Live data from Hacker News

Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

arstechnica.com

121–130 of 208 posts

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The evidence on the Android side doesn't seem to support this line of reasoning. There are multiple app stores on Android (including Amazon's), and sideloading is permitted, yet there is still a dispute over the platform fee rate that Google is charging for Google Play. At the end of the day, it's a dispute over money, and specifically the platform commission rate: developers want a bigger cut of the retail app price…

Your reasoning is faulty. There is no Android platform fee for app developers. In fact, alternative Android stores pay no fees at all. The Play Store has fees, and there's a dispute about them, but that doesn't make it analogous to the situation on iOS, which really has an iOS platform fee because it's impossible to install native code on the device you ostensibly own without Apple's ongoing permission.

You can install whatever you want on an iPhone if you’re willing to compile it yourself with one or two shell commands. You do need access to a Mac.

Contrary to popular belief, you can even install a non-safari browser:

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#122

> One bill opposed by the App Association is the Open App Markets Act, which aimed to help app developers use alternative in-app payment systems and avoid Apple's standard cuts of 15 to 30 percent. The cut is a platform fee , and collecting it via the in-app payment system is mechanism , not policy. The core issue is Apple's rate: although it is usually comparable to rates on other game platforms (eShop, Google Play,…

The "core problem" isn't Apple's rate - they're free to charge whatever they want. The real issue is that the App Store has no competition, so Apple could charge 90% and developers would have no choice but to abide or abandon the platform.

Your point of view here will depend somewhat on your level of success.

In the current model, the barrier to entry is pretty low. $99 gets you xcode, plus you need done hardware.

Once you've made something you need to reach a market. A good market place (like a regular super market) brings together suppliers and customers. That market has costs.

One model for costs is to charge each app the same amount. Say, for example $5000 per app submission. Lots of successful suppliers would like this model because it raises the bar for completion, and means they pay less money.

Another model is free-to-enter, but takes a cut of the sales. Successful products end up paying much much more than stuff no-one wants.

Overall I think I prefer the second model. Wildly successful apps, and developers, are basically funding an equal-access marketplace.

Now, of course there are winners and losers. From published numbers its clear most apps make 0,for some definition of 0. Every developer thinks their app is special, but most are, well, not.

Good marketing helps, buzz in the tech-press, visibility on forums, shows and events, and do on. Some do nothing, waiting for their big apple-lottery break of being "promoted in the app-store".

Developers risen in a world of cost-free-everything believe that they are the sole value-add in the path from hardware to consumer. Apple should provide this appstore connection to the developer free of charge. Of course developers think this, and they're welcome to think this, but it doesn't mean Apple has to do it this way.

Developers have choices. They can choose to develop for Android instead. They can choose to use the Google store, or a different store, or make their own store.

If you develop for iOS you know the rules. If you see value in that market (and you like the low barrier to entry) then go for it. If you make money then pay your 30%. If you don't (and the odds are you wont) then delight in the money you saved by there not being an entrance fee.

But don't sign up for the competition, win the game, _then_ complain the prize money is too low.

You may like Apple, you may not. But its your choice to join their game, or not. There's no bait-and-switch here, the rules are clear and well understood. You either accept their position of strength, their ability to crush you on a whim, their ability to arbtitarily create winners and losers, their ability to earn royalties on your code (on their platform) or you don't.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reasoning is faulty. There is no Android platform fee for app developers. In fact, alternative Android stores pay no fees at all. The Play Store has fees, and there's a dispute about them, but that doesn't make it analogous to the situation on iOS, which really has an iOS platform fee because it's impossible to install native code on the device you ostensibly own without Apple's ongoing permission.

You can install whatever you want on an iPhone if you’re willing to compile it yourself with one or two shell commands. You do need access to a Mac. Contrary to popular belief, you can even install a non-safari browser: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...

>Code signing identity

>Please refer to the Apple documentation on how to get a code signing identity and certificates. You can check that you have a code signing identity correctly installed by running the following command.

