5 ms·
> Didn't customers pay a premium for Apple hardware because of the unified ecosystem and superior security to begin with Not defending Apple, but offering fore
by _jal 5y ago
> Didn't customers pay a premium for Apple hardware because of the unified ecosystem and superior security to begin with
Not defending Apple, but offering forever-services for one-time fees is a great way to go out of business. I would not expect the App Store to be subsidized by hardware sales.
Also, assuming you accept the premise in the first place, it makes sense to charge the developer, who is the one generating work for reviewers.
- relaxing 5y agoAll of those are recurring fees.
- h0l0cube 5y agoNot sure why this is getting downvoted. The developer program has a yearly fee. Phones, even in the rare case that they are used for their full lifespan, still need to be replaced as they slowly die/become obselete - in practice every 2-5 years.
- mkishi 5y agoNot completely, but maybe enough to lower the insane fees? For instance, why not charge for the services used and a low payment processing fee? If developers bring associated costs, they should pay for it. It just seems 30% is overshooting quite a bit. They want to treat developers like regular customers with regular margins, when they are more like partners bringing them nearly free revenue. I guess I'm too ignorant to understand how building, maintaining and securing the App Store is 10x more expensive than doing the same for something like Mastercard.
- _jal 5y agoI was responding to comments about a particular pricing model, not defending Apple. Perhaps I should find a better way to communicate that - making it literally the first words of my post didn't work.