8 ms·

It's going to be a hell for the users and the smaller developers. Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal

by mrtksn 5y ago

It's going to be a hell for the users and the smaller developers. Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal arrangements would be needed as each country has different laws and processes. Remember the agreements and forms we fill for different countries when we want to sell paid apps/features on App Store? I also can't wait to pay account fees for many app stores and modify my apps to fit specific app store rules. The %30 cut, for me covers this boring complexity. I'm sceptical that the potentially lower commissions will offset the added development and administrative costs. As for the users, people will start forgetting where they paid what. They will get frustrated, blame devs etc. It would become tiresome and many will be turned off the moment a payment is requested simply because they don't want to go through the same stuff multiple times. I despise platform fragmentations. Instead of telling companies what they must do, I think the regulators should intervene for market fairness, i.e. Apple&Google getting heavily fined when enforce different rules on different developers differently or compel them to accept an app in the App Store if they can't clearly indicate which rule is being broken. I would like to remind you all the troubles we need to go through to support just platforms: AppStore and Play Store. I am NOT looking forward to start paying fees and do development/Marketing work/Adjustments for Epic, Microsoft, Oracle, T-Mobile, Vodafone etc. just to reach the exact same users as of today. Edit: I, as a developer, don't want to deal with multiple platforms and their management and fees. Please tell me if you are mobile developer or is your opinion ideological. The Arguments so far look like coming from people who have no real experience with getting an app into the AppStore. How do you plan to sell Apps in the UK, France, Turkey, charge VAT and pay it to the respective governments for example. How do you plan to file your export paperwork in the US? How do you plan to deal with compliance? Seriously, are there any indie developers here with hands on experience? How do you handle international trade and taxation outside of platforms like AppleStore?

