4 ms·

Do the top 100 apps on iOS feel the same way though? Does every developer out there think 30% commission on paid apps is tyranny? I feel like it's a reasonable

Do the top 100 apps on iOS feel the same way though? Does every developer out there think 30% commission on paid apps is tyranny? I feel like it's a reasonable trade-off. Free apps don't cost you much (yes, $99 for dev tools is not much honestly. It keeps away spurious bots and spammy accounts). Paid apps cost 30% -- if the dev decides to charge outrageous prices then well, Apple will take an outrageous cut). Most apps cost $1-$5 which is cheap. Of course, at a billion users it's hefty. But if you're grumpy about that then it just means you're grumpy about a shrewd for-profit company.

jariel 6y ago
"Does every developer out there think 30% commission on paid apps is tyranny?" Combined with the ambiguity, lack of choice, threats to business - absolutely yes, iOS is basically universally reviled by developers. Nobody on this planet accepts that the 30% is necessary for anything ergo, it's a massive chunk out of profits. Most companies are not hugely profitable. In many cases, Apple is making considerable more profit off of apps than developers themselves. For a $1 spent, about 25 cents to Apple mostly profit, then 70 cents to the dev which will mostly be dev., ad. and op. costs. It wouldn't surprise met that Apple makes more surplus from Fornite than Fortnite makes off the platform.
- throwawaynothx 6y ago
  Not to mention you require an apple machine to compile code for IOS (or rent a service that will compile it for you) - Also you need to PAY for a developer ID. Their business model is munted. All because people are sheep. They advertised to moronic uni students who like shiny things, Their parents wanted to seem hip so they got on board. I mean hell, you cant even use a cable they don't own.
  - lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
    Yeah, much easier to dismiss iOS users as fashion-conscious shiny-obsessed sheep rather than maybe talk to some iOS users and understand what exactly they prefer about the platform they use. Because I rather like the fact the iOS devices get OS updates for about twice as long as Android devices. Android security was also a pretty bad joke for a very long time—it has started to change, but there's only so much they can fix. Google would release an OS (or even a security) update, then you'd have to wait for both the OEM and the network provider to pass the update on to end users. Google are changing this with security patches, but there's still a lot of Android devices running old versions with no prospect of any new features coming any time soon. In iOS land, there's no OEM or network intermediaries (something Apple insisted on in all deals with networks from the first iPhone), so generally takeup of a new iOS version happens really promptly - as of June 2020, 81% of iOS users are on iOS 13.* That's good for the health of the platform as app developers can build on top of new OS features knowing a reasonable number of actual users can use those new features. Also, there are a whole variety of suppliers of Lightning cables. Go to Amazon and search "MFi certified lightning cable". * https://www.statista.com/statistics/565270/apple-devices-ios-version-share-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/565270/apple-devices-ios...
    - jariel 6y ago
      This is fine, but besides the point. 30% is outrageous and basically no developers want to pay it. Were it 10%, all those things you mention would remain the same.
      - Razengan 6y ago
        > 30% is outrageous and basically no developers want to pay it. Boy will your world be shook when you discover the Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo stores.
      - lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
        30% is the same amount Google takes from the Play Store. Also, OP is stating that the only reason people buy iOS is because they're some kind of idiot fashionista sheeple etc. I was merely pointing out that there are compelling reasons to prefer iOS beyond, I dunno, the magic mind-control powers of the ghost of Steve Jobs.
