5 ms·
What's beneficial for consumers is the fact that the Apple ecosystem exists at all. People pay because it's a good experience. Everyone is welcome to create goo
by sooheon 6y ago
What's beneficial for consumers is the fact that the Apple ecosystem exists at all. People pay because it's a good experience. Everyone is welcome to create good end-user experiences with open technologies like PWA, and distribute however they wish. It's strange to me to say on the one hand "we could not survive without the iOS customer pool, we need to make a native app because it's the greatest experience, but we don't want to pay the platform that makes it all possible".
- Hamuko 6y ago>Everyone is welcome to create good end-user experiences with open technologies like PWA Everyone who isn't targetting Apple devices that is. I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that it is not possible to publish an application on the Apple App Store without paying. Period end. I also don't see why there's an expectation that Hey has to pay Apple for providing the app. They are trying to bring out an app to allow their customers on Apple devices to be able to use their service. It's not like they're just putting their app there for marketing because the App Store is absolutely horrible at any kind of marketing. This is a bit like expecting Netflix to pay Comcast, AT&T and every other ISP for the priviledge of using their networks. Netflix's customers are already paying those companies just like how Hey's customers are paying for their Apple devices.
- sjwright 6y ago> I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that it is not possible to publish an application on the Apple App Store without paying. Period end. I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that the same is true for games on the Xbox, PlayStation and nearly every mainstream games console for the past thirty years. Pretty much every games console software title included a healthy cut for Nintendo, Sega, Microsoft, or Sony. And if you didn't have the explicit blessing of these companies, you couldn't publish your games at all. Period end. Where was your outrage then?
- Hamuko 6y ago>Where was your outrage then? Where was the game publishers' outrage? Where was the game developers' outrage? Gaming console makers and game developers have way better relations than Apple and the people developing for the App Store. And the game console makers' cut isn't just pure greed. Sony took an estimate loss of $240-$300 on every PS3 sold at launch just in order to widen out the install base.
- Apocryphon 6y agoMicrosoft lost money for each Xbox they sold for multiple generations of Xboxes.
- sjwright 6y ago> Where was the game publishers' outrage? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_v._Accolade > Gaming console makers and game developers have way better relations Let's set aside the unproven assumptions; so your logic is that if you're a nice platform monopolist, you can charge arbitrary platform access fees. But if you're a bunch of meanies, different laws shall apply to you. I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension that you were making a serious point. > Sony took an estimate loss of $240-$300 on every PS3 Now I know you're not being serious. Such behaviours are anti-competitive as it would be exceedingly difficult for a new market entrant to compete with such artificially low console prices. What you're saying is that the US Government should enact laws which favour dumping and loss-leader activity. Ridiculous.
- Apocryphon 6y ago> Let's set aside the unproven assumptions; so your logic is that if you're a nice platform monopolist, you can charge arbitrary platform access fees. But if you're a bunch of meanies, different laws shall apply to you. I'm sorry, I was under the misapprehension that you were making a serious point. You're not entirely wrong: https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut-is-actually-the-industry-standard https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/07/report-steams-30-cut... > One source explained that although Steam only takes 30%, other fees and deductions mean they are usually collecting closer to 65% on their end, while they say console sales return much closer to the full 70% but are stingier with refunds and the like. > Another source also stressed that just because a retailer takes 30% doesn’t mean the developer of the game actually gets the other 70%, saying publishers often earn between 30-70% of a sale themselves depending on the deal that has been struck. There are also engine licensing fees to consider (games that use Unreal have its 5% fee waived if they are sold on the Epic Store), taxes, and other costs not factored into what many people assume the actual creator of a game earns. One source said their takeaway from a physical retailer at the end of the day is often between just 10-15%. You know, maybe this doesn't have to end with Apple. The Google Play store charges a 30% service fee as well. Maybe the entire pricing system of the industry is fucked, and worth further scrutiny. Furthermore, it's been repeatedly brought up in the discourse over the publishing industry's recent lawsuit against Internet Archive that the industry standard for book publishing are contracts where the publishers pocket 75% of book sales, while the author retain the rest. Meanwhile, you hear horror stories out of the music industry where artists are paid a pittance. This can be an endemic problem that's afflicting multiple industries at once. Maybe we can confer our righteous indignation both at Apple, and the rest. And maybe we ought to figure out a better way to help creators, whether app developers, game developers, authors, or musicians, get the pay they're due.
- bgarbiak 6y agoI believe no one actually says "we don't want to pay", it's more like "we don't want to pay 30% of our income". I could eventually live with a one-time 30% tax, but taking that much for a recurring payments? Calling it a highway robbery is totally on point.