would lose; currently they provide no revenue (beyond the token developer fee). Banking, rewards, credit, etc. applications (applications which interface consumers with their pre-existing accounts for CRUD-style management purposes) w…
> It's clear that any change to the equilibrium would have winners and losers. What equilibrium? Equilibrium implies multiple forces balancing each other out. This doesn't seem to be the case here, because Apple are effectively dictating terms. A better term would be "status quo".
I can understand that colloquially it could mean the latter, so I apologize for using a technical term.
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#698Earlier quoted context omitted.
Developers have no leverage because there are no alternatives. What can they do, take their apps and leave the store?
Yes, exactly that - go on strike. And the position is just like employees - one leaves, and mgt says "so what"? Many leave and mgt is screwed. Maybe developers could even create a fund to help themselves survive a 'strike', and/or to help fund alternatives such as versions on Android. Enough leave en masse, and Apple will have no choice but to listen. Until then, Apple divides & conquers.
You seem to also be bizarrely comparing the app store and the apps hosted to the plight of workers and union action. Apps are in 99% of cases produced by business. Developers are but a single part of a business workforce, which could include HR, support, accounting, management and any number of other personal needed to keep a business running. Businesses don’t just go ‘on strike’.
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#699Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re saying that 60% of 70% is less than 30%?
Doesn't seem quite right. Users Will Pay: $100 Dev Profit per $100: $60 Apples Cut/Profit: $30/$29.99 Dev Cut/Profit: $70/$42
> Dev Cut/Profit: $70/$42
Apple's cut is $30 but their profit certainly isn't $30 minus one cent.
Obviously there's the hard cost of transactions, which includes but certainly isn't limited to merchant fees. If it's an international app, there's the currency exchange involved in selling that app in local currency, under local merchant rules. Apple also absorbs various costs caused by avoiding and dealing with fraud. The transaction could be performed with gift card, which means maintaining that network, physical manufacturing costs, retailer profit margin... I seriously doubt that Apple even breaks even on the 70% when the payment uses a gift card.
There's the work Apple does in policing their store. While it does irritate developers, the end result is that the App Store is significantly less overrun with scams and junk than it would otherwise be—which means that customers are going to be more trusting of your app than would be the case if the store was a total free-for-all.
Then of course there's a subset of consumers who discovered your app because it's in Apple's app store. Providing you these eyeballs is valuable and worth something.
And of course there are a lot of soft costs—Apple did put a lot of work into all the resources for developers. How you personally believe these should be accounted for is obviously a matter of personal opinion, but that work does cost money and has benefited developers. There's an argument to be made that some amount of it could be assigned to Apple's app store revenues.
Re: Tim Cook’s Fortnite trial testimony was unexpectedly revealing
#700Earlier quoted context omitted.
$600 is a lot for a small dev who already has a computer. What if they’re a windows gamer and they’re happy with their old desktop? $600 is a lot to many people if it’s not strictly necessary.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted, you're right. Besides, the cheapest Mac Mini M1 is $1000 in my country. Not everyone can afford that.