10 ms·

> Open up alternate payment mechanisms… without the Apple tax I don't agree with this, as a developer and a consumer. As a consumer it is extremely nice that I

> Open up alternate payment mechanisms… without the Apple tax I don't agree with this, as a developer and a consumer. As a consumer it is extremely nice that I don't have to deal with all sorts of exotic and different payment gateways. Some accept Amex, some don't. Some try to store my card without my consent, some don't. Some make it really obvious that not being charged during a trial period some don't. Some payment gateways are buggy, slow and frustrating and some are really good. As a consumer I bloody hate that and I love iOS and Apple for the fact that I can securely put payment methods behind Apple Pay and then know that I can do any in-app purchases via an already established and well working gateway. No faffing about with some other shite. From a developer perspective I don't see why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut when clearly they are offering a lot of value by making this possible in the first place? For example, my VPN I can either buy a license by going to their website and go through a 5 minute checkout process or I can do a 5 second checkout via the iOS app. The first one goes 100% to the VPN developers, the second also means that a cut goes to Apple. Sounds fair to me, because I literally purchased a VPN in a moment where I didn't have the time of going to a website. I was abroad, I was on a mobile and I had limited time to get quickly a subscription so I could use the VPN and I would have not bought it if it wasn't for the ease and speed which the app allowed me to do. This was only the case because Apple does such a diligent job in keeping it so sleek. Without Apple Pay I would have not bought that license and they would have not lost 30% of the sale, but effectively 100%.

