Apple has historically never considered their products as a platform, but rather as a final product, useable as-is. iOS was initially completely closed, for bullshit reasons. Helping developers is never a priority, and it is easy to feel when you try to build something running on their products. This is unfortunate and I think it is highly irrational.
Arguably iOS was originally intended and designed to run HTML5 web apps without intermediation. Web tech based applets downloadable and runnable from a home screen, similar to Palm Pre and WebOS.
Not quite (HTML5 wasn’t even finalized for release until 2014). Jobs really intended for Apple-only Native Apps, one of which was a Safari, that allowed third party services via webpages
> similar to Palm Pre and WebOS.
not quite. webOS was more than 'tech based applets'. webOS tried to leverage HTML and CSS as the programming language for native apps much like Android leveraged Java. It was not the same philosophy as iPhone OS 1.0
I’ve never paid for an app, and don’t want to pay more for an AppStore that I don’t use. Only app I use other than Apple stock apps is a bank app which I can use safari and Instagram. Which should work on web browsers but I don’t care about it enough to pay money for it
I don't get it, how would you be paying more for an AppStore?
If Apple reduces platform fees the price of the phone could go up to compensate for that.
Also, my experience aligns with this too. I dont game on my phone and basically use default apps. I use the United app to book flights but could easily use the mobile website. Same with Twitter
"The “way” is already paid by the hardware — but Apple uses their position of power to double-dip." I understand the optics of this don't look good, but is it wrong to have multiple sources of revenue derived from the "way"? 1. what happens if supply chain dynamics and smartphone market competition negatively impact the hardware margins? What happens when consumer appetite for innovation in the phone stagnates and ma…
I too don't see any issue with this. They built the phone and created a platform to build upon. They exact a 30% tax. So be it. I will not use, install, or tell my friends or family to use, install, or get software from any third party app on their phones as it would break one of the biggest selling points of the iPhone: it's appliance nature and how difficult it is to brick or screw up. I also don't want the podcast…
You are not alone. Consumer satisfaction of the iPhone as a product is through the roof. Android has been steadily losing customers who jump over to iPhone.
> They pretend with a straight face like it was somehow impossible to sell software or reach customers before their magical store made it happen. I never heard them claim it but speaking as a developer it's obvious that Apple was a driving force here. Sellable desktop software became obsolete due to piracy. Everything is server-based now. Mobile apps, particularly on iOS, is the only place where the general public co…
Phrased differently you'll find these kind of statements in the testimonies by Apple execs in the Epic case. On the other hand your claim that: >Sellable desktop software became obsolete due to piracy. Is unfounded. Games are sellable desktop software and they're doing just fine. What people want is fair prices and easy availability, which is the business model of every digital store since itunes.
>Is unfounded. Games are sellable desktop software and they're doing just fine.
On Stream, the App Store, console stores, and other
similar plaforms.
I think the core sentiment here is being lost. This isn’t so much a call to action against Apple’s fees. It’s pointing out something that I’ve felt building over the last couple of years out of Apple, which is an attitude of hubris, contempt, and a “taking for granted” of Apple’s developers. The WWDC spiel of how much they value us has become trite and transparent. They do produce some really nice tools and APIs. I c…
Mac developers have been bitching about Apple for 30+ years. There are lots of valid criticisms. At the same time I find the "Apple takes us for granted" complaints a little hollow. I think a lot of developers discount the platform and think it's all their apps that bring in iOS uses. This was more true in the 90s on the Mac. The platform Apple provided was good but it was the third party software that really made th…
The iPhone without then apps that run on it is somewhat interesting, but is largely a novelty; they happen to provide a platform on which I can conveniently access Facebook/Twitter/Instagram/TikTok, Lyft/Uber/DoorDash/Instacart, or Flippy Unicorn / Geometry Racer. Many people said Windows Phone's UI was amazing--I even know stanch Apple people who said that--and pretty much everyone I knew thought Palm's WebOS was better than iOS in myriad ways... but I wouldn't even consider buying either of those devices because I wouldn't be able to use the apps I use literally all day every day. Hell: apps are so important that before Apple introduced the APP store, like 50% of the few people who owned the original iPhone (which had potential, but did kind of suck) were jailbreaking it, so they could do something as simple as play a game, as Apple had seriously shipped a phone without even a copy of Snake. The iPhone would merely be an "extravagance" for most people... were it not for the apps that it has managed to get to develop often uniquely for their platform (something I would argue is done using anti-competitive lock-in strategies, and at the extreme disadvantage of the user, more than simply by good engineering).
Yep. It is not surprising at all that the term “insulting” appears three times because that’s how it feels for so many reasons. Remember: - They pretend with a straight face like it was somehow impossible to sell software or reach customers before their magical store made it happen. - They pretend like the current “search” feature of the App Store is not a sad reduction of what it used to be (or what it could be if a…
> - They pretend with a straight face like it was somehow impossible to sell software or reach customers before their magical store made it happen. I've never heard them claim that. The claim is that for an appliance like a phone - rather than a general purpose computer - device reliability trumps all, including the ability for the consumer to run arbitrary code on the device.
They have. See their responses to the Senate anti-trust panel. Also in numerous interviews.
Somewhat true. There are 300M iPhone install base in China, on an equal bases you can take the 30% of App Store Revenue away to compare to Google's Play Store. But generally speaking iOS user spend double the amount of money compared to Android users. And to the OP's number, Apple has ~25% market share. Not 20%. Those numbers are shipments, not usage. which is for the 100th times meaningless in nearly all topics.
Right, yeah. There's just so many unknowns when it comes to "how profitable are App Stores" that any conversation about it is seriously pointless. Like, I don't even want to guess; I refuse to believe that iOS is more profitable than Android, because I'm not even sure if that's the right question . All the data we have on global/domestic smartphone shipments, active users, monthly actives, daily actives, dollars spen…
>it all comes from these dodgy "Global Insights" app consulting firms.
Most of my Data were deduced /inferred from Official Apple and Google, Mobile Carrier, Government Numbers. For more numbers Benedict Evans slides has many more details.
>How do we know the price of the hardware today isn't offset by services revenue? Unless you want to some doggy NRE number into accounting. Apple's hardware are extremely profitable doesn't matter how you spin or slice it. But, yes. Today's price are subsidise by their services revenue. The keyword here is price. Apple still gets to keep their same margin. Basically Apple shifted the cost of macOS, cloud and other so…
I don't think they shifted anything, they just added the new revenue on top and became more profitable.
Apple used to account their software development cost as part of their product COGS. Which is what Steve's way of saying you buy iPhone for iOS. Both are the same and one. I believe this was listed in their late 00s investor notes. We dont know how much they account for those development though. It was never listed, but in the case of 2018, $10 / devices were put to Services Revenue. Which is roughly $3B annual revenue to Services Revenue.
> They should be forced to allow competing browser engines(not just skins on Safari engine) on the platform I really don't want to have multiple browsers installed on my phone & swap between them because some web app works in one browser, but not another. Mobile browsing is already pretty shitty, I don't think fragmentation will make it any better.
I'm not sure the solution to that is "so app developers are forced to make sure their app works better in 'your' browser (Safari) because that's the only choice for a large number of users".