461–470 of 944 posts
What are you going to do about it? Use Android?
Use Android or use websites instead of apps. Apple pushes their app ecosystem so hard because it's their walled garden. If you want to support a creator, go their website and click whatever they offer.
Its a walled prison
I've noticed watching blood money on Netflix that greedy systems tend to get greedier and greedier, and this is the best way to catch bad actors.
On the other hand, criminals that try not to become too big and remain low-profile are the ones that never get caught.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What really makes it uncomfortable is that Apple isn't just a neutral marketplace. They control the OS, the distribution channel, and the payment rails, so creators and platforms like Patreon can't realistically opt out
They could opt out - by sticking to web platforms. Apple cannot charge for that. However, apple does attempt to gimp the web platforms on mobile to "subtly" push for apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is outrageously wrong. Back in 2011, the pricing model for "an app in your pocket" was 99 cents. The universal pricing model of apps was a one-time fee and the pricing range was that of an mp3 roughly. 30% of that is a lot. App sales worked only in volume. If you sold software over the internet, you had PayPal, which had a flat fee of $0.35 + 1.7% or so and if your shareware was $30, the transaction fee essentia…
It's not a "processing fee". It's an distribution/access/market fee for the captive audience that Apple has spent tens of billions developing and supporting. If you think you can make any money selling software on the internet and paying nothing other than $0.35 + 1.7%, think again.
Just stop publishing the app, not every little thing needs an app. What the use for the app anyway? Notifications and apple pay?
I'm running a small service, sub 150 users, no online signup kind of business, B2B. Small EU country. 95% of users ask 'do you have an mobile app?' in first 5 minutes of onboarding. Telling them how to install a PWA (and what it is and so forth) is an uphill battle. Unfortunately App Stores rule the non technical crowd.
Basically you just ask their email address and add it to a list in Firebase. Upload your ipa to firebase and the user will receive an email with a link to download
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s about convenience in most cases; an “app” to tap on, not a URL to remember and enter or a bookmark to save, name, file, and locate. Just like apps in general, PWAs are mostly a mobile heavy modality. Bookmarks and the browser is largely still fine on laptop/desktop, but even there you see the app design language start prevailing with things like bookmarks and “recent sites” being presented like app icons.
I swear it is so alien to me. Tapping on an app is equivalent to tapping on a link in my bookmarks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that were legally enforcable, which is almost certainly not the case, Microsoft and Google could do the same, making your argument moot in this context.
Every software company can do this. Oracle Java is free for personal use but if you use it in prod you have to pay a licence based on the number of employees in your company. Epic games takes 5% of your revenue above a million if you use unreal for a game. Docker desktop requires a paid license if you have over 250 employees or $10 million in revenue.
Apple has an Apple Pay for Donations[1] program, which doesn't apply for rent seeking entities like Patreon. I wonder if Patreon's 10% fee is commensurate with the negligible value that they provide? [1]: https://developer.apple.com/apple-pay/nonprofits/
Source I run a non-profit and we have an app that takes donations via Apple Pay
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. We can say this to any company, "$X could reduce price by $Y and still make $Z profits", but it doesn't really make any sense. Making profits is what makes a company a company instead of a non-profit organization.
Makes me think of the concept of involution in Chinese business and how they understand all of this very differently, and how difficult it is to compete because of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no ideological argument for voluntary action here. The entire goal is to force regulators to step in. The debate over 'good vs. bad companies' is just online noise and rhetorical trik, no one on either side of the political spectrum wants these systems to be fixed voluntarily with corporate altruism.
But what are they even doing for regulators to have to step in? Making profits from someone selling their product in your market seems pretty valid to me. Are you saying this is anticompetitive to other possible app store storefronts like Google Play or something?
I'm not sure what is the basis for your question but using market definition where Google Play and Apple Store are in the same market is not correct (market definition is essential part of any monopoly regulation).
Markets are defined by choice of practice, not by choice in principle.