11 ms·
This is bull. Apple deserves a "rent", and not a "cut". They are providing infrastructure and services, and they deserve a minimum rent for these, which they al
by truth_ 5y ago
This is bull. Apple deserves a "rent", and not a "cut". They are providing infrastructure and services, and they deserve a minimum rent for these, which they already take.
But Apple should not take cut on every purchases made through the app. It makes no sense.
AWS does not take a "cut" on every Netflix subscription bought. They just charge for the storage and traffic. This is how App Store should function.
- spiderice 5y agoI find it telling that you use AWS as an example because they are different than the apple model, while ignoring all the companies using the exact same model as apple, including how Epic charges developers to host content on the Epic store.
- bendmorris 5y agoEpic is a great example. Their own store lists alternative stores on the Epic store, like itch.io. But they don't take a cut of games bought from those stores. Once you launch itch, you're in itch.
- dijit 5y agoSteam is a better example as Epic is operating at a loss position to disrupt the incumbent.
- verall 5y agoMy friends and I play Apex through Steam, which I downloaded for free. When you click to purchase "Apex coins", it takes you straight to EA's website. Apple wants to enforce a cut on every purchase of in-game currency. Steam does not do this. And Valve allows you to sell steam keys on your own website also without paying the cut, so long as you don't undercut the steam store.
- ninjinxo 5y agoSteam does take a cut for microtransactions, very likely force price parity, and put the developers under NDAs: https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/1ogbo7/will_money_from_steam_wallet_be_eligible_for/#ccs0a41 https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/1ogbo7/will_mo...
- verall 5y agoThey take a cut for microtransactions that they process, but you are free to use your own service. They do require price parity. That link doesn't seem related at all.
- ninjinxo 5y ago>you are free to use your own service Do you have any sources on how restrictive valve are or have been with that, or is that just speculation? Can developers default to their own payment systems and bypass valve's, or is theirs required to take a secondary, less-accessible option (when it's even allowed)? From the same thread, the mtx cut taken was a dealbreaker for redfall studios, so it certainly sounds like they didnt get the option for their own mtx transaction service: https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/1ogbo7/will_money_from_steam_wallet_be_eligible_for/ccsoq3a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/1ogbo7/will_mo... If the direct links to comments aren't working, try logging into your reddit account.
- notafraudster 5y agoThis would be true if they listed "alternative store_s_", but what they actually did is add itch.io to their store in a token way once they started the lawsuit in order to say "Look, we have no problem working with other stores". It's a stunt for the lawsuit. Even the Itch founder who signed the deal said they basically found it bemusing and an effort to gain legal leverage without really doing anything else. It'd be like if Apple took all of the developers who testified against Apple, reduced their commission to 0% in perpetuity, and then asked the judge to throw out their testimony because the complaints were moot. (That being said, I do think there are conditions where stores would/should allow other stores, and I think those conditions could be more permissive than the Roblox example. Apple should, medium term, resolve the GeForce Now/XCloud objections.)
- orisho 5y agoI bought The Division 2 after seeing a promotion on the Epic store. To install it, you have to install the Ubisoft store Uplay, which is launched through an integration with the Epic store. After playing that game, I saw promotions for Assassin's Creed Odyssey on Uplay, and purchased it. I later went on to purchase many other games on Uplay. In short, Epic allows Ubisoft to sell games on its store, for which they presumably pay a cut - for those sales. But Epic has no problems letting Ubisoft require their store be installed for those games, and if you buy something there - even though the Epic Launcher installed it - they don't get a cut. This is more akin to the App Store installing Fortnite - which Apple could get a cut out of, but not getting a cut for purchases in the app.
- notafraudster 5y agoBoth Apple and Valve (Steam) allow similar arrangements, although not precisely the same. EA games on Steam, and Ubisoft games on Steam before they left Steam, require installing Origin and UPlay respectively. But don't you find it notable that Epic does not distribute Uplay on its own, unbundled from purchases? On the Apple side, it's ok for applications to require the user make an account on services like Uplay (I believe several Ubisoft games require this; and Fortnite requires the Epic equivalent). You can then use that account to buy stuff on the stores. It's not an exact parallel because there are no (non-jailbreak) external app stores on the iPhone, but it's a close parallel.
- josephcsible 5y agoThere's no device or platform for which the Epic Store is the only way to get apps, so it shouldn't be held to the same standard as Apple's App Store.
- tmp231 5y agoI’m not sure what standard you are appealing to? Who cares if Apple only lets whatever they want on their own store? It’s their store. I hope Microsoft or Amazon would get back in the phone game and allow alternate stores.
- orisho 5y agoHe's saying the App Store should be held to a different standard because it is the ONLY store for iPhones. That isn't true for the Epic store - you can just install one of the other stores, or purchase from a different method.
- tmp231 5y agoEveryone should be held to the same standard of respecting private property. You know what you are getting into when going onto apples store; if you don’t like it then encourage all your clients to use Android.
- josephcsible 5y agoRespecting private property? Whose property is an iPhone? Apple's or the end user's? Whose (intellectual) property is the Epic Store? Apple's or Epic's? Apple wants to use the only thing that's theirs in the equation (the App Store) to restrict an interaction between both of the other things that aren't theirs.
