5 ms·

Yes but many of the larger players who are willing to go to war use the 'its not fair on smaller developers' argument against them. This really slaps down the

Yes but many of the larger players who are willing to go to war use the 'its not fair on smaller developers' argument against them. This really slaps down the ability to use that.

saagarjha 6y ago
…which, like many of Apple's moves regarding the App Store, is basically "let's shut down the ability of people to complain" rather than "let's actually fix things so people won't complain".
varispeed 6y ago
15% is still not fair.
- HatchedLake721 6y ago
  And you calculated that how?
  - varispeed 6y ago
    It's a level that state would take to take care for roads, healthcare, civil service, army and so on. There is no justification for such high % to maintain an app. They could charge per app review and maybe the data transfer fee no more than Amazon S3. Anything else is Apple abusing their monopoly. Developer can't submit their app to an alternative app store because Apple doesn't allow that and it must change.
    - HatchedLake721 6y ago
      > There is no justification for such high % to maintain an app Again, you calculated that how?
    - breakfastduck 6y ago
      It's not 'maintain' - its offer all the services that come along with it (integrations, store, download, hosting, authentication). If you produce a food product, you should expect the store to take a cut of the price before it gets to you.
      - varispeed 6y ago
        These things that you listed are not that expensive to run. If you produce a food product you can also set up your own store, but you can't in case of Apple.
        singemonkey 6y ago
        You probably upvoted that guy who was sure he could build Dropbox in a weekend.
        alisonkisk 6y ago
        Dropbox is great. But Apple bans its customers and app developers from using Dropbox as an an app delivery system.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - viktorcode 6y ago
      Unlike a commercial company a state is not for-profit enterprise. Maybe you think that app stores shouldn't be for-profit marketplaces either?
      - alisonkisk 6y ago
        The state is not-for-profit because it is a monopoly. Like Apple.
- simonh 6y ago
  For app store listing and promotion, application delivery all over the world to hundreds of millions of devices, access to back end services like notifications and iCloud storage, and sales transaction processing? Really? Imagine if you had to develop or pay for all of those services individually. Your own download site, product promotion, services, a third party transaction processor, a content delivery network, bespoke cloud syncing, etc, etc.
  - varispeed 6y ago
    Well, the app store cannot exist without app and phone without apps is essentially worthless (unless it has at least the caller app). So who is promoting who? The so called application delivery is just a file server that anyone can setup for peanuts these days. Apple offers no alternative for notifications or storage - there is no competition so they can dictate extortionate prices. Yes many companies would love to run these services on their own, but they can't as Apple is blocking it.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - pg_bot 6y ago
    30% is honestly a terrible deal as Apple does not provide the value for the money they are charging. The difference is you are forced into that arrangement you don't have the option of doing it all yourself. If you had to develop all of those services yourself, it would look a lot like the internet. None of the things you mention are particularly challenging for the modern web.
    - viktorcode 6y ago
      I don't get "you are forced" part. If a deal is bad for you, don't take it.
      - alisonkisk 6y ago
        Then you are a victim of Apple's tortious interference between yourself and your customers. Apple installs malware on every iDevice preventing users from installing apps they choose to purchase from 3rd parties.
Dylan16807 6y ago
A lot of small devs are going to be over this threshold.
- macinjosh 6y ago
  Good for them! That's a lot of money.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    It's not a lot of money if 10-20 people are splitting it between wages and employment taxes and health care and rent and marketing. You can be quite a small business and still go over a million in revenue. This is more like "single small team" as a threshold.
  - alisonkisk 6y ago
    You seem to be conflating revenue with profit.
heavyset_go 6y ago
No it doesn't. Apple and Google have stood on the neck of the mobile app distribution market for over a decade, and small developers have suffered for it. This change doesn't address the problem at all.
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  I'm not saying it addresses the problem, I'm saying it gives their competitors less ammunition against them in court.
- alisonkisk 6y ago
  Google Android allows 3rd Party app stores and sideloading, with $0 0% fee. Hardly neck-standing.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    The only way to implement automatic upgrading, background installation or batch upgrading/installation of apps is via the Play Store. Third party app stores cannot compete with the Play Store on feature parity.

