6 ms·

> It's actually Apple vs. Users. Apple has been taking us for a ride this whole time. Oh please. Nobody who actually uses Apple feels that way. Though I agree

> It's actually Apple vs. Users. Apple has been taking us for a ride this whole time. Oh please. Nobody who actually uses Apple feels that way. Though I agree they should allow a way to sideload apps. One of the downsides of being primarily an iOS dev is not being able to participate in activities like game-jams because there's no way to casually share my stuff with other users. > Taking a cut of say, 3%, to keep the app store running is forgivable. But 30% Do you know how much Google, Microsoft, Steam and Epic themselves take from sales on their stores? Apple protects its users better than the other major players. Their privacy and accessibility features alone are unparalleled, and they do a lot to curtail scummy developer practices. The entities which Apple protects users from are often the ones crying foul. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24154647 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24154647 and similar comments: > the magnitude of this is not immediately apparent unless you’ve worked in an agency / freelanced building iOS applications. You have no idea how many user-hostile and abusive things I’ve seen blown completely out of the water with the golden phrase "Apple won’t allow that". It wins arguments in favour of the user instantly and permanently. > I’ve run up against Apple’s capricious review process more times than I can count, so I’ve got more reason than most to complain about it. But it’s impossible for me to argue that these rules don’t help the user when I’ve personally seen it happen so many times. It’s a double-edged sword to be sure, and I believe the best way of balancing things in favour of the end-user is to be more open than Apple is, but there are undeniable benefits to the user with the current system.

Throwawaay1199 6y ago
> Apple protects its users better than the other major players Who wants them to stop doing that? They can still do that for the apps which chose to get the full treatment. This is not the problem here. The problem is that they don't give you an option to not participate. No alternative way. So let's not pretend here. It's all about MORE money here. They won't go broke if they allow what Epic did. They'll just get less and this is it. This is what it's all about. I don't understand this sentiment of playing marketing division for them by some users here. It's quite disgusting actually. Do you get money for that? Seriously. You'd lose NOTHING if Apple would change so what's your motivation here? It makes no sense at all. And yes, I created an extra account for that because you people are toxic as hell when the topic is Apple and someone is not part of the circlejerk.
boudin 6y ago
Their review system is totally random, and that's what makes it painful. There's easy way to trick them for some things, so I wouldn't consider this as an actual proper safety net. It does give the impression of safety to the end user though, I guess that's the intent. Apple uses techniques from totalitarian regimes. They decide, judge and control everything. There's no freedom at all. You can only use what Apple decide you can use. But it does provide some kind of safety, or at least a feeling of safety (there will always be security flaws). After, is it a good thing?
- jalfresi 6y ago
  As an Apple customer the review system is working very well for me. No malicious apps have got through the process and onto my phone yet. In that sense, its worth it to me.
  - boudin 6y ago
    That you know off. The security is provided by the operating system, not the review process. The last layer, and that's the most efficient one, which exists on most systems is you by choosing what you install (most because some phones/computers manufacturers adds pre-installed crapwares) I can tell you that across all my devices I don't think any malicious apps made its way there neither (as for you with your ios device, I will never be entirely sure). And this, without apple random reviews.
alkonaut 6y ago
> they do a lot to curtail scummy developer practices. Which is excellent. Apple taking a cut for apps I have no problem with. They have support, I trust them with privacy/security and so on. That costs money. The interesting discussion is how much apple can claim to own a part of profits made in the apps, by selling content (in-app purchases). On one hand: if a game is free for a trial, and you can unlock the full game I think that should count as an app purchase (the alternative would be to not have in-app upgrades and just have 2 apps, which was a worse situation). But on the other hand: if I buy a recipe app for $10 and then recipes for $1 a piece which I could also buy on the corresponding website, then I don't think apple should have a cut at all.
- kwanbix 6y ago
  I agree with you somehow. 30% sounds too high. 10% is much more reasonable. Imagine you selling a house and the realtor getting 30% of it. Crazy high.
  - Razengan 6y ago
    What percentage do Microsoft, Google, Sony, Nintendo, Steam and Epic take?
    - blaser-waffle 6y ago
      Can't speak for others, but Steam gets 30% Source: https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/30/18120577/valve-steam-game-marketplace-revenue-split-new-rules-competition https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/30/18120577/valve-steam-gam...
      - joncalhoun 6y ago
        Does steam take any cut of in-game purchases for free to play games? I don't think they do, so that is a difference to consider.
    - SyneRyder 6y ago
      Microsoft takes 5%. https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-windows-10-sweetener-new-deal-gives-devs-bigger-cut-of-app-store-sales/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-windows-10-sweetene...
munawwar 6y ago
30% is like paying govt taxes... with which govts builds roads, infrastructure, what not. None of the app stores (including many of the alt app stores) needs that much. >Apple protects its users better than the other major players. If "other major players" are the baseline, then nothing is going to improve. They all stink. For example, think why apple made it super easy to approve auto renewing payments but made it so hard to unsubscribe (which is hidden deep in settings).. if that's not dark UX then I don't know what is? Lots of scammy apps make use of this. Do they get removed from the app store inspite of all their negative reviews and customer complaints? mostly not.. best case, takes months..
p1necone 6y ago
"I agree they should allow a way to sideload apps" I think this sentence means you agree with the comment you're replying to. That's basically all Apple needs to do, if you can install apps in a way that doesn't involve Apples store then they can do and charge whatever they want with it. The only reason people have a problem with Apples 30% cut and review restrictions is because there's no other option.
dwild 6y ago
> Do you know how much Google, Microsoft, Steam and Epic themselves take from sales on their stores? Nice job of misinformation right there! Apple should send you a check for that one! Let me quote you the article we are commenting on: > Apple has removed Epic Games’ battle royale game Fortnite from the App Store after the developer on Thursday implemented its own in-app payment system that bypassed Apple’s standard 30 percent fee How many of the one you named did the same? Weird how it's 0 right? Okay now let bring something you said yourself, how many of them block side loading, which is a great way to bypass this? Again 0. A fee for a service is perfectly fine, you are the only one trying to argue anything about this. What we are arguing is that Apple is forcing people to pay that fee, even though there's perfectly valid alternative that can be done, and that this practice is wrong. None of the company you are citing does that.