pentae 6y ago
Do you think your desire for convenience should outweigh the benefits to users/devs who want freedom of choice?
- rahkiin 6y ago
  If a developer does not want their product sold to customers of Walmart because Walmart takes % percentage and has a certain set of rules, then the developer can go away and not sell to Walmarts customers. Same analogy works with Xbox/PlayStation customer base.
  - pentae 6y ago
    Walmart is one of thousands of stores where you can purchase goods. XBox/Playstations are a niche recreational device for gaming, not an essential device used by everyone to procure goods and services and conduct business.
    - jfk13 6y ago
      An iPhone is now an essential device used by everyone? It's a wonder I am still surviving.
      - pentae 6y ago
        Smartphones are now pretty essential. You can't even enter stores in my country without scanning a QR code for COVID tracking
        jasode 6y ago
        >Smartphones are now pretty essential. If you didn't notice, you switched the conversation from "Apple iPhone" to "smartphone". In any case, I didn't get an iPhone until 2012 and for the entire 7+ years of ownership, I have never installed a single app on it. I just use the plain vanilla functionality. An Apple product like the iPhone and the Apple curated App Store is not essential to life. About 90% of my friends & family use Android (the more popular smartphones) because they cost less than Apple. EDIT to downvoters: - gp comment (rahkiin) of Walmart-restrictions analogy is about Apple (not "smartphones" in general) - followup comment (jfk13) is also about Apple iPhone and not smartphones - pentae's comment that switches the subject from "iPhone" to "smartphones" ... to try an win an argument just confuses the thread
        harpratap 6y ago
        You are just being pedantic now. It was pretty clear what he/she meant. Smartphones are a necessity now.
- iguy 6y ago
  Not OP, but I share the desire for convenience. This convenience is only available to me because there is a large customer base which companies can't access any other way. They have varying reasons for wanting an iphone, each of which alone would not (I think) form a big enough pool to persuade companies to listen. Or the privacy conscious are tempted to make an exception when (like OP) they badly need something to work right now... or just don't have time to vet every company... and divided we fall. And I'm happy to pay for this. I probably spent double what I would have paid for an android phone. I have not spent close to that much again on apps. But the difference between $5 and $10 inside the app store is (for me) much smaller than the hurdle of having to go to some other dodgy payment gateway & give them my card.
  - pentae 6y ago
    And if side loading was possible, what makes you think that your App Store experience would suffer?
    - photonios 6y ago
      It wouldn't, but eventually somehow is going to find a way to sneakily install apps on my grandma's phone that are no good. I like the current experience because it keeps the really bad stuff out.
    - iguy 6y ago
      I guess my claim is that, if side-loading were common, then lots of apps which now play by the rules would (eventually) be replaced by ones that don't. There are lots of iphone apps from companies I would never trust to install a real app on my computer. I'm glad they exist, and are so firmly kept under control. (And I'm sure their makers grumble about this.) I also buy lots of things from companies I would never trust with my credit card details.
      - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
        No one would take away your right not to trust such companies your card details. Unfortunately, you are OK with the fact that some people can't exercise their will to trust said companies and use their software, even if they badly need it.
- photonios 6y ago
  Yes, if their convenience comes at a cost to my convenience. I pay a premium for my iPhone and various other Apple devices. The fact that there is only one AppStore, controlled by a single party is a feature for me that I am happy to pay for. If there's is more than one party which can install apps on my device, I have to worry about which party to trust etc. The same applies to payments.
  - robert_foss 6y ago
    If you trust the AppStore, just use that. If other people want to use other sources, that shouldn't affect you.
    - Steko 6y ago
      It certainly affects you if: (1) Apple, seeing drastically reduced app revenue, stops investing as much in the app store, dev tools, etc. Or increases their hardware prices; (2) third party stores pay for exclusive apps; (3) malware is installed by people with your contact info and communications; (4) even if no intent to use, the malware risk is there and you're a few drunk clicks from losing your bank account.
      - robert_foss 6y ago
        #1 Apple makes enough money. If they don't want to support their app store, than that is choice they're making. #2 Frankly this is much like the situation we're in now. Only that we there are no other options. This eventuality is surely less bad than the current actuality. #3 Malware is already installed by people you are in contact with. And nothing prevents a 3rd party store from having equally rigorous testing as Apple. #4 You're a few drunk swipes away from emptying your credit card today.
        Nebasuke 6y ago
        Sure, I can understand those arguments in favour of having a 3rd party store, but that's not what the parent is arguing, nor what you said in your original post. All of these do affect the user. You think it would be a better ecosystem, but some users would not agree it's a strictly better approach. I for one don't.
corkmask 6y ago
As a consumer I mostly agree BUT no one forces me to pay for anything, so I avoid dodgy sites. As a developer of an app that is in IAP hell right now I disagree. I don't care for the app store, nor does it provide me with any benefit. All I want is for my existing customers, for who I spent MY marketing money to acquire, to be able to install my app on a device THEY paid money for.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  As a consumer in China you can't use an app that doesn't conform to the rules set by CCP. Sideloading is a must. And push notifications must work for sideloaded apps, too. If apple doesn't provide that, devices should have ways to install alternative push providers. All that keeps that from happening is the extreme closeness of iOS
  - Bud 6y ago
    13 years of the iPhone being the most popular consumer product in the history of the universe would seem to suggest that sideloading is not "a must"; indeed, some might say it suggests the opposite: that sideloading is in fact a huge plus and part of why the ecosystem is succeeding so well and users' security and stability of their devices is so superior to competing products.
    - MereInterest 6y ago
      Fine. Installing custom software is not an economic "must", but is a moral "must". If I have bought a device, then it is mine to run whatever software I want on it, and the manufacturer of the device has no moral claim over it.
      - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
        To me it's just a monopoly abusing its position.
        6y ago
syshum 6y ago
