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

Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 408 posts

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#311

Post by etchalon »

freetanga wrote: post #310
dkonofalski wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true in the slightest, though. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Steam all take 30% for distribution and hosting, same as Apple. It's not artificially high if it's in line with the rest of the tech industry and if you want to try and claim that it's because of some monopoly, vertical or otherwise, then you have to explain why the other storefronts are also monopolies. It's not a monopoly. Other phones and eco…

On consoles I can buy a digital copy, and I believe the 30% does not apply. On Windows I can buy a digital copy on the devs website and MS gets nothing. On Steam, I could buy the game in another storefront (GOG), or Direct, and Valve would get nothing. On Android I could use a separate AppStore and Google would get nothing… In other words, in all those platforms devs can opt in to participate on a centralized store t…

Digital copies on consoles still get 30%, and console agreements may include additional royalties beyond that.

There is no way, on any major console, to "opt out" of the fee.

Mac has the same options available to developers as Windows.

Steam's third-party redemption mechanic is notable, and awesome.

On Android, different third-party stores have different fees. Samsung, for instance, charges the same 30% as Google. Epic's store charges 12%.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#312

Post by freetanga »

machomaster wrote: post #296
1000100_1000101 wrote: post #262

Epic says this is about protecting small developers... which, frankly, is BS. Epic charges $100 per game in their store, vs. Apple's $99/yr for access to the store, and the latest tools. This is pretty much a wash, unless you're not regularly releasing games. Epic charges 12% for their game store. For most developers, those earning less than $1M, Apple charges 15%. So again, pretty much a wash. Epic doesn't take a fe…

Not sure why you are comparing Epic's prices to Apples' instead of comparing to Epic's actual game store competitor Steam.

I believe the issue is on access to the target operating system (iOS) rather than storefronts.

Steam does not sell iOS software. They sell games for Mac, Windows and Linux which you can buy also directly or at a competitor such as GOG, if the developer chooses to.

To sell into the iOS ecosystem as a Dev you can only do it via Apple so far. Epic wants to sell their own iOS multiplayer games and in app lootboxes without forking 30% to Apple.

I do wonder: anybody knows if Amazon pays Apple for the things I buy through their iOS app?

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#313

Post by freetanga »

For those who see a perpetual take of 30% of your revenues (pre costs, pre taxes) as a reasonable ask: I cannot wait to see you on the other end of the pointy stick…

Imagine in a future not far away that car ownership has been replaced by car subscription, and all remaining 6 car manufactures decide to tell you that since you ride their fabulous IP, you must now pay a 30% surcharge on gasoline you use. What happens when you have low income and cannot afford a car?

Then your ISPs, then your health services, then your grocery stores, etc…

I think the crowd at HN is very smart for some things, but incredibly self-centered and out of touch with the broader reality on many topics. Not everyone makes hundreds on thousands of dollars on Tech jobs, not all devs sell millions of copies, and neither you will make that for the rest of your life.

As I said somewhere on the page, Apple owes large part of what it is today to the dev environment (Things,Devonthink, etc) which created attractive products only available on Mac. IOS or MacOs without third party apps is pretty boring.

Apple now has divorced developers and screaming for their share of alimony every month.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#314

Post by kanbara »

freetanga wrote: post #313

For those who see a perpetual take of 30% of your revenues (pre costs, pre taxes) as a reasonable ask: I cannot wait to see you on the other end of the pointy stick… Imagine in a future not far away that car ownership has been replaced by car subscription, and all remaining 6 car manufactures decide to tell you that since you ride their fabulous IP, you must now pay a 30% surcharge on gasoline you use. What happens w…

the first two or three paragraphs dont really make sense. developers are not end-users, and if they are making profit to pay the 30%, they are making money. small businesses are only charged 12/15% anyway.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#315

Post by HatchedLake721 »

NetOpWibby wrote: post #105
HatchedLake721 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who played part in Windows Phone demise? Epic? Which never released the Unreal Engine for Windows Phone and now cries the loudest about the status quo. Or the 1000’s of developers who abandoned pre App Store distribution models in favor of Apple’s hardware, software and APIs, happily signed up to 30% revenue share with Apple that didn't change in 15 years? (other than go down to 15% for 90% of sellers who do unde…

LMAO MICROSOFT played the hugest part in Windows Phone demise. I still had a Palm Pre at the time and was waiting for a particular yellow Nokia Windows Phone to release for Sprint. My recollection is muddy after that but Windows Phone was no more so I got an iPhone.

Possibly, but at the time Windows Phones were snappier and often had better hardware than Android.

For me, developers played a huge part.

There were a lot of popular and new apps missing in the windows store.

Microsoft had to even co-fund app developers to build apps for windows phone, without much luck or being too late.

E.g. Instagram for Windows released 18 months after Android. Did YouTube ever release on windows phone?

This played a big part in people choosing iOS/Android instead.

I haven’t looked into this for years, but that’s my recollection of early/mid 2010s.

