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

Post by cptskippy » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:33 PM UTC

norman784 wrote: post #646

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.

As a user I don't care for the 30% cut, what I care is to have a centralised payment method and subscription system, I don't have energy/time to keep with different subscriptions in each service/app and knowing that there are bad actors, they will do whatever possible to make hard to unsubscribe (like a few years ago the NYT, where you could only unsubscribe by phone and was very hard even so). But if even when using…

Post by kspacewalk2 » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:42 PM UTC

tivert wrote: post #797

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's incredible is the idea that an argument or a point of view is somehow invalidated purely because it happens to side with the trillion dollar company. This is in the same vein as "this cause is supported by teh evil Amerika, hence it must be evil" line of thinking, typically espoused by self-declared anti-imperialists (who are often mere anti-US-imperialists). >make a few people who already have everything even…

> What's incredible is the idea that an argument or a point of view is somehow invalidated purely because it happens to side with the trillion dollar company. What's incredible is how people waste their tiny amount of personal energy defending their exploitation by a corporation that has vastly more resources than them and objectively does not need their help. Apple is probably the poster child for effectively using…

Post by merlindru » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:55 PM UTC

linuxhansl wrote: post #836

AlwaysRock wrote: post #817

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldnt defend 30% specifically but surely they should get some cut or share. What is the right number? 1%? 50%? I don't know. > 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. Kind of an odd take. They take a cut because they provide a service. They are not stealing. I guess lump me in with the defending apple cro…

Seems to me the range of what a credit card charges would seem sensible. I.e. 3-7%. Alternatively charge 30% but be forced to allow side-installing Apps. That way developers can decide if they want the convenience and reach of the AppStore or not.

Post by politician » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 5:57 PM UTC

Post by politician » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 6:00 PM UTC

Gabrys1 wrote: post #347

zamadatix wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You're charging too much" seems unlikely to be the actual argument presented though. Something along the lines of the scare message, still not actually allowing it to be handled via in app flow like a first party payment, and intentionally making a 3rd party choice potentially impossible to compete vs a 1st party choice by arguably hiding part of the processing fee margin in the overall fee would be the kinds of arg…

I think the percentage charged is very relevant though. And the fact the developer is to hide the fee and not list it on the receipt (subscription: $10, Apple tax: $3) And the fact you cannot charge less for the same service if you sold it outside the platform (as you'd like to do as you didn't need to collect the Apple tax).