>I don't see why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut Alright then allow easy installation of other App-stores and distribution channels If the Apple Store brings that much value, outside of their mandated use, then the other app stores will fail anyway so... >my VPN I can either buy a license by going to their website and go through a 5 minute checkout process or I can do a 5 second checkout via the iOS app. The first one goes 100% to the VPN developers, the second also means that a cut goes to Apple. Sounds fair to me, Alright then allow developers to add a Convenience Fee / Apple Tax line item to the billing, specifically calling out the fee for purchasing in-app. If the value is there you should have no problems paying a 30% higher price for the items to save that 4 min 95 secs correct? That sounds fair to me >Without Apple Pay I would have not bought that license and they would have not lost 30% of the sale, but effectively 100%. No, that is not he proper way to look at it. I dont know about a VPN service but for many business a 30% chop at the revenue likely means they are losing money. So losing the sale completely would be better than selling an item at cost However what is likely happening is they are increasing the price for all consumers so they can still make a profit on Apple Customers. This likely loses them customers in other market segments.
- dustinmoris 6y ago
  > Alright then allow easy installation of other App-stores and distibution channels > If the Apple Store brings that much value, outside of their mandated use, then the other app stores will fail anyway so... No, this only benefits dodgy bullshit developers doing bullshit things. The fact that there is only one, very well guarded and fenced AppStore IS a great feature for consumers. As a father I'd buy my kids an iPhone and not an Android, because I know that only way they will be able to get an app on their phone is through a store which has consumers, consumer ethics and protection at the forefront of their mind, not the desire to please developers trying to constantly push the border and slowly do more dodgy shit and trick a minor into some bullshit which they can't tell the difference from the good stuff. EDIT: There is a huge market of consumers who value their own protection and the protection of their families A LOT more than IAP margins for developers. If you want to sell your stuff to that consumer group then you have to play by their rules, can't demand them to lower their standards so you can get it your way.
kalleboo 6y ago
I’d be fine with a solution like: * Apps have to support Apple IAP, but can also offer other payment methods directly in the app (similar to their policy on Sign In with Apple and other login systems) * You're allowed to charge different amounts for the different payment systems, and present them directly in the app. So in your VPN example, if Apples one click payment flow (and their cancellation/return policies) is worth a 25% higher price for you, you're free to pay it.
jakub_g 6y ago
> why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut There's no other option. It's not possible to sideload apps. Developers are obliged to use appstore. Regarding payments, the developers are not only obliged to have a way to pay with Apple (would be okay), they are obliged to not have another way. Your argument is "I like pepsi, therefore I'm fine with the fact that no one can buy coca-cola".
- FirefoxIsSlow 6y ago
  Make a web app? That's what I do to avoid giving Apple money.
  - rydre 6y ago
    Apple deliberately hinders Progressive Web Applications on iOS Safari, effectively stifling innovation. Look at how many requests are there on WebKit to implement many of the features/API's required. They don't even allow competing browser engines. Chrome, Firefox etc on iOS are just wrappers around Safari.
    - FirefoxIsSlow 6y ago
      Wow it really sounds bad to own Apple products.
    - dhimes 6y ago
      This is where I think they might be legally vulnerable, if anywhere. Especially since Jobs initially answers the shocked reaction of 30% by "it's no big deal everybody is going to make web apps anyway."
- ryanwaggoner 6y ago
  And yours is like “I don’t like Pepsi but this restaurant I like only serves Pepsi, so I want the government to force them to serve Coca-Cola, instead of just going to another restaurant.”
Dylan16807 6y ago
> From a developer perspective I don't see why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut when clearly they are offering a lot of value by making this possible in the first place? It's entirely reasonable for apple to get some cut for validating and distributing the app. But a flat 30% (eventually dropping to 15% per customer) doesn't seem right for something charging a significant amount of money. If the 30% fee applied to the first 10-20 dollars, and they only charged for payment processing after that, they'd still make plenty of money both up front and recurring. (I'm imagining something like "5% flat" or "cost they pay plus 1.5%" for the payment processing fee.)
- corkmask 6y ago
  so for a subscription based app, I have to partner with Apple (30% of income is partnering) for the privilege of allowing me to offer my customers a native app? I do the marketing, content creation, app development and customer support and every year I pay the ̶𝚖̶𝚘̶𝚋̶ their cut so they won't burn down my store?
  - threatofrain 6y ago
    Once you’re in Apples ecosystem, some of the marketing, app development, and customer support is now handled by Apple. I also don’t see why you have earned access to Apple customers, anymore than you should have access to Alibaba or Walmart customers. The argument should be why Apple customers should vote with their wallets to tell Apple to move one way or another.
    - corkmask 6y ago
      no marketing unless you mean spending more on app store seo or whatever it is called no app development unless you mean the non existent support and the willy-nilly api changes no customer support unless you mean refunding subscription when the dev is not at fault. I don't want access to apple's customers! I want my customers to be able to load my app on their devices. IF Microsoft pulled such a move people would lose their minds
erikrothoff 6y ago
Before anyone goes applauding Apple’s monopoly here, they should consider the developer experience as well. There is absolutely no innovation from Apple’s side. The API’s are horrible and can barely do rudamentary things like server side cancelling of subscriptions. Sometimes they change logic in their webhooks without warning, and there is absolutely no support to speak of. We can’t even trigger refunds on the users behalf! We have to make due with really bad revenue reports, and App Store connect is incredibly slow to work with. Market forces should push Apple to improve, but thanks to their power over their own market they don’t. In the end it will hurt users too.
shafyy 6y ago
> why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut If noone would develop great apps for the iPhone, Apple could not sell the iPhone. It's a symbiotic relationship. Even if you disregard that: It's a duopoly situation, and Apple is exploiting that.
simion314 6y ago
>From a developer perspective I don't see why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut when clearly they are offering a lot of value by making this possible in the first place? Would it be fair if Google would take a cut for any payments you do from Chrome? Also by this logic I assume you think is fair that next OSX version will lockdown and you will have to pay Apple for the privilege of running the applications you want and that Apple also approved that are safe for you and are also contain Apple approved content. Apple could make you pay to host free applications on their store, so you pay the costs for hosting the content. For paid apps Apple can take a small cut on top of the hosting if they promote the applications. Apple should not get involved if I buy a XBOX game using an XBOX app and get a giant cut from that and they should not block legal content