- tmp231 5y agoYea, their OS, their store, their software stack. Sure, you own the device, so put whatever OS you want on it. But you can’t force Apple to write their OS however you want except by market forces. Well, you could try using extreme tactics like government regulation, but that’s a severe overreach and uncalled for just because you don’t like the way apple writes their software.
- ilrwbwrkhv 5y agoBull. Without apple the iOS ecosystem wouldn't exist.
- ivalm 5y agoWithout Microsoft, the windows eco system wouldnt exist. Should MS get a cut of all windows applications?
- musicale 5y agoShould MS get a cut of all Xbox applications?
- matz1 5y agoThey should if they could get a way with it.
- tmp231 5y agoIf they want? I’m not sure why you think you have a right to dictate private policy on a private platform.
- josephcsible 5y agoIf you buy a Camry and then become an Uber driver, should you have to give Toyota a cut of your earnings?
- tmp231 5y agoIf they tell you going then won’t buy that Camry. Get a Honda.
- josephcsible 5y agoI don't quite understand your first sentence, but by your second one it sounds like your answer is basically "yes". That seems like a rather extreme position to take. Are you also opposed to the First Sale Doctrine?
- geodel 5y agoDo Netflix customer have to keep AWS components updated on their client device to keep Netflix working fine? Because app customers have to depend on App store vendors for OS and other components.
- hnlmorg 5y agoAWS pricing is extremely thorough and not at all comparable with Apple's App Store: - AWS charge you on bandwidth used, Apple don't charge developers for the number of downloads - AWS charge you on compute time, Apple don't charge you for ongoing use of their services beyond one initial charge for app submission - AWS charge you for storage, Apple don't charge you for storing your app I'm not a fan of Apple's App Store terms any more than the next person, but the GP's comparison to eBay is a hell of a lot more apt than your comparison with AWS.
- lukeramsden 5y ago> - AWS charge you on compute time, Apple don't charge you for ongoing use of their services beyond one initial charge for app submission Yes they do, the fee is yearly, and they make billions in revenue from this. Google charge one-time.
- thayne 5y agoNot to mention that you have to purchase expensive apple hardware to develop for iOS.
- ericlewis 5y agoRent would go up and there would be basically 0 actually free apps anymore. It’s already hard to pay 99$ a year for many people. Now you have to pay some larger number and your app may never make money. It’s always an achievement just to get your 99$ back anyway.
- stadium 5y agoAndroid has mostly free apps, ad supported. iOS has more paid apps, for one because people that can afford a high end phone are more willing to pay for $99 for an app. Look at the pricing for the same app on Android vs iOS.
- fsloth 5y agoWith the risk of sounding overly harsh - If 99$ per annum is a concrete financial risk maybe being a solo developer is not such a good lifepath financially. I imagine anyone capable of deploying an app store app has pretty good skills and is quite hireable. Of course individual situations can be different, but this is discussion about the "generic situation".
- atomicnumber3 5y agoOne thing I don't like about the iOS model is that 100/yr is a significant barrier to hosting "open source" type apps out of the goodness of your heart. Concrete example: best ssh app on android is ConnectBot which is gratis and free. Best ssh app on iOS is Termius which is crippled by default, nonfree, and requires a $10/mo *subscription* to unlock. I don't mind paying for software I use, but 120/yr for a phone ssh app is too much. And this is the best app on the store, a less costly and freer competitor hasn't emerged. And I can't even sideload my own apps.
- throwaway3699 5y ago> I don't mind paying for software I use, but 120/yr for a phone ssh app is too much. This is because it's much easier to earn money on the long-tail dedicated fans than the masses. Especially when those masses are likely to hate advertising based models with a passion.
- Spooky23 5y agoAWS captures you by being the custodian of your data and charging you to move it. That’s the real magic of AWS and is the reason S3 was the mother service. Pre-AWS, colo at scale meant circuits and high friction networking. With the modern cloud providers, there’s less friction, but a tollbooth.
- spion 5y agoBy that logic, should Apple charge something like $1/user/month to allow companies to publish apps and run software on iPhones?
- afavour 5y agoHow is that the same logic? Amazon does not charge end users for allowing services they use to run on AWS.
- vultour 5y agoAWS charges for bandwidth. Should Apple start charging the developer $1 for every download?
- shkkmo 5y agoThat seems a bit price gougey given how much bandwidth costs...but sure, as long as other AppStores are allowed on the platform, that's fine.
- supergirl 5y agothey could charge $0.09/GB like S3. that would be interesting actually, because it's not exactly free so developers need to optimize for it
- hnlmorg 5y agoYes they do. They charge you compute time, data egress and storage costs. They charge you for premium support, DNS lookups, and even just having an unused IP reservation. AWS has an extensive and diverse model for charges. So much so that it's very difficult to accurately calculate the total cost of a new project ahead of deploying it due to all the hidden costs. If Apple adopted the same model as AWS, people would still moan.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- giantrobot 5y agoNetflix pays AWS (and their other services) based on their use. AWS "takes a cut" in that Netflix pays for their service.