keithnz 5y ago
I saw nothing saying you can't still use them.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  Sure, you can do dev work for Windows Phone Store. That doesn't mean that it's as rewarding as doing work for Apple AppStore. The fragmentation will not open the floodgate for all the users out there who were holding off because they didn't want to use App Store or Play Store. It's going to be the exact same userbase but there will be more gatekeepers to deal with.
  - stirlo 5y ago
    > but there will be more gatekeepers to deal with. They’re not mandating support for alternative payment providers merely saying Apple and Google cannot prevent you as a developer offering an alternative to your users. Whether you decide to support alternatives is up to you but when you can use stripe for a 2% fee or Apple/Google with 30% how can you be worse off?
    - mrtksn 5y ago
      No one mandates to support AppStore or Google Play in first place. That's something you do if you want to reach the users of that service.
      - Vespasian 5y ago
        Companies want to reach the users of the devices. Apple and Google effectively prevent you from doing that without being in their stores. The fact that "technically" you can install apps on android and "technically" users can get an apple dev certificate / or sometimes jailbreak their device are nothing more than a single atom layer thick fig leaf. These two companies effectively have a duopoly on the mobile phone market and act accordingly. Edit: Corrected to not attack the parent commenter.
        mrtksn 5y ago
        No body is preventing me from doing anything, please stop speaking for me. Please read carefully: I do have Apps in the AppStore, I am happy with the business relationship with Apple and I am not looking forward to be forced into establishing new business relationships to reach the exact same user base.
WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
“Allow other payment platforms” is not the same as “Demand devs to support them all”, I don’t know between which lines you must have read it.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  Sure, You can't have platform fragmentation costs if you don't support platforms. You only support them if you want to reach the customers. That's exactly the same as not supporting Android or iOS or not getting into App Development in first place.
  - WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
    So, for example, if the bulk of the customers in Korea might be using Samsung Pay, you might just want to keep integrating with that instead of also having to provide Apple mechanisms, and maybe restructure your price since Apple imposes its tax?
    - mrtksn 5y ago
      Sure, I can do that. Let's take a look at it: 1) I need to learn and integrate Samsung's API or I need to hire someone to do that for me. I need to maintain a version of the app that works the way Samsung thinks it should(how do you deliver and restore purchases might differ from Apple). 2) Then I need to go through paperwork and payments that will enable me to sell Korea software from UK. I haven't look at the trade agreements between UK and Korea, I guess the easiest way is to pay a specialist that knows it. That's something that I would rather don't go through. Probably it's not possible unless I make significant money from it anyway.
      - WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
        Well, Korean government is likely to prioritize their local developers. And their darling, Samsung. UK and US have to jump through some hoops, sorry not sorry.
ethbr0 5y ago
Developers (and users) deserve choice. If you want to pay 30% to Apple to take care of that for you, then you should be able to. If someone else doesn't want to pay 30% to Apple, then they should have that right too. I've lived through both fragmented platforms and unified platforms, and I'll take the former any day. They're messy, but fair and dynamic. And critically, they evolve and allow new competition to emerge.
- simondotau 5y ago
  > If someone else doesn't want to pay 30% to Apple, then they should have that right That right? Are you saying developers should have the right to all of Apple's stuff for free, no matter what? Is Apple not allowed to distribute their tools and libraries under a license of their choosing? Should we ignore licenses altogether? Perhaps I don't want to pay the "cost" associated with use of a GPL-licensed library in my proprietary application. Should I have the right to just ignore the GPL license?
  - jpambrun 5y ago
    This argument is nonsensical.. I should be able to use my fully-paid-for device how I see fit.
    - simondotau 5y ago
      Apologies if I wasn't clear. I'm talking about the relationship between Apple and developers who are building applications using Apple's proprietary software libraries. I completely agree that consumers should have very wide rights to the device they purchased.
      - seanalltogether 5y ago
        Should I pay Apple for the right to build a Mac app, or Windows for using their desktop apis? Maybe I should have to pay mozilla and google every time someone visiting my website and I use a piece of javascript that executes in their browsers?
boudin 5y ago
I think it's going to be better for users and developers. On the ios store it will be possible to add a link to a website, tell the user that an external registration is necessary for apps that are companion app of a web service. For the case above, it should also be possible for customers with one user account only to use ios apps. What I just say above might seems to make no sense, but that's the current user experience that Apple enforces us to provide. From a dev experience, I can only see thinga getting better. If we can get to the point when an app store allows to publish apps that can be built on something else than a mac and with a good CI and CD, that could be a dev dream come true. From a business point of view, it can only be positive, having ways out of the random death sentenced decided randomly by Apple and Google using their store obscure rules and review process to kill apps. On android it's already fragmented in a way (Huawei has its own store now that their phones doesn't ship with the google layer). So it can just push more devs to take this into consideration.
yobbo 5y ago
> I despise platform fragmentations It is fair to point out that "platform fragmentation" occurs because of the policies of Apple and Google, not because of regulation. If they had some altruistic care for user/dev experience, the platforms would be open and frictionless to begin with. Their aim is to insert friction at all points of interoperability, and remove friction inside of their own platform.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  Nothing is altruistic. It's simply business and business is about to get harder for smaller developers.
  - commoner 5y ago
    Smaller developers now have more payment processing options in South Korea. In addition to Apple's and Google's own systems, they can also choose from a wide variety of third-party systems that charge ~3% instead of 15%/30%. I don't see how this would be anything but a benefit for smaller developers.
    - mrtksn 5y ago
      Do you have know-how on distributing apps and getting paid for? This sounds to me like ideological talk. "We wouldn't need to spend money on cleaning staff if everyone clean their door front." Yeah, sure.
      - commoner 5y ago
        I do, and your arguments in this thread don't convince me at all. Is there something incorrect in my comment? Developers went from having one payment processor that charges 15%/30% to many payment processors that can charge as little as under 3%. Revenue-wise, there is no downside to having these additional options.
        mrtksn 5y ago
WastingMyTime89 5y ago
> Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal arrangements would be needed as each country has different laws and processes. Remember the agreements and forms we fill for different countries when we want to sell paid apps/features on App Store? I also can't wait to pay account fees for many app stores and modify my apps to fit specific app store rules. The ruling force platforms to allow developers to use different payment processors. It doesn't force developers to use these processors. Digital payments predate app stores by a decade. It's mostly a solved issue. > As for the users, people will start forgetting where they paid what. It's just a charge on your bank account in the end. I'm not sure the where is really significant. > I think the regulators should intervene for market fairness You must be happy then because that's exactly what they are doing.
sleepydog 5y ago
I think what will happen is that most developers will offer in-app payments with a discount if you don’t pay through Google or Apple, to reflect the lower cut that alternative payment services would take. This should put pressure on Google and Apple to compete with those payment services, which is a good thing, IMO. It may reduce the revenue Google and Apple receive, but honestly I think that could be a good thing. They both do much more than maintain their OS. Both companies have suites of apps that they develop in-house and offer for free.
onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
You realize that you don't have to deal with "boring complexity" when you use plenty of other payment processors, like Stripe, right? And instead of being charged 30%, you get charged a transaction fee, plus ~3%.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  It doesn't work like that. Here is the Stipe page with description of what you need to do: https://stripe.com/docs/tax/registering https://stripe.com/docs/tax/registering Essentially, you need to register with the authorities of all the markets you would like to support. Different trade agreements with each country, different documents, different language. So you pay %3 instead %30 and then give the rest to the lawyers and accountants. Good luck with that.
  - Vespasian 5y ago
    Your app might only be targeted at a single country or a single market with "easy" taxation rules across borders like the EU. Companies do that all the time and if they see the value of being available globally by paying apple 30% that's fine as well. However right now we don't know whether such a service is in fact worth 30% percent because Google and Apple effectively prevent a competitor from offering lower prices
    - mrtksn 5y ago
      Obviously everyone can do whatever they like, I am pointing out the burden this puts on smaller developers. Suddenly, creating and distributing apps can get prohibitive for smaller developers.
      - commoner 5y ago
        > Suddenly, creating and distributing apps can get prohibitive for smaller developers. That's not true, because the law does not prohibit developers from using Apple's or Google's current payment systems. It enables more payment processing options (with lower fees) without removing existing ones. Developers can also choose different payment processors for different regions.
sam0x17 5y ago
Users definitely want to have third party app stores. One of the most obvious use cases for a smartphone imo, running a GBA emulator, isn't even possible in Apple's ecosystem because of the stringent app store regulations. How crazy is it that my $1200 phone can't play pokemon red but a $80 linux handheld (or any android device if you know what you're doing) can. Simply pathetic. 9-year-old 90s me is laughing at these pathetic devices of the future. Side note if Nintendo had played their cards right they could have made the entire library of GBA games available in a Nintendo smart phone app, like 10 years ago...