pentae 6y ago

Do you think your desire for convenience should outweigh the benefits to users/devs who want freedom of choice?

rahkiin 6y ago
If a developer does not want their product sold to customers of Walmart because Walmart takes % percentage and has a certain set of rules, then the developer can go away and not sell to Walmarts customers. Same analogy works with Xbox/PlayStation customer base.
- pentae 6y ago
  Walmart is one of thousands of stores where you can purchase goods. XBox/Playstations are a niche recreational device for gaming, not an essential device used by everyone to procure goods and services and conduct business.
  - jfk13 6y ago
    An iPhone is now an essential device used by everyone? It's a wonder I am still surviving.
    - pentae 6y ago
      Smartphones are now pretty essential. You can't even enter stores in my country without scanning a QR code for COVID tracking
      - jasode 6y ago
        >Smartphones are now pretty essential. If you didn't notice, you switched the conversation from "Apple iPhone" to "smartphone". In any case, I didn't get an iPhone until 2012 and for the entire 7+ years of ownership, I have never installed a single app on it. I just use the plain vanilla functionality. An Apple product like the iPhone and the Apple curated App Store is not essential to life. About 90% of my friends & family use Android (the more popular smartphones) because they cost less than Apple. EDIT to downvoters: - gp comment (rahkiin) of Walmart-restrictions analogy is about Apple (not "smartphones" in general) - followup comment (jfk13) is also about Apple iPhone and not smartphones - pentae's comment that switches the subject from "iPhone" to "smartphones" ... to try an win an argument just confuses the thread
        harpratap 6y ago
        You are just being pedantic now. It was pretty clear what he/she meant. Smartphones are a necessity now.
iguy 6y ago
Not OP, but I share the desire for convenience. This convenience is only available to me because there is a large customer base which companies can't access any other way. They have varying reasons for wanting an iphone, each of which alone would not (I think) form a big enough pool to persuade companies to listen. Or the privacy conscious are tempted to make an exception when (like OP) they badly need something to work right now... or just don't have time to vet every company... and divided we fall. And I'm happy to pay for this. I probably spent double what I would have paid for an android phone. I have not spent close to that much again on apps. But the difference between $5 and $10 inside the app store is (for me) much smaller than the hurdle of having to go to some other dodgy payment gateway & give them my card.
- pentae 6y ago
  And if side loading was possible, what makes you think that your App Store experience would suffer?
  - photonios 6y ago
    It wouldn't, but eventually somehow is going to find a way to sneakily install apps on my grandma's phone that are no good. I like the current experience because it keeps the really bad stuff out.
  - iguy 6y ago
    I guess my claim is that, if side-loading were common, then lots of apps which now play by the rules would (eventually) be replaced by ones that don't. There are lots of iphone apps from companies I would never trust to install a real app on my computer. I'm glad they exist, and are so firmly kept under control. (And I'm sure their makers grumble about this.) I also buy lots of things from companies I would never trust with my credit card details.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
      No one would take away your right not to trust such companies your card details. Unfortunately, you are OK with the fact that some people can't exercise their will to trust said companies and use their software, even if they badly need it.
photonios 6y ago
Yes, if their convenience comes at a cost to my convenience. I pay a premium for my iPhone and various other Apple devices. The fact that there is only one AppStore, controlled by a single party is a feature for me that I am happy to pay for. If there's is more than one party which can install apps on my device, I have to worry about which party to trust etc. The same applies to payments.
- robert_foss 6y ago
  If you trust the AppStore, just use that. If other people want to use other sources, that shouldn't affect you.
  - Steko 6y ago
    It certainly affects you if: (1) Apple, seeing drastically reduced app revenue, stops investing as much in the app store, dev tools, etc. Or increases their hardware prices; (2) third party stores pay for exclusive apps; (3) malware is installed by people with your contact info and communications; (4) even if no intent to use, the malware risk is there and you're a few drunk clicks from losing your bank account.
    - robert_foss 6y ago
      #1 Apple makes enough money. If they don't want to support their app store, than that is choice they're making. #2 Frankly this is much like the situation we're in now. Only that we there are no other options. This eventuality is surely less bad than the current actuality. #3 Malware is already installed by people you are in contact with. And nothing prevents a 3rd party store from having equally rigorous testing as Apple. #4 You're a few drunk swipes away from emptying your credit card today.
      - Nebasuke 6y ago
        Sure, I can understand those arguments in favour of having a 3rd party store, but that's not what the parent is arguing, nor what you said in your original post. All of these do affect the user. You think it would be a better ecosystem, but some users would not agree it's a strictly better approach. I for one don't.

