3 ms·

>they charge a percentage of what the app developer makes What seems perverse to me is they don't tax you on your profits, I am sure Google and Apple won't lik

>they charge a percentage of what the app developer makes What seems perverse to me is they don't tax you on your profits, I am sure Google and Apple won't like the governments do the same to them. Btw I understand it is super hard to implement a tax on profits only so it would make more sense IMo to give the developers a choice, pay on what you use (pay for bandwidth, for reviews, for dev tools licenses, for advertising) OR pay the tax. The small devs could chose the tax , the big developers would chose the first one , Apple will have less money from this giant devs but they could keep their high walls for a few more years(I prefer if Apple and Epic don't get a secret deal and this fight continues so judges and us uncover more data about this topic)

sitkack 5y ago
The work done by the app stores isn't linear wrt to the purchase price. Clearly they shouldn't be taking a percentage cut. Together, GA has a duopoly on app stores and they have set their fees to be the same. That one of them would consider buying the trouble maker on the other platform is just ... telling.
tomjen3 5y ago
I considered the option of pay for what you use, but those prices would have to be massive (tens of thousands of dollars per dev) to even start to make up for it. It would essentially be a monopoly gift for the biggest developers.
- simion314 5y ago
  That seems fishy, can you elaborate? - bandwidth is not that expensive , so only if the giants would screw you over with inflated prices. You could force the giants to reveal how much it actually costs(though I seen that even in the face of a judge the bastards pretend they are clueless and avoid answering questions) - app reviews, You pay per review or per hour, maybe you submit a game to Sony or MS and they want a review dude to play it all to ensure is not broken. -ads , only if you want, this should be an auction system - dev tools, you should only have to pay for Apple signing your stuff, compilers, SDKs, IDEs should be always an opion for the dev to chose. Btw, I am including all stores in my critique (including Steam,Sony's Play Station, and Microsoft)

sitkack 5y ago

The work done by the app stores isn't linear wrt to the purchase price. Clearly they shouldn't be taking a percentage cut. Together, GA has a duopoly on app stores and they have set their fees to be the same. That one of them would consider buying the trouble maker on the other platform is just ... telling.

tomjen3 5y ago

I considered the option of pay for what you use, but those prices would have to be massive (tens of thousands of dollars per dev) to even start to make up for it. It would essentially be a monopoly gift for the biggest developers.

simion314 5y ago
That seems fishy, can you elaborate? - bandwidth is not that expensive , so only if the giants would screw you over with inflated prices. You could force the giants to reveal how much it actually costs(though I seen that even in the face of a judge the bastards pretend they are clueless and avoid answering questions) - app reviews, You pay per review or per hour, maybe you submit a game to Sony or MS and they want a review dude to play it all to ensure is not broken. -ads , only if you want, this should be an auction system - dev tools, you should only have to pay for Apple signing your stuff, compilers, SDKs, IDEs should be always an opion for the dev to chose. Btw, I am including all stores in my critique (including Steam,Sony's Play Station, and Microsoft)