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

US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#311

Post by shiroiuma »

gruez wrote: post #198
enragedcacti wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple argued from the very beginning that the 30% was its fee for running the App Store, marketing the apps, and storing and delivering the app bundles. The in-app payment system was a convenient way for Apple to collect its commission and a way for Apple to create a unified payment experience for its customers, but it was never the Achilles heel for Apple's business model. Is it just me or does this argument seem…

>Its like a toll road arguing "no, driving on the road is free of course, we just charge at the entrance and exit for the privilege of looking at the toll road". I mean, there's actually many toll roads/bridges that only charge for travel in one direction. The other is free, with the expectation that you'll need to make a return trip anyways.

Does Google Maps still assume that the toll applies in both directions? I used to live near a bridge like this and it was really annoying, because I had Google Maps set to avoid toll roads, but because of this it would refuse to plot a route over the bridge, even though there was no toll in that direction.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#312

Post by kmeisthax »

MobileVet wrote: post #56

I am curious if any businesses operating with the ‘pay Apple their cut’ on outside sales actually do? Does Apple have the manpower to chase every developer for that fee? Do they really expect to collect it or is it more of a threat? Any HN people with first hand knowledge of a business paying that fee?

Given the zeal Apple has for their 30%, they absolutely will be demanding fully open books and tracking for that outbound link.

There's no firsthand knowledge because this is the first time Apple's actually had to chase companies for the fee. In fact, their whole argument against Epic was that banning steering made it easier on both parties to attribute revenue.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#313

Post by etchalon »

poundofshrimp wrote: post #145

To see why Apple’s mandatory commissions are absurd, compare phones to desktop computers. There is no fundamental difference between the two. So, why is it okay to install whatever you want and pay for it directly on desktops, but on phones it is not? The “better security” argument just doesn’t make sense in this context.

It's OK because that's just how it worked out.

One platforms norms developed before the internet and one developed after.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#314

Post by [deleted] »

stouset wrote: post #177
poundofshrimp wrote: post #145

To see why Apple’s mandatory commissions are absurd, compare phones to desktop computers. There is no fundamental difference between the two. So, why is it okay to install whatever you want and pay for it directly on desktops, but on phones it is not? The “better security” argument just doesn’t make sense in this context.

Apple is hosting, distributing, and directly marketing apps in the app store. They are reviewing submitted apps for compliance with their policies and security requirements. If you want to compare it to desktop computers, great! Compare it to the macOS App Store which… takes a 30% commission. Whether or not you personally agree that 30% is a reasonable fee, you can't simply deny that operating the app store costs mon…

[deleted]

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#315

Post by poundofshrimp »

CubsFan1060 wrote: post #265
poundofshrimp wrote: post #145

To see why Apple’s mandatory commissions are absurd, compare phones to desktop computers. There is no fundamental difference between the two. So, why is it okay to install whatever you want and pay for it directly on desktops, but on phones it is not? The “better security” argument just doesn’t make sense in this context.

If there is no fundamental difference, then did you just define the market as all phones, tablets, and pcs? If so the the iPhone is a small minority and can’t possibly be forced to change anything, right? You can just replace your iPhone with a pc if you want to install things?

Both phone and desktop consumers can install third-party apps on their devices. From this point of view, there is no fundamental difference. Yet, on desktops, people are free to install freely, but on the iPhone, Apple controls all third-party installations.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#316

Post by saintfire »

alephnan wrote: post #284
bradgessler wrote: post #54

Am I getting this right? Say I use Stripe as my payment processor. Stripe takes 2.9% + $0.30, then Apple takes 27% so I'm at 29.9% + $0.30 being taken out of however much I charge for my app? For a $10 app, $0.30 is 3% putting the fee at 32.9%. For the privilege of paying 2.9% more, my users get to see a scary privacy message and when I bill the customer a year later for a subscription, there's a 20-30% chance that t…

If you don't like making $6.71, the alternative is to make $0 by not selling it on the Apple app store.

Isn't that a defining trait of a monopoly position?

"If you don't like it then alternative is your target market is cut by over 50%"

Not a great argument. When you essentially have the say as to whether a company can afford to exist then you have serious control over a "free" market.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#317

Post by AdamJacobMuller »

choppaface wrote: post #163
GeekyBear wrote: post #114

At this point, it's worth remembering that one of the points on which Epic lost was Apple's right to take a cut of transactions. I found this discussion of the Apple v. Epic ruling to be informative: > as discussed in the findings of facts, IAP is the method by which Apple collects its licensing fee from developers for the use of Apple’s intellectual property. Even in the absence of IAP, Apple could still charge a co…

But use of said IP is required because Apple forbids side-loading. Therefore Apple App store is a monopoly. So hopefully the court result will in the end help get the Apple App store shut down / opened up.

Even if you're side-loading, you're still using Apple IP.

Every single framework and the OS itself up to the Mach OSS Kernel is Apple IP.

It would be entirely unfeasible to run anything on an iPhone without some Apple IP. You'd be looking at an Asahi Linux for iPhone.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#318

Post by Spivak »

aCoreyJ wrote: post #158
lolinder wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The details of the process of getting approval for links may be out of line, but the idea that simply using a different payment processor would remove the entirety of the 30% commission was always a pipe dream. Apple has always been adamant that the fee is for the service of using the App Store, not the payment processor, and that you owe them for sales made regardless of whether they're able to take the money direct…

That's precisely what gets them in trouble though. Every bank, credit card, giant corporation has an app and has to pay Apple nothing but indie game developers subsidize them

Because the fee is only charged for digital goods yada yada Apple legalese. It's not 30% of every time money moves when an iPhone is involved. Indie devs are still processing credit card payments so I don't think this argument follows.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#319

Post by sircastor »

poundofshrimp wrote: post #145

To see why Apple’s mandatory commissions are absurd, compare phones to desktop computers. There is no fundamental difference between the two. So, why is it okay to install whatever you want and pay for it directly on desktops, but on phones it is not? The “better security” argument just doesn’t make sense in this context.

> There is no fundamental difference between the two.

Are the input devices the same? The screens sizes? The situations you use them? The means of network connectivity? The social conventions around them?

There are tremendous differences between phones and desktop computers. Really the only way that they’re not different is that they’re both Von Neumann machines. But that describes so many things around us these days that it’s a distinction without a difference. By the same virtue a modern television is no different.

Re: US developers can offer non-app store purchasing, Apple still collect commission

#320

Post by knubie »

sircastor wrote: post #293
choppaface wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But use of said IP is required because Apple forbids side-loading. Therefore Apple App store is a monopoly. So hopefully the court result will in the end help get the Apple App store shut down / opened up.

Some people think of the App Store as a bazaar that Apple runs on its property, and it’s a 15-30% charge to setup a tent and sell your wares. Others think of it as Apple’s general store where they carry your app as a product, and you pay 15-30% for a place on the shelf. The concept that Kroger (for instance) has a monopoly of customers in its own store is ridiculous. There are other stores, and other bazaars. What an…

I think a better analogy would be something like installing aftermarket parts for for your vehicle.
Post reply on HN