corkmask 6y ago

As a consumer I mostly agree BUT no one forces me to pay for anything, so I avoid dodgy sites. As a developer of an app that is in IAP hell right now I disagree. I don't care for the app store, nor does it provide me with any benefit. All I want is for my existing customers, for who I spent MY marketing money to acquire, to be able to install my app on a device THEY paid money for.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
As a consumer in China you can't use an app that doesn't conform to the rules set by CCP. Sideloading is a must. And push notifications must work for sideloaded apps, too. If apple doesn't provide that, devices should have ways to install alternative push providers. All that keeps that from happening is the extreme closeness of iOS
- Bud 6y ago
  13 years of the iPhone being the most popular consumer product in the history of the universe would seem to suggest that sideloading is not "a must"; indeed, some might say it suggests the opposite: that sideloading is in fact a huge plus and part of why the ecosystem is succeeding so well and users' security and stability of their devices is so superior to competing products.
  - MereInterest 6y ago
    Fine. Installing custom software is not an economic "must", but is a moral "must". If I have bought a device, then it is mine to run whatever software I want on it, and the manufacturer of the device has no moral claim over it.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
      To me it's just a monopoly abusing its position.
      - 6y ago

syshum 6y ago

>I don't see why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut Alright then allow easy installation of other App-stores and distribution channels If the Apple Store brings that much value, outside of their mandated use, then the other app stores will fail anyway so... >my VPN I can either buy a license by going to their website and go through a 5 minute checkout process or I can do a 5 second checkout via the iOS app. The first one goes 100% to the VPN developers, the second also means that a cut goes to Apple. Sounds fair to me, Alright then allow developers to add a Convenience Fee / Apple Tax line item to the billing, specifically calling out the fee for purchasing in-app. If the value is there you should have no problems paying a 30% higher price for the items to save that 4 min 95 secs correct? That sounds fair to me >Without Apple Pay I would have not bought that license and they would have not lost 30% of the sale, but effectively 100%. No, that is not he proper way to look at it. I dont know about a VPN service but for many business a 30% chop at the revenue likely means they are losing money. So losing the sale completely would be better than selling an item at cost However what is likely happening is they are increasing the price for all consumers so they can still make a profit on Apple Customers. This likely loses them customers in other market segments.

dustinmoris 6y ago
> Alright then allow easy installation of other App-stores and distibution channels > If the Apple Store brings that much value, outside of their mandated use, then the other app stores will fail anyway so... No, this only benefits dodgy bullshit developers doing bullshit things. The fact that there is only one, very well guarded and fenced AppStore IS a great feature for consumers. As a father I'd buy my kids an iPhone and not an Android, because I know that only way they will be able to get an app on their phone is through a store which has consumers, consumer ethics and protection at the forefront of their mind, not the desire to please developers trying to constantly push the border and slowly do more dodgy shit and trick a minor into some bullshit which they can't tell the difference from the good stuff. EDIT: There is a huge market of consumers who value their own protection and the protection of their families A LOT more than IAP margins for developers. If you want to sell your stuff to that consumer group then you have to play by their rules, can't demand them to lower their standards so you can get it your way.

kalleboo 6y ago

I’d be fine with a solution like: * Apps have to support Apple IAP, but can also offer other payment methods directly in the app (similar to their policy on Sign In with Apple and other login systems) * You're allowed to charge different amounts for the different payment systems, and present them directly in the app. So in your VPN example, if Apples one click payment flow (and their cancellation/return policies) is worth a 25% higher price for you, you're free to pay it.

jakub_g 6y ago

> why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut There's no other option. It's not possible to sideload apps. Developers are obliged to use appstore. Regarding payments, the developers are not only obliged to have a way to pay with Apple (would be okay), they are obliged to not have another way. Your argument is "I like pepsi, therefore I'm fine with the fact that no one can buy coca-cola".