It has a secure chain of trust in the sense that the machine is secured against user control. Face, meet boot.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#124
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're misunderstanding the GP. They're talking about services provided entirely by other people, e.g. buying ebooks from Amazon. In that light, here are the responses to your bullets: - the hardware I already paid for - this should be included in the price of the hardware (and certainly is in the case of Apple) - I don't use the Books app, I use the Amazon Kindle app - I never listened to a podcast on my iPo…

> - I don't use the Books app, I use the Amazon Kindle app Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing offers 2 options: 35% royalty and 70% royalty. https://kdp.amazon.com/en_US/help/topic/G200644210 You can choose between two royalty options for each of your eBooks: the 35% royalty option and the 70% royalty option. -If you select the 35% royalty option, your royalty will be 35% of your list price without VAT for each unit sol…

Ok, now imagine Amazon only allowed you to list a book if it was self-published via KDP.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reasoning is faulty. There is no Android platform fee for app developers. In fact, alternative Android stores pay no fees at all. The Play Store has fees, and there's a dispute about them, but that doesn't make it analogous to the situation on iOS, which really has an iOS platform fee because it's impossible to install native code on the device you ostensibly own without Apple's ongoing permission.

You can install whatever you want on an iPhone if you’re willing to compile it yourself with one or two shell commands. You do need access to a Mac. Contrary to popular belief, you can even install a non-safari browser: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...

... with a $700+ Mac purchased from Apple, and usually a $99/yr subscription purchased from Apple, plus a network connection to Apple's servers to obtain code signing permission, which must be periodically refreshed or your code will stop running, to ensure you are never independent of Apple's ongoing approval.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#126
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "core problem" isn't Apple's rate - they're free to charge whatever they want. The real issue is that the App Store has no competition, so Apple could charge 90% and developers would have no choice but to abide or abandon the platform.

Amazon threw billions at creating an alternate storefront for Android devices. If they cannot achieve it, then who could? Maybe Samsung, and then it's a triopoly where which store still depends on who sells your phone.

Samsung actually used to bundle their own app store with their phones, but gave up eventually since it wasn't getting much traction

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reasoning is faulty. There is no Android platform fee for app developers. In fact, alternative Android stores pay no fees at all. The Play Store has fees, and there's a dispute about them, but that doesn't make it analogous to the situation on iOS, which really has an iOS platform fee because it's impossible to install native code on the device you ostensibly own without Apple's ongoing permission.

You can install whatever you want on an iPhone if you’re willing to compile it yourself with one or two shell commands. You do need access to a Mac. Contrary to popular belief, you can even install a non-safari browser: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...

And pay for an apple developer license.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can install whatever you want on an iPhone if you’re willing to compile it yourself with one or two shell commands. You do need access to a Mac. Contrary to popular belief, you can even install a non-safari browser: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...

>Code signing identity >Please refer to the Apple documentation on how to get a code signing identity and certificates. You can check that you have a code signing identity correctly installed by running the following command. It has a secure chain of trust in the sense that the machine is secured against user control. Face, meet boot.

Ok? Doesn’t change what I wrote. You can install the cert and profile in a few minutes.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple didn't help deliver my ebook or podcast. They don't deserve 30% of that.

> Apple didn't help deliver my ebook or podcast How true. Well, except for: - designing and manufacturing the hardware - marketing and selling the hardware - creating and promoting the Books app - popularizing podcasts with the iPod - creating and promoting the Podcasts app etc. > They don't deserve 30% of that. This illustrates my point: the core dispute is over platform fees charged by the App Store.

Apple's customers (people who bought iPods and iPhones) already paid handsomely for the hardware and software. It wasn't subsidized by app revenue.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can install whatever you want on an iPhone if you’re willing to compile it yourself with one or two shell commands. You do need access to a Mac. Contrary to popular belief, you can even install a non-safari browser: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...

... with a $700+ Mac purchased from Apple, and usually a $99/yr subscription purchased from Apple, plus a network connection to Apple's servers to obtain code signing permission, which must be periodically refreshed or your code will stop running, to ensure you are never independent of Apple's ongoing approval.

Far from “impossible”, which is what GP asserted.
Post reply on HN