Yes but many of the larger players who are willing to go to war use the 'its not fair on smaller developers' argument against them. This really slaps down the ability to use that.

saagarjha 6y ago

…which, like many of Apple's moves regarding the App Store, is basically "let's shut down the ability of people to complain" rather than "let's actually fix things so people won't complain".

varispeed 6y ago

15% is still not fair.

HatchedLake721 6y ago
And you calculated that how?
- varispeed 6y ago
  It's a level that state would take to take care for roads, healthcare, civil service, army and so on. There is no justification for such high % to maintain an app. They could charge per app review and maybe the data transfer fee no more than Amazon S3. Anything else is Apple abusing their monopoly. Developer can't submit their app to an alternative app store because Apple doesn't allow that and it must change.
  - HatchedLake721 6y ago
    > There is no justification for such high % to maintain an app Again, you calculated that how?
  - breakfastduck 6y ago
    It's not 'maintain' - its offer all the services that come along with it (integrations, store, download, hosting, authentication). If you produce a food product, you should expect the store to take a cut of the price before it gets to you.
    - varispeed 6y ago
      These things that you listed are not that expensive to run. If you produce a food product you can also set up your own store, but you can't in case of Apple.
      - singemonkey 6y ago
        You probably upvoted that guy who was sure he could build Dropbox in a weekend.
        alisonkisk 6y ago
        Dropbox is great. But Apple bans its customers and app developers from using Dropbox as an an app delivery system.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - viktorcode 6y ago
    Unlike a commercial company a state is not for-profit enterprise. Maybe you think that app stores shouldn't be for-profit marketplaces either?
    - alisonkisk 6y ago
      The state is not-for-profit because it is a monopoly. Like Apple.
simonh 6y ago
For app store listing and promotion, application delivery all over the world to hundreds of millions of devices, access to back end services like notifications and iCloud storage, and sales transaction processing? Really? Imagine if you had to develop or pay for all of those services individually. Your own download site, product promotion, services, a third party transaction processor, a content delivery network, bespoke cloud syncing, etc, etc.
- varispeed 6y ago
  Well, the app store cannot exist without app and phone without apps is essentially worthless (unless it has at least the caller app). So who is promoting who? The so called application delivery is just a file server that anyone can setup for peanuts these days. Apple offers no alternative for notifications or storage - there is no competition so they can dictate extortionate prices. Yes many companies would love to run these services on their own, but they can't as Apple is blocking it.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- pg_bot 6y ago
  30% is honestly a terrible deal as Apple does not provide the value for the money they are charging. The difference is you are forced into that arrangement you don't have the option of doing it all yourself. If you had to develop all of those services yourself, it would look a lot like the internet. None of the things you mention are particularly challenging for the modern web.
  - viktorcode 6y ago
    I don't get "you are forced" part. If a deal is bad for you, don't take it.
    - alisonkisk 6y ago
      Then you are a victim of Apple's tortious interference between yourself and your customers. Apple installs malware on every iDevice preventing users from installing apps they choose to purchase from 3rd parties.

Dylan16807 6y ago

A lot of small devs are going to be over this threshold.

macinjosh 6y ago
Good for them! That's a lot of money.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  It's not a lot of money if 10-20 people are splitting it between wages and employment taxes and health care and rent and marketing. You can be quite a small business and still go over a million in revenue. This is more like "single small team" as a threshold.
- alisonkisk 6y ago
  You seem to be conflating revenue with profit.

heavyset_go 6y ago

No it doesn't. Apple and Google have stood on the neck of the mobile app distribution market for over a decade, and small developers have suffered for it. This change doesn't address the problem at all.

breakfastduck 6y ago
I'm not saying it addresses the problem, I'm saying it gives their competitors less ammunition against them in court.
alisonkisk 6y ago
Google Android allows 3rd Party app stores and sideloading, with $0 0% fee. Hardly neck-standing.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  The only way to implement automatic upgrading, background installation or batch upgrading/installation of apps is via the Play Store. Third party app stores cannot compete with the Play Store on feature parity.