FirefoxIsSlow 6y ago
Make a web app? That's what I do to avoid giving Apple money.
- rydre 6y ago
  Apple deliberately hinders Progressive Web Applications on iOS Safari, effectively stifling innovation. Look at how many requests are there on WebKit to implement many of the features/API's required. They don't even allow competing browser engines. Chrome, Firefox etc on iOS are just wrappers around Safari.
  - FirefoxIsSlow 6y ago
    Wow it really sounds bad to own Apple products.
  - dhimes 6y ago
    This is where I think they might be legally vulnerable, if anywhere. Especially since Jobs initially answers the shocked reaction of 30% by "it's no big deal everybody is going to make web apps anyway."
ryanwaggoner 6y ago
And yours is like “I don’t like Pepsi but this restaurant I like only serves Pepsi, so I want the government to force them to serve Coca-Cola, instead of just going to another restaurant.”

Dylan16807 6y ago

> From a developer perspective I don't see why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut when clearly they are offering a lot of value by making this possible in the first place? It's entirely reasonable for apple to get some cut for validating and distributing the app. But a flat 30% (eventually dropping to 15% per customer) doesn't seem right for something charging a significant amount of money. If the 30% fee applied to the first 10-20 dollars, and they only charged for payment processing after that, they'd still make plenty of money both up front and recurring. (I'm imagining something like "5% flat" or "cost they pay plus 1.5%" for the payment processing fee.)

corkmask 6y ago
so for a subscription based app, I have to partner with Apple (30% of income is partnering) for the privilege of allowing me to offer my customers a native app? I do the marketing, content creation, app development and customer support and every year I pay the ̶𝚖̶𝚘̶𝚋̶ their cut so they won't burn down my store?
- threatofrain 6y ago
  Once you’re in Apples ecosystem, some of the marketing, app development, and customer support is now handled by Apple. I also don’t see why you have earned access to Apple customers, anymore than you should have access to Alibaba or Walmart customers. The argument should be why Apple customers should vote with their wallets to tell Apple to move one way or another.
  - corkmask 6y ago
    no marketing unless you mean spending more on app store seo or whatever it is called no app development unless you mean the non existent support and the willy-nilly api changes no customer support unless you mean refunding subscription when the dev is not at fault. I don't want access to apple's customers! I want my customers to be able to load my app on their devices. IF Microsoft pulled such a move people would lose their minds

erikrothoff 6y ago

Before anyone goes applauding Apple’s monopoly here, they should consider the developer experience as well. There is absolutely no innovation from Apple’s side. The API’s are horrible and can barely do rudamentary things like server side cancelling of subscriptions. Sometimes they change logic in their webhooks without warning, and there is absolutely no support to speak of. We can’t even trigger refunds on the users behalf! We have to make due with really bad revenue reports, and App Store connect is incredibly slow to work with. Market forces should push Apple to improve, but thanks to their power over their own market they don’t. In the end it will hurt users too.

shafyy 6y ago

> why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut If noone would develop great apps for the iPhone, Apple could not sell the iPhone. It's a symbiotic relationship. Even if you disregard that: It's a duopoly situation, and Apple is exploiting that.

simion314 6y ago

>From a developer perspective I don't see why anyone should use the AppStore as a distribution channel to a huge market and completely circumvent Apple's cut when clearly they are offering a lot of value by making this possible in the first place? Would it be fair if Google would take a cut for any payments you do from Chrome? Also by this logic I assume you think is fair that next OSX version will lockdown and you will have to pay Apple for the privilege of running the applications you want and that Apple also approved that are safe for you and are also contain Apple approved content. Apple could make you pay to host free applications on their store, so you pay the costs for hosting the content. For paid apps Apple can take a small cut on top of the hosting if they promote the applications. Apple should not get involved if I buy a XBOX game using an XBOX app and get a giant cut from that and they should not block legal content