3 ms·
Apple could charge a licensing fee to developers that equals %30 of app revenues instead in exchange for permission & access to use the iOS SDK and get access t
by mahyarm 10y ago
Apple could charge a licensing fee to developers that equals %30 of app revenues instead in exchange for permission & access to use the iOS SDK and get access to signing keys. If they use the app store, then that %30 is automatically collected for them.
I could see that as a result of a lawsuit forcing them out of the app store model.
- AnthonyMouse 10y agoIf iPhones were open to third party software then restricting access to the official SDK would only cause others (e.g. Google, Mozilla, Canonical) to create competing ones. And how would a monopoly on signing keys be any different than the original app store monopoly? That's effectively what the app store monopoly is.
- umanwizard 10y agoInterestingly however, the plaintiffs don't allege anything about the practical impossibility of loading non-app-store apps. (At least, not as far as is mentioned in this decision -- I haven't read the original case, only the summary discussed in this decision, but it seems fairly complete) Instead, they point out (1) Apple's threat to ban apps that use other distribution channels from the app store, and (2) Apple's threat to void warranties of phones onto which apps have been sideloaded So a monopoly on signing keys is actually different from what (the plaintiffs are claiming) is the problem with the app store monopoly.