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

891–900 of 1001 posts

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

#891

Post by squigglydonut »

square_usual wrote: post #888
squigglydonut wrote: post #881

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nextjs and native browser components that I style in ways that are familiar to mobile app users. So like , and you use CSS to give it 8px border radius and 48px height. Since I'm going for a material style with an iOS feel I mix the forms. Another example is I use a hamburger menu but I use sf symbols light "icon" as an SVG.

SF Symbols are copyrighted. You should be careful about your usage of them in a non-Apple-approved manner.

Yes I know. Show me exactly what you are referring to.

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

#892

Post by squigglydonut »

square_usual wrote: post #888
squigglydonut wrote: post #881

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nextjs and native browser components that I style in ways that are familiar to mobile app users. So like , and you use CSS to give it 8px border radius and 48px height. Since I'm going for a material style with an iOS feel I mix the forms. Another example is I use a hamburger menu but I use sf symbols light "icon" as an SVG.

SF Symbols are copyrighted. You should be careful about your usage of them in a non-Apple-approved manner.

My PWA is used on Apple products and I developed it with the intent of being used on Apple Products. I cannot control if a user uses a non Apple product. I cannot be expected to restrict what products my users use to access my product.

Added: I will also add that the icons I'm using are very basic. Found in many ui kits. The minus symbol, arrows, trash can. The only one that is recognizable to the trained eye is that I'm use the copy symbol (two pages). So if it's going to be an issue for that one I would be fine to use something from Google. I just want Apple to know that I'm on team Apple. I want people to use Apple products. When they come out with SwiftUI Kit for web, I will be the first user. For a product like mine, most users are iphone users.

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

#893

Post by lolinder »

folmar wrote: post #885
lolinder wrote: post #874

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very normal for companies to charge some customers more than others based on their ability and/or willingness to pay. See: student, senior, and military discounts, SaaS with organization pricing vs individual pricing, etc.

I don't know for the US but in many countries that's just illegal if you have a monopoly.

The judge in this ruling found that Apple does not have a monopoly, so it wouldn't matter either way.

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

#894

Post by dwaite »

smoldesu wrote: post #816
dwaite wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has been the style of argument made to regulators so far. However then people get shocked that Apple says ok, we've rolled out the ability for third party app stores, we still review all the apps before signing, and the store owes us a 20% commission.

Yes, people are shocked. Apple's provisional approach to legislative compliance isn't working, their indifference towards public opinion is what brought antitrust regulators onto the scene in the first place. Their App Store monopoly is the most literal definition of anticompetitive bundling in the 21st century; they're tying the primary product (Apple hardware, software, APIs, etc.) to a secondary product (the App S…

Again, this is what I think people get wrong when they talk about anticompetitive bundling.

Apple will continue to take a cut to make apps for the phone. The App Store and in-app purchases are how they take their cut today.

The bundling is anticompetitive against the potential market for third party payment providers and third party app marketplaces, sure. However, decoupling it is independent of reducing Apple's high fees. Apple will continue to charge a substantial fee for their part, even if due to regulatory compliance they offer less services to developers.

Someone would need to make a legal case directly against the fees Apple charges. I suspect that is a very challenging thing to do - least of which because they have never raised rates. The fees Apple collects have been the same since the first app was sold for iPhone, and the success has grown under that framework.

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

#895

Post by kazinator »

az226 wrote: post #532
kazinator wrote: post #211

How is it non-app store purchasing if Apple still gets the commission? If Apple gets commission, the sale took place on Apple's cyberturf, all of which can be identified as being their app store. The user's Apple device where they made this purchase is effectively a branch location of the that store.

It's malicious compliance. It's non-app store purchase but Apple still gets to keep a 27% net cut. Had Apple made no commissions on those sales it would have still been super onerous but at least then people can "buy" the degraded experience if there is a savings to be had for the customer.

> malicious compliance

Nice term; it is fortuitously applicable in another ongoing HN thread.

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

#896

Post by sangnoir »

judge2020 wrote: post #165
judge2020 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll probably need to be another lawsuit since it's in the developer agreement. Via user lolinder ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39020745 ): > Apple is already pretty clear in its developer agreement [0] that the 30% commission is for "its services as Your agent and/or commissionaire" (Schedule 2 3.4), not for its services as a payment processor. They are contractually allowed to take the 30% fee out of paym…

To add, I'm not sure what legal basis there is for "you're charging too much". My only guess is filing against Apple and Google jointly for being a duopoly, but Epic has made it extremely hard to do something like this because of their existing jury trial against Google which gives a lot of concessions to third-party app stores in terms of functionality.

> To add, I'm not sure what legal basis there is for "you're charging too much"

Anti-price-gauging laws have already been ruled as constitutional, so there is case law for "You're charging too much"

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

#898

Post by pritambaral »

squigglydonut wrote: post #842

I designed and built my PWA. You just have to define a manifest and set an empty service worker. Boom now your mobile responsive app is a PWA. PWA can look exactly like native app if you are careful with the design. There are navigation patterns that users expect. Make sure to dial in the information hierarchy and design modals correctly. Use familiar iconography and use type that works at small point sizes. This is…

Is it still true that iOS PWAs cannot be opened with a link (except from a notification pushed to the app).

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

#899

Post by squigglydonut »

pritambaral wrote: post #898
squigglydonut wrote: post #842

I designed and built my PWA. You just have to define a manifest and set an empty service worker. Boom now your mobile responsive app is a PWA. PWA can look exactly like native app if you are careful with the design. There are navigation patterns that users expect. Make sure to dial in the information hierarchy and design modals correctly. Use familiar iconography and use type that works at small point sizes. This is…

Is it still true that iOS PWAs cannot be opened with a link (except from a notification pushed to the app).

Interesting. Can you explain more about exactly when that happens? I can test it with mine.

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

#900

Post by rustcleaner »

samtheprogram wrote: post #215
nsagent wrote: post #160

I've got to say, Apple definitely lost me on this one. This feels bad enough that despite having an iPhone since the iPhone 3G, I'll likely jump ship when I need to upgrade unless they make a U-turn on this move. EDIT: Wow, getting downvoted for saying Apple is losing me as a customer with this move is surprising. I don't understand how people on Hacker News of all places want conformity of thought. I switched from u…

You haven’t daily driven Android since at least the iPhone 3GS, according to your comment. There’s a reason they’re able to charge 30%, have a dominant market position in the US, and people continue to release apps for iOS (and prioritize launching there over Android). You’re also not the customer in this situation — you’re talking not as a developer but as an end-user without any mention of a subscription service th…

GrapheneOS on Pixel makes 98% of Android problems go away. Just side-load F-Droid from the initially secure and barren state, install Aurora and Syncthing from F-Droid, configure Syncthing to pair with a PC partner (gives you that cloud feeling), and you have the absolute basics for a feature-equivalent Android device without all the rentier-model enforcement which comes on Soisung devices. If you need Google-stuff, GSF is available fully sandboxed and you can use Android profiles to highly isolate if so desired.

There is no good reason which comes to my mind to go with anything else if a sane, secure, privacy- and sovereignty-respecting mobile device is what you are after. 98% of devices are just beautiful overpriced subscription and microtransaction cash-traps. Just like setting a snare in the wild to catch a rabbit, Apple (and competitors) have constructed a beautifully seductive snare for you!

Post reply on HN