6 ms·

It’s absolutely obvious that iOS has to allow side loading and other app stores. It’s user hostile and tyrannical of Apple to do otherwise. Always was. It’s a h

• baal80spam 5y ago
  > It’s a huge fat 30% margin Isn't the margin 15% for (what I assume is) a vast majority of sales?
  • osrec 5y ago
    That's still incredibly high.
  • post_break 5y ago
    It only took a threat to get 15%, and if you make enough money you don't get that deal.
  • blendergeek 5y ago
    I always see this comment anywhere the thirty percent is mentioned. The truth is that after Epic's lawsuit, Apple did reduce their cut to 12.5% for smaller players. But for the majority of the App Store's time in existence it had been 30% across the board.
  • evanmoran 5y ago
    You are right that in practice most people don’t get 1M in yearly revenue, but the 30% is a huge consideration for anyone making a new software business that has a chance to grow past 10 employees. What most successful companies do instead is dodge it by being free with ads (Facebook, Instagram, Amazon, Snap, YouTube, Zillow, etc), baked into an existing subscription business (Office, Google Docs, Basecamp, Netflix, Disney+, Photoshop, 1Password), or they ditch the phones entirely using web, desktop or console platforms instead (Figma, Sketch, most AAA games, most sass companies). The only big companies left are micropayment game companies and that is mostly because casual games are a perfect fit for mobile and it’s worth the 30% to be where the users are.
• drcode 5y ago
  Maybe it would be better if people just choose not to buy iOS devices if they are so terrible- why does the government have to get involved?
  • gameswithgo 5y ago
    That is the idealistic idea, but when companies grow very large they become able to: * dominate the supply chain, making it impossible for other companies to compete * write their own laws or otherwise influence legislation to keep themselves in their dominant position
  • johanwallem 5y ago
    The government decided they need to regulate companies and enforce competition laws, so now that they have done that, it’s only natural to enforce this
  • KptMarchewa 5y ago
    They are using their advantage in one side of business - quality of hardware, camera, and OS - to get advantages in another side - apps. That's definition of abusive monopoly.
    • zepto 5y ago
      Somehow there are a bunch of competitors to choose from.
• zepto 5y ago
  It’s 15%
  • IncRnd 5y ago
    It's 15% for small businesses but not for those with greater income, where it remains 30%.
    • zepto 5y ago
      It’s 15% for every business except the top 2% most profitable.
      • IncRnd 5y ago
        It's 15% for small businesses that make less than $1 million in app proceeds. PS if you are thinking of subscriptions, those are 30% for the first year, 15% afterwards. That's due to the high percentage of subscriber churn, so most subscriptions pay 30% and don't get to the 15% level.
        • zepto 5y ago
          That is 98% of app businesses. $1M in proceeds per year is a solid business.
          • IncRnd 5y ago
            Unlike what you wrote, "It's 15%", it is not 15%.
            • zepto 5y ago
              98% of it is at 15%. Except for a minority of exceptions it is 15%. Let’s recall what you wrote: “It’s a huge fat 30% margin”. Now that is certainly bullshit, isn’t it?
              • 5y ago
• prepend 5y ago
  I don’t think so. Side loading is needed by like 1% of users and for the rest it is bad. For example, I expect most users are like my mom and will never legitimately side load anything unless malware tricks her into it. That being said, Apple should allow it like debug mode or whatever. I just don’t think it’s a big deal because it won’t be used much. And if Epic thinks many users will side load so they can avoid 30%, that’s unlikely.
  • HumblyTossed 5y ago
    > I don’t think so. Side loading is needed by like 1% of users and for the rest it is bad. Then make it not at all obvious how to do it. Grandma will never figure it out, and the 1% of us who WANT the feature can have it.
    • askafriend 5y ago
      This is how you end up with Microsoft. Supporting any and all use-cases instead of focusing deeply on the few that matter.
    • prepend 5y ago
      What I meant is that malware will do it for grandma or walk her through it. My mom is one of those millions who answer the phone and let scamsters walk her through setting up logmein and taking over her Windows box. The only way I helped her was by switching her to Apple where this isn’t possible. Went from me cleaning her cheapo windows laptop up every six months to three years on an iPad with no cleanup.
  • wayneftw 5y ago
    I'm pretty sure that many corporations would love to distribute private apps to their own company iPhones. Instead, everybody has to ask Apple to please pretty please let some software run on devices that they own.
    • taylodl 5y ago
      No you don't. Businesses can load their own applications, bulk purchase software directly from the vendor and avoid paying app store fees (even manage the licenses), force deploy applications to their fleet of iOS devices, and force update iOS applications. We've been able to do that, and have been doing that, for years. No need to get any permission from Apple, no need to submit anything to their App Store, no need to pay Apple anything.
• hiccuphippo 5y ago
  >no other computer in history I’ve heard of had operated in such a closed garden I'm pretty sure all the big videogame consoles do.
  • HumblyTossed 5y ago
    iPhones are closer to a multipurpose computer than a video game console is.
    • threatofrain 5y ago
      But why should it remain that way? Is this distinction capricious or does it find some inherent basis? Video game consoles are starting to become social meeting spaces with web browsers and audio chat. If anything, it is more obvious to the user just what they're missing out on by selecting one console over another; for example, Breath of the Wild is basically there to sell the Nintendo Switch. If you don't buy the Switch, you will never get Breath of the Wild. What's a metaphorical Breath of the Wild that's available on Android but not on iOS? Isn't it often the reverse, where iOS gets a hot app, and Android users wonder when or if they will ever get the same? Also, how do we get a situation where users can choose Apple as the intermediary where they wish, versus a scenario where we say "Isn't this your fault that you voluntarily accepted all of Walmart's demands?"
    • askafriend 5y ago
      I want my phone to be closer to a video game console than a multi-purpose computer. I’m glad iPhone gives me that option.
      • ralfn 5y ago
        Apple is selling being a government. Controlling a market, and by extension society. We do not get to vote on the representatives that decide the app store rules. We do not get the right to hold them accountable in the execution of such rules. They play judge, jury and executioner, while hiding their internal discussions, goals and actions in secrecy. A democratic and free state would be wise not allow a competing for profit government. It shouldn't share the right to regulate a market with other entities anymore than they should share the monopoly of violence. I understand you are likely living in a country with a subpar government, but your mentality is short sighted and inconsistent. If you like regulated markets so much why don't like you want the democratically elected government to regulate a market? And if you like free markets so much why are you using an iPhone? And why don't you want the government to protect that free market from anti competitive undermining? Companies shouldn't be allowed to regulate a market as they see fit, anymore than that a property owner can administer Sharia law. Nobody is an island. All our actions affect others. The fact that your personal wellbeing or displeasure is the first thing that comes to your mind speaks to the quality of your character.
• sixothree 5y ago
  What's hostile is taking the ideas from good developers and implementing them directly in the OS. They should really buy the technology instead of simply forcing companies out of business.
• tomjen3 5y ago
  The nanosecond that happens, Facebook is going to only be available as a sideload and that version will spy even more than the app has ever done.
• alkonaut 5y ago
  Apple taking 30% for things in their store is ok. Or if it’s 15% or 12.5% or whatever. It’s a service they provide. I also don’t care if I can or cannot side load programs. It’s a non issue for almost all users. It has to be made possible for researchers though (opaque CSAM detection that no one can investigate etc). The problem is if they want to charge for in app things I buy from the developer, or draw a line between “content” and “features” etc. When Apple review an app and process payments for it that costs money. But when I buy another game level from a developer that wants to charge me directly - there is no review and no processing done by Apple.