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

Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

mobiledevmemo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 128 posts

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#21

Post by dataflow »

detourdog wrote: post #15
librish wrote: post #5

I'm surprised that so many developers are siding with Apple in this regard. If other stores and payment options were allowed I genuinely believe that: - Apple's own fees would be reduced relatively quickly - Technological savvy users will be able to discern which external sites are safe and get even lower prices when available - Very few companies will be able to afford not being on the App Store (especially if Apple…

Probably a familiarity with how brick and mortar business work and what it was like when software came in a box. 30% or 15% for one stop global distribution and multi-jurisdictional tax collecting is a deal all day long. Could Spotify have bootstrapped itself without the App Store?

Did brick and mortar stores have a monopoly on software distribution?

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#22

Post by jwells89 »

speedylight wrote: post #9

I don’t understand this issue too well to feel one or another. I just want all of my purchases and subscriptions to remain tied to my Apple ID and cancelable from my place. It makes life so much easier and saves money because it’s very hard to forget about subscriptions I no longer use when they’re all listed in one place. Also if I want to refund a purchase for whatever reason I can deal directly with Apple instead…

My hope is that if third party stores and sideloading come to iOS, Apple greatly incentivizes devs somehow to leverage a new unified subscription control panel API to help keep subs all in one list even if you don’t subscribe through the app store.

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#23

Post by MBCook »

ianlevesque wrote: post #2

It’s like they want regulators to get involved. The arrogance is insane.

They’re sort of trapped between a rock and a hard place.

I don’t think what they’re doing is right, don’t take this as defense.

On the one hand “services revenue” (their cut from casino/exploitive games) is basically the only thing growing. people who want iPhones have them. People who want iPads have them. The Vision Pro is never going to sell 1 billion units. Wall Street demand growth so they “have to“ keep finding ways to juice services revenue a bunch. Or the stock will get hammered.

On the other hand, doing this is absolutely alienating every developer. And that will hurt the brand and their growth and their revenue too. You think there are as many developers who want to develop for the Vision Pro as there would have been if Apple was still as popular with devs as they were 10 years ago?

But of course even if developers weren’t getting really mad they’ve gone so far as to get governments to start taking a deep look at them. And you know that’s not gonna go well.

Juicing revenue makes developers and the governments more bad. Actions by the government or to be better for developers will make Wall Street mad.

They mismanaged it and now they’re screwed. They could’ve been slowly cutting down and opening up this whole time. In small controlled ways they were willing to give up. In ways to let them keep the revenue growth but just slow it down a little.

Instead they’ve got lawsuits. And governments forcing their hand.l to do things they hate and (in some cases) may be bad. And they’re being petulant about it all and going to get in even more trouble for defying courts/legislatures. All while hurting the brand.

Good job Apple.

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#24

Post by redeeman »

talkingtab wrote: post #14

This is an example of the incredible arrogance of companies like Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Facebook. They have the ability to pour an enormous amount of money into lawyers and lobbying so that even companies like Epic or countries like the Netherlands have little chance of controlling misbehavior. Even the IRS is having a hard time getting Microsoft to pay their 28 BILLION dollar tax bill. It should be cle…

by purchasing the new iphone, and calling on apple to not allow third party stores, because they know they cannot say no to installing facebook, and IF thirdparty stores or sideloading were to be allowed, facebook might just get worse!

(all this seen in comments in other threads on hn)

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#25

Post by sneak »

Since when did we as an industry start championing rentseeking that adds no value?

Yes, the App Store is valuable. No, generic payment processing rails aren’t. Even the 1-3% charged by CC companies is bullshit. Apple, of course, charges 10x this.

The only reason they get away with it is because they have leveraged cryptography to stifle competition. If other app stores were possible on iOS, Facebook and Epic and Netflix would collaborate to create one in a heartbeat and billions of people would stop having to pay higher prices to inflate Apple’s stock value.