Throwawaay1199 6y ago

> Apple protects its users better than the other major players Who wants them to stop doing that? They can still do that for the apps which chose to get the full treatment. This is not the problem here. The problem is that they don't give you an option to not participate. No alternative way. So let's not pretend here. It's all about MORE money here. They won't go broke if they allow what Epic did. They'll just get less and this is it. This is what it's all about. I don't understand this sentiment of playing marketing division for them by some users here. It's quite disgusting actually. Do you get money for that? Seriously. You'd lose NOTHING if Apple would change so what's your motivation here? It makes no sense at all. And yes, I created an extra account for that because you people are toxic as hell when the topic is Apple and someone is not part of the circlejerk.

boudin 6y ago

Their review system is totally random, and that's what makes it painful. There's easy way to trick them for some things, so I wouldn't consider this as an actual proper safety net. It does give the impression of safety to the end user though, I guess that's the intent. Apple uses techniques from totalitarian regimes. They decide, judge and control everything. There's no freedom at all. You can only use what Apple decide you can use. But it does provide some kind of safety, or at least a feeling of safety (there will always be security flaws). After, is it a good thing?

jalfresi 6y ago
As an Apple customer the review system is working very well for me. No malicious apps have got through the process and onto my phone yet. In that sense, its worth it to me.
- boudin 6y ago
  That you know off. The security is provided by the operating system, not the review process. The last layer, and that's the most efficient one, which exists on most systems is you by choosing what you install (most because some phones/computers manufacturers adds pre-installed crapwares) I can tell you that across all my devices I don't think any malicious apps made its way there neither (as for you with your ios device, I will never be entirely sure). And this, without apple random reviews.

alkonaut 6y ago

> they do a lot to curtail scummy developer practices. Which is excellent. Apple taking a cut for apps I have no problem with. They have support, I trust them with privacy/security and so on. That costs money. The interesting discussion is how much apple can claim to own a part of profits made in the apps, by selling content (in-app purchases). On one hand: if a game is free for a trial, and you can unlock the full game I think that should count as an app purchase (the alternative would be to not have in-app upgrades and just have 2 apps, which was a worse situation). But on the other hand: if I buy a recipe app for $10 and then recipes for $1 a piece which I could also buy on the corresponding website, then I don't think apple should have a cut at all.

kwanbix 6y ago
I agree with you somehow. 30% sounds too high. 10% is much more reasonable. Imagine you selling a house and the realtor getting 30% of it. Crazy high.
- Razengan 6y ago
  What percentage do Microsoft, Google, Sony, Nintendo, Steam and Epic take?
  - blaser-waffle 6y ago
    Can't speak for others, but Steam gets 30% Source: https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/30/18120577/valve-steam-game-marketplace-revenue-split-new-rules-competition https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/30/18120577/valve-steam-gam...
    - joncalhoun 6y ago
      Does steam take any cut of in-game purchases for free to play games? I don't think they do, so that is a difference to consider.
  - SyneRyder 6y ago
    Microsoft takes 5%. https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-windows-10-sweetener-new-deal-gives-devs-bigger-cut-of-app-store-sales/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-windows-10-sweetene...

munawwar 6y ago

30% is like paying govt taxes... with which govts builds roads, infrastructure, what not. None of the app stores (including many of the alt app stores) needs that much. >Apple protects its users better than the other major players. If "other major players" are the baseline, then nothing is going to improve. They all stink. For example, think why apple made it super easy to approve auto renewing payments but made it so hard to unsubscribe (which is hidden deep in settings).. if that's not dark UX then I don't know what is? Lots of scammy apps make use of this. Do they get removed from the app store inspite of all their negative reviews and customer complaints? mostly not.. best case, takes months..

p1necone 6y ago

"I agree they should allow a way to sideload apps" I think this sentence means you agree with the comment you're replying to. That's basically all Apple needs to do, if you can install apps in a way that doesn't involve Apples store then they can do and charge whatever they want with it. The only reason people have a problem with Apples 30% cut and review restrictions is because there's no other option.

dwild 6y ago

> Do you know how much Google, Microsoft, Steam and Epic themselves take from sales on their stores? Nice job of misinformation right there! Apple should send you a check for that one! Let me quote you the article we are commenting on: > Apple has removed Epic Games’ battle royale game Fortnite from the App Store after the developer on Thursday implemented its own in-app payment system that bypassed Apple’s standard 30 percent fee How many of the one you named did the same? Weird how it's 0 right? Okay now let bring something you said yourself, how many of them block side loading, which is a great way to bypass this? Again 0. A fee for a service is perfectly fine, you are the only one trying to argue anything about this. What we are arguing is that Apple is forcing people to pay that fee, even though there's perfectly valid alternative that can be done, and that this practice is wrong. None of the company you are citing does that.