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

421–430 of 1001 posts

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

#421

Post by [deleted] »

semiquaver wrote: post #355
David_FF wrote: post #335

Maybe I missed it But how will they actually know how much money developers are making via external web purchasing? Audits? In my opinion working with both Apple and Google's billing libraries is pretty painful. Many developers use third parties to make it easier like Qonversion or RevenueCat. These all have to go through Apple and Google respectively If you can just have a web page to do it, that seems easier actual…

> Developers are required to provide a periodic accounting of qualifying out-of-app purchases, and Apple has a right to audit developers' accounting to ensure compliance with their commission obligations and to charge interest and offset payments.

[deleted]

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

#422

Post by throwitaway1123 »

greg_V wrote: post #45
nerdawson wrote: post #7

They want a 27% commission on sales made from those links and the right to audit companies' accounts for compliance. https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1747406430054097099 It's beyond a joke. Between that and the payment processing fees, you're no better off. In fact, you get all of the same costs but none of the benefits of Apple's app store native payment infrastructure.

Apple is acting like a state within their domain. Collecting a VAT and requiring compliance that's reserved usually for the national tax office with inspective powers. Having locked in the richest consumers of the world, they get to say what goes and what doesn't, worldly courts and laws be damned. It's both hilarious and gruesome at the same time, because we're supposed to be equal under consumer laws or whatever, b…

> Apple is acting like a state within their domain.

Someone unironically complained yesterday that developers who don't like paying the 30% fee probably don't like paying their taxes, and I made the exact same argument that Apple was acting like a sovereign state [0]. And now Apple is doubling down by announcing that they'll be performing financial audits just like the Internal Revenue Service if you include a link to purchase content/services outside of the app store.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39007657

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

#423

Post by Hamuko »

55555 wrote: post #402

Google should update the Chrome TOS so that they get 30% of all sales placed through Chrome, regardless of payment processor used. They're missing out on trillions of dollars and all they have to do is update their TOS!

Apple has thankfully figured out that there's good money in online sales so they'll in fact get a cut if you buy stuff on Safari, although only if you use Apple Pay and even then they only get a miniscule 0.15% (or less) cut. I imagine this is because they don't have the technology to skim off all transactions yet and laws prohibiting excessive processing fees.

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

#424

Post by IceHegel »

Yes, there's a very real sense in which the world is better for having had Apple than not. They have made technological life more beautiful.

For that reason, people seem strangely committed to defending them through their rent-seeking period.

Apple cannot be both a good company and a monopoly.

As their users, we should not accept the false framing and false choice their management presents of either monopolistic control of the mobile ecosystem or endless spam and a Wild West free-for-all.

I do not understand why people's hearts are still drawn to Apple as the company of Steve Jobs, when it is clearly something very, very different today.

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

#425

Post by riscy »

account-5 wrote: post #383
riscy wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've yet to see an HN hate thread about the trillion dollar company Google and its Play Store, with the same fees, stealing 30% from an even broader part of society.

You clearly not been looking hard enough; Google, rightly, gets hated on way more than Apple. My experience tends to be that on HN apple can do no wrong.

Google gets mild-mannered, disappointed commenters sighing about how they've messed up search, the web, and has no product/customer support. When Apple comes up, people get on their soap boxes with expletives about how society and the world is fundamentally being ruined. The tone just isn't comparable at all.

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

#426

Post by gonzon »

andersa wrote: post #373

It's incredible that there are actually people in this thread arguing in favor of Apple. You don't need to defend the trillion dollar company. They are not your friend, they do not care about you, your work or your life. All they do is steal 30% from society that could be used for more productive purposes than make a few people who already have everything even richer.

the ironic thing is that the way you describe apple is the way 99% of people outside of hackernews would describe the people of hackernews (or tech ppl in general).

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

#427

Post by johnnyanmac »

kridsdale1 wrote: post #387
pompino wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We should discuss the points on their merits, not based on who's making them and how much money they have. Its not based on how much money they have. Its how they've managed to accumulate the money - by gouging devs.

[flagged]

>They’re also operating all the servers. Your $100 does not cover it.

I mean, let's be real here. Most people even if Apple fully allowed other payment processors would still opt into Apple's payment. Easiest to setup, most visible and familiar interface for consumers, and lets them push liability back to Apple. So they'd still get 30% from many consumers.

This angle only applies in a situation where you think 1) the pareto principle applies and 2) all of that 20% decided to roll their own payment processing, which isn't trivial nor a risk many want to take onto themselves. It'd take a lot more than a dozen megacorps doing this to make Apple sweat.

And if this does happen, it sounds like a service issue a that point. If you can offer all that convenience but people don't view it as worth 30%, then maybe the rate should be re-negotiated.

>They spend hundreds of millions on SWE salaries to make a nice SDK for you to use

they spend hundreds of millions to get other businesses to do business with them, and still charge many upfront costs along the way. Back then, we simply called that the cost to do business.

Adtech also spends hundreds of millions each on salaries to make a nice SDK for you to use. I don't exactly feel I owe those companies for their labor since I'm (the dev) not the primary point of revenue.

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

#428

Post by jonhohle »

radley wrote: post #39

There's a strong chance this will be shot down as "bad-faith" compliance. Rumor is Epic will quickly contest it [Update: confirmed] https://twitter.com/timsweeneyepic/status/174740814726057173...

Yeah, as much as I defend Apple against the “they have a monopoly on the iPhone” crowd, this seems worse than the original restrictions. People have been buying stuff online for decades. There’s no new security issue at play here. Taking a commission from a company that’s already paying for payment processing can’t possibly be seen as reasonable.

How are they even going to attempt to enforce compliance. Is every store required to integrate with their payments API?

If they’re taking payments from the platform and it does turn out to be a scam, now their hands are dirty as well.

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

#429

Post by riscy »

Hamuko wrote: post #423
55555 wrote: post #402

Google should update the Chrome TOS so that they get 30% of all sales placed through Chrome, regardless of payment processor used. They're missing out on trillions of dollars and all they have to do is update their TOS!

Apple has thankfully figured out that there's good money in online sales so they'll in fact get a cut if you buy stuff on Safari, although only if you use Apple Pay and even then they only get a miniscule 0.15% (or less) cut. I imagine this is because they don't have the technology to skim off all transactions yet and laws prohibiting excessive processing fees.

Does there exist a payment processor that takes zero cut?

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

#430

Post by johnnyanmac »

camillomiller wrote: post #418
pompino wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We should discuss the points on their merits, not based on who's making them and how much money they have. Its not based on how much money they have. Its how they've managed to accumulate the money - by gouging devs.

This is a biased view that disregards basic available metrics. Apple is a hardware company. Developers are instrumental to its devices success and a point can be made that 30% might be too high of a fee. On the other hand many of those developers wouldn’t have a job in the first place if it wasn’t for Apple creating the App Store.

I find it interesting seeing the arguments here on how Apple should keep its large cut for years after it's become sustainable, but when mentioning the idea of giving copyrighted artists any sort of royalty (it'd be far, far, far from 30%) for training LLMs that the argument shifts back to "well they got paid already".

So, how long does Apple get to reap the rewards of their old accomplishments from 18 years ago? how long should such works be benefited from before we shift the dynamics back to being "a public commons"?

Post reply on HN