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#26

Post by judge2020 »

librish wrote: post #5

I'm surprised that so many developers are siding with Apple in this regard. If other stores and payment options were allowed I genuinely believe that: - Apple's own fees would be reduced relatively quickly - Technological savvy users will be able to discern which external sites are safe and get even lower prices when available - Very few companies will be able to afford not being on the App Store (especially if Apple…

Unfortunately the most vulnerable will be easily manipulated into bypassing whatever prompts are needed. The threat vector is facebook telling users to install Instagram/FB from their own app store instead of from the App Store, both eroding their privacy (since they won't be mandated to respect the "do not track" popup) as well as training them how to install apps from third-party sources and that "it's OK to sideload because Facebook and Instagram require it".

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#27

Post by judge2020 »

librish wrote: post #12
threeseed wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because most iOS developers aren't confused about the situation. Apple's commission is for the App Store, SDKs, Developer Support etc. Not just a payment processing fee. And so if there are other stores and payment options which there will be soon Apple is still within their right to collect that fee. As every court around the world has said. They could collect it as a percentage of sales like Epic or just lum…

Then force them to unbundle those fees if they want to collect them. It just doesn't make any sense that some developers have to pay up to 30% of their iOS revenue while others (including huge corporations like Uber, Starbucks, Target etc) pay nothing.

The rule has been that physical purchases don't need to use IAPs, since the service you're purchasing is not solely enabled by Apple's investment into the entire hardware/software/APIs stack that allows your users to buy gems in your game.

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#28

Post by librish »

TillE wrote: post #20
librish wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then force them to unbundle those fees if they want to collect them. It just doesn't make any sense that some developers have to pay up to 30% of their iOS revenue while others (including huge corporations like Uber, Starbucks, Target etc) pay nothing.

It's 15% for any developer making under $1 million. Even if we think the SDKs should be free, you're not going to find a significantly better deal for payment (with Apple handling all sales taxes etc), auto updates, crash reporting, etc etc. Smaller developers aren't being ripped off, not anymore. There's a philosophical argument that Apple shouldn't control your device, but that really has nothing to do with the 30%…

Wouldn't Stripe be significantly cheaper?

I'm making the opposite of a philosophical argument, I'm making a practical one. Apple is not going to take away the App Store, or make it too difficult for developers to upload apps, since that would be a real threat to their iPhone business.

Developers need Apple, but Apple needs developers too. Currently their market domination makes it an extremely hard collective action problem for developers. Not being on the App Store means losing out on the majority of your revenue, which makes it tough for enough developers to band together against Apple.

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#29

Post by judge2020 »

qarl wrote: post #10

Guys - Epic lost the lawsuit. That's why nothing changed. Why does this feel exactly like the 2020 election, where one side lost but keeps complaining that everyone is acting like they lost.

Political comment aside, I think everyone's talking about it because it seems like the only source of change in the current day comes from courts making decisions and changing to how existing laws are interpreted. Congress hasn't made any real meaningful new regulations to curtail anti-consumer behavior since the 08 crisis. People were hoping things would change from this lawsuit, but SCOTUS didn't want to hear it and set precedent for whatever reason. Nonetheless, people continuing to talk about it will certainly keep it in the public consciousness and might lead to eventual congressional action ( /s ).

Re: Apple to Developers: Heads I win, tails you lose (part 2)

#30

Post by threeseed »

talkingtab wrote: post #14

This is an example of the incredible arrogance of companies like Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Facebook. They have the ability to pour an enormous amount of money into lawyers and lobbying so that even companies like Epic or countries like the Netherlands have little chance of controlling misbehavior. Even the IRS is having a hard time getting Microsoft to pay their 28 BILLION dollar tax bill. It should be cle…

You're simply wrong. And every court and government around the world agrees.

Companies have a right to charge a fee for using their platform.

Apple can not be forced to give you their SDKs, Services etc for free and help you sell that product on their marketplace for free. They have a right to charge something. You can rightfully argue that the 27% is way too high and courts have agreed. But those like Epic hypocritically arguing for 0% no one agrees with.

Post reply on HN