        jariel 6y ago
        "30% is the same amount Google takes from the Play Store." Except that developers don't need to use the App Store a sales/distribution mechanism. It's like saying "In one country, there is only one car, and it is $50 000". In another country, the same car exists, and yes, there are other $50 000 cars ... but there are also any number of other choices. And FYI even Google is engaging in anticompetitive practices. Both platforms should be required to allow the installation of any app vendor point they want as the default app store.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Uau, paying for tools what a crime. I almost forgotten that here people want to get paid without paying for their own tools.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Back in the old days that was up to 80%, so no not all developers.
- cafed00d 6y ago
  Ok, I can see that my opinion is getting super-downvoted. But I genuinely fail to understand why developers' opinions should be treated with so much reverence. It sounds to me like the _only_ reason developers are clamoring against the App Store is because some fraction of developers are unhappy about a high commission. It's on the same lines are some people out there unhappy about Apple's high prices. In both cases, you should vote with your wallets -- do not buy Apple devices or develop for Apple devices. >Combined with the ambiguity, lack of choice, threats to business Would you say that there was abundant choice for developers before the iPhone? What would you develop for -- Blackberry? Nokia? None of those manufacturers had anything remotely close to the iPhone. Right? Would you say that a 3rd party developer who writes a "flashlight" app is really a legitimate business? Ok, I'll acknowledge the beef with Spotify and the threat an integrated platform can pose in that regard. So what would you propose Apple do? Pay software engineers on their payroll to help Spotify sell music on the iPod (oops; I mean iPhone)? >Most companies are not hugely profitable. >In many cases, Apple is making considerable more profit off of apps than developers themselves. >For a $1 spent, about 25 cents to Apple mostly profit, then 70 cents to the dev which will mostly be dev., ad. and op. costs. All this goes to show is that Apple is hugely expensive platform to develop for. Massively expensive! I am sincerely trying to understand _why_ would any developer _need_ to take this expense if they cannot afford it? Can't you develop a web app instead?
  - anon4242 6y ago
    > Pay software engineers on their payroll to help Spotify sell music on the iPod (oops; I mean iPhone)? Well, Microsoft did that, they developed the Spotify app for Windows Phone back in the day. > I am sincerely trying to understand _why_ would any developer _need_ to take this expense if they cannot afford it? Can't you develop a web app instead? I guess because such a large portion of phone users use iPhone, not developing for iOS means you remove yourself from competing about not only those customers but others as well. Say you develop a chat app (fat chance of that now but anyways), a large portion of Android users will say "It's nice and all but because some of my friends have iPhones I want to be able to chat with them as well." So quite simply, you need to be where the customers are and customers want native apps not web apps. They don't want to open Safari or Chrome or Firefox, type in a URL and some login credentials. It's too much of a nuisance. So if you don't write a native app some one else will and then they take all your customers...
- Razengan 6y ago
  > iOS is basically universally reviled by developers. No. No, it is not. I am a developer, and I support iOS and Apple’s practices. I know this comment will be buried; It’s ironic how the people supposedly championing freedom tries to bury any dissenting voices. > In many cases, Apple is making considerable more profit off of apps than developers themselves. Apple pays out more revenue to developers than the Play Store.
ouid 6y ago
>grumpy about a shrewd for profit company. Like Enron or something.

