3 ms·
On one hand, I get where you're coming from. On the other hand, if they offer a recipe app for free (because it contains no recipes, and let's face it, that's
by NamTaf 6y ago
On one hand, I get where you're coming from.
On the other hand, if they offer a recipe app for free (because it contains no recipes, and let's face it, that's how you get quick user interest), then purchase recipes for $1.x each to cover the amortised app creation cost, you're basically just sidestepping the app store cut by any other name.
- graeme 6y agoThis is the crux of it. People aren’t applying second order thinking.
- alkonaut 6y agoI don't think Apple should be allowed to charge a cut from a subscription app for example. Just because I can watch Netflix on my iPhone doesn't mean it's wrong that I can download a $0 app, and then pay Netflix for the content without Apple seeing one cent from it.
- graeme 6y agoBut what app couldn’t be either a subscription or be unlocked via in app purchase? The dominant ios business model for apps currently is a basic version free to download, bigger functionality unlocked via in app purchase. Up front app costs are fading.
- alkonaut 6y agoAgreed. So the current model of “take a cut of everything” makes it very simple because they don’t need to differentiate between unlocking a full version of a game and buying a monthly subscription to music. The first I think is obviously right the second is insane (and in between there are an infinite number of cases). I don’t think the status quo is acceptable though.