The Verge seems to confirm my historic bias:

> If you’re wondering why none of Microsoft’s many strenuous Windows Phone efforts ultimately paid off, the key answer lies in the platform’s chronic failure to attract third-party app developers. Every time Nokia launched a new Windows Phone, it had to dodge and duck the question of when there’ll be an Instagram app for the OS. Even as Microsoft was beating Google at providing a smoother and slicker first-party app experience, Google was winning handily in having the more essential apps and the more enthusiastic third-party ecosystem.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/10/16452162/windows-phone-h...

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#316

Post by jahewson »

freetanga wrote: post #313

For those who see a perpetual take of 30% of your revenues (pre costs, pre taxes) as a reasonable ask: I cannot wait to see you on the other end of the pointy stick… Imagine in a future not far away that car ownership has been replaced by car subscription, and all remaining 6 car manufactures decide to tell you that since you ride their fabulous IP, you must now pay a 30% surcharge on gasoline you use. What happens w…

> you must now pay a 30% surcharge on gasoline you use. What happens when you have low income and cannot afford a car?

What a strange example. Over the past few years gas prices have fluctuated by 100%. Your idea comes pre-disproven.

You can’t really compare commodities with consumer discretionary spending.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#317

Post by aurareturn »

brandon272 wrote: post #292
aurareturn wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought we were trying to make statements that made no sense.

Nothing nonsensical about developers wanting better treatment or a better deal from a company asking for 30% of their gross margin. Insofar that Walmart extracts margin out of its small suppliers, we don't see a lot of third parties sitting on the sidelines telling suppliers trying to negotiate better contracts that they need to shut up, pay up and that the third parties are "on Walmarts side". To the extent that sma…

  Nothing nonsensical about developers wanting better treatment or a better deal from a company asking for 30% of their gross margin.
I was replying to a person who thinks Apple needs to provide everything for free.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#318

Post by tpmoney »

throw10920 wrote: post #254
tpmoney wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, desktop anti-cheat is a continual cat and mouse game more than any iOS anti-cheat conflict I've seen. One can argue that macOS, Linux and Windows are not sufficiently "well-designed" OSes for this purpose, but at that point you'd have to start distinguishing what features are missing from those OSes that would be present in this hypothetical iOS version that isn't highly dependent on the degree to which Appl…

Anyone remotely familiar with operating system design can tell you that desktop and mobile operating systems have massive differences with respect to security. "macOS, Linux and Windows are not sufficiently "well-designed" OSes for this purpose" is exactly the case.

Ok, so what are the features missing from those OSes that iOS has that enable these anti-cheat capabilities and also that are also not dependent on Apple maintaining its strict control over what can and can't run on iOS?

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#319

Post by nodamage »

blibble wrote: post #42
xivzgrev wrote: post #39

I mean I gotta give respect to Apple. They seem to have done the minimal technical compliance with the order. Users can make a purchase for their app outside of the App Store. But at the same time they put in as much friction as they could, including reframing the charge to developer as a lead commission - and the net cost to developer is HIGHER than using Apple. Of course epic is going to challenge the spirit of the…

> I mean I gotta give respect to Apple. They seem to have done the minimal technical compliance with the order. it's borderline contempt of court > I can respect though how they approached a potentially large setback for their business. I'd be pretty mad if I was the judge, they might like my 2nd ruling even less

The judge literally suggested Apple could do this in her ruling:

"Even in the absence of IAP, Apple could still charge a commission on developers. It would simply be more difficult for Apple to collect that commission."

"The Court presumes that in such circumstances that Apple may rely on imposing and utilizing a contractual right to audit developers annual accounting to ensure compliance with its commissions, among other methods."

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#320

Post by somenameforme »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #4

Can anyone provide a link to context on what OP is talking about, for those who don't know it? I don't understand what Apple is actually doing from this tweet/thread. Are they are somehow managing to force even payment links from ordinary web sites in an ordinary web browser (Safari?) to go through them as payment processor? (How?) Or is this a new rule for app store apps (what is the new rule?) Or a new payment stru…

As it seems many are not clear, here is a quick and abbreviated background:

The case is primarily about Epic's Fortnite game. Fortnite is free to play, but makes billions of dollars based on in-game microtransactions for things like in-game cosmetics. Apple charges developers 30% on each of these transactions. Epic didn't like this and so started offering users a way to pay on their own site instead of going through Apple, with a large discount. Apple responded by kicking Fortnite off their app store, and so Epic sued them for anticompetitive behavior.

The gist of the trial and appeals (to date) is that the judge ruled that Apple must allow developers to advertise non-apple means of payment. So Apple responded to this by allowing developers to include exactly one reference (in the entire program), in plain text (non-hyperlink), to an an outside payment site, and has changed their terms to require that developers must now also pay them 27% off all revenue from these outside transactions as well.

Epic is now claiming that this was a bad-faith compliance of the court's ruling, and this will 100% end up in court again. And that's where we are for now.

Post reply on HN