jariel 6y ago

"Does every developer out there think 30% commission on paid apps is tyranny?" Combined with the ambiguity, lack of choice, threats to business - absolutely yes, iOS is basically universally reviled by developers. Nobody on this planet accepts that the 30% is necessary for anything ergo, it's a massive chunk out of profits. Most companies are not hugely profitable. In many cases, Apple is making considerable more profit off of apps than developers themselves. For a $1 spent, about 25 cents to Apple mostly profit, then 70 cents to the dev which will mostly be dev., ad. and op. costs. It wouldn't surprise met that Apple makes more surplus from Fornite than Fortnite makes off the platform.

throwawaynothx 6y ago
Not to mention you require an apple machine to compile code for IOS (or rent a service that will compile it for you) - Also you need to PAY for a developer ID. Their business model is munted. All because people are sheep. They advertised to moronic uni students who like shiny things, Their parents wanted to seem hip so they got on board. I mean hell, you cant even use a cable they don't own.
- lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
  Yeah, much easier to dismiss iOS users as fashion-conscious shiny-obsessed sheep rather than maybe talk to some iOS users and understand what exactly they prefer about the platform they use. Because I rather like the fact the iOS devices get OS updates for about twice as long as Android devices. Android security was also a pretty bad joke for a very long time—it has started to change, but there's only so much they can fix. Google would release an OS (or even a security) update, then you'd have to wait for both the OEM and the network provider to pass the update on to end users. Google are changing this with security patches, but there's still a lot of Android devices running old versions with no prospect of any new features coming any time soon. In iOS land, there's no OEM or network intermediaries (something Apple insisted on in all deals with networks from the first iPhone), so generally takeup of a new iOS version happens really promptly - as of June 2020, 81% of iOS users are on iOS 13.* That's good for the health of the platform as app developers can build on top of new OS features knowing a reasonable number of actual users can use those new features. Also, there are a whole variety of suppliers of Lightning cables. Go to Amazon and search "MFi certified lightning cable". * https://www.statista.com/statistics/565270/apple-devices-ios-version-share-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/565270/apple-devices-ios...
  - jariel 6y ago
    This is fine, but besides the point. 30% is outrageous and basically no developers want to pay it. Were it 10%, all those things you mention would remain the same.
    - Razengan 6y ago
      > 30% is outrageous and basically no developers want to pay it. Boy will your world be shook when you discover the Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo stores.
    - lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
      30% is the same amount Google takes from the Play Store. Also, OP is stating that the only reason people buy iOS is because they're some kind of idiot fashionista sheeple etc. I was merely pointing out that there are compelling reasons to prefer iOS beyond, I dunno, the magic mind-control powers of the ghost of Steve Jobs.
      - jariel 6y ago
        "30% is the same amount Google takes from the Play Store." Except that developers don't need to use the App Store a sales/distribution mechanism. It's like saying "In one country, there is only one car, and it is $50 000". In another country, the same car exists, and yes, there are other $50 000 cars ... but there are also any number of other choices. And FYI even Google is engaging in anticompetitive practices. Both platforms should be required to allow the installation of any app vendor point they want as the default app store.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Uau, paying for tools what a crime. I almost forgotten that here people want to get paid without paying for their own tools.
pjmlp 6y ago
Back in the old days that was up to 80%, so no not all developers.
cafed00d 6y ago
Ok, I can see that my opinion is getting super-downvoted. But I genuinely fail to understand why developers' opinions should be treated with so much reverence. It sounds to me like the _only_ reason developers are clamoring against the App Store is because some fraction of developers are unhappy about a high commission. It's on the same lines are some people out there unhappy about Apple's high prices. In both cases, you should vote with your wallets -- do not buy Apple devices or develop for Apple devices. >Combined with the ambiguity, lack of choice, threats to business Would you say that there was abundant choice for developers before the iPhone? What would you develop for -- Blackberry? Nokia? None of those manufacturers had anything remotely close to the iPhone. Right? Would you say that a 3rd party developer who writes a "flashlight" app is really a legitimate business? Ok, I'll acknowledge the beef with Spotify and the threat an integrated platform can pose in that regard. So what would you propose Apple do? Pay software engineers on their payroll to help Spotify sell music on the iPod (oops; I mean iPhone)? >Most companies are not hugely profitable. >In many cases, Apple is making considerable more profit off of apps than developers themselves. >For a $1 spent, about 25 cents to Apple mostly profit, then 70 cents to the dev which will mostly be dev., ad. and op. costs. All this goes to show is that Apple is hugely expensive platform to develop for. Massively expensive! I am sincerely trying to understand _why_ would any developer _need_ to take this expense if they cannot afford it? Can't you develop a web app instead?
- anon4242 6y ago
  > Pay software engineers on their payroll to help Spotify sell music on the iPod (oops; I mean iPhone)? Well, Microsoft did that, they developed the Spotify app for Windows Phone back in the day. > I am sincerely trying to understand _why_ would any developer _need_ to take this expense if they cannot afford it? Can't you develop a web app instead? I guess because such a large portion of phone users use iPhone, not developing for iOS means you remove yourself from competing about not only those customers but others as well. Say you develop a chat app (fat chance of that now but anyways), a large portion of Android users will say "It's nice and all but because some of my friends have iPhones I want to be able to chat with them as well." So quite simply, you need to be where the customers are and customers want native apps not web apps. They don't want to open Safari or Chrome or Firefox, type in a URL and some login credentials. It's too much of a nuisance. So if you don't write a native app some one else will and then they take all your customers...
Razengan 6y ago
> iOS is basically universally reviled by developers. No. No, it is not. I am a developer, and I support iOS and Apple’s practices. I know this comment will be buried; It’s ironic how the people supposedly championing freedom tries to bury any dissenting voices. > In many cases, Apple is making considerable more profit off of apps than developers themselves. Apple pays out more revenue to developers than the Play Store.

ouid 6y ago

>grumpy about a shrewd for profit company. Like Enron or something.