by mrtksn 5y ago

keithnz 5y ago

I saw nothing saying you can't still use them.

mrtksn 5y ago
Sure, you can do dev work for Windows Phone Store. That doesn't mean that it's as rewarding as doing work for Apple AppStore. The fragmentation will not open the floodgate for all the users out there who were holding off because they didn't want to use App Store or Play Store. It's going to be the exact same userbase but there will be more gatekeepers to deal with.
- stirlo 5y ago
  > but there will be more gatekeepers to deal with. They’re not mandating support for alternative payment providers merely saying Apple and Google cannot prevent you as a developer offering an alternative to your users. Whether you decide to support alternatives is up to you but when you can use stripe for a 2% fee or Apple/Google with 30% how can you be worse off?
  - mrtksn 5y ago
    No one mandates to support AppStore or Google Play in first place. That's something you do if you want to reach the users of that service.
    - Vespasian 5y ago
      Companies want to reach the users of the devices. Apple and Google effectively prevent you from doing that without being in their stores. The fact that "technically" you can install apps on android and "technically" users can get an apple dev certificate / or sometimes jailbreak their device are nothing more than a single atom layer thick fig leaf. These two companies effectively have a duopoly on the mobile phone market and act accordingly. Edit: Corrected to not attack the parent commenter.
      - mrtksn 5y ago
        No body is preventing me from doing anything, please stop speaking for me. Please read carefully: I do have Apps in the AppStore, I am happy with the business relationship with Apple and I am not looking forward to be forced into establishing new business relationships to reach the exact same user base.

WesolyKubeczek 5y ago

“Allow other payment platforms” is not the same as “Demand devs to support them all”, I don’t know between which lines you must have read it.

mrtksn 5y ago
Sure, You can't have platform fragmentation costs if you don't support platforms. You only support them if you want to reach the customers. That's exactly the same as not supporting Android or iOS or not getting into App Development in first place.
- WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
  So, for example, if the bulk of the customers in Korea might be using Samsung Pay, you might just want to keep integrating with that instead of also having to provide Apple mechanisms, and maybe restructure your price since Apple imposes its tax?
  - mrtksn 5y ago
    Sure, I can do that. Let's take a look at it: 1) I need to learn and integrate Samsung's API or I need to hire someone to do that for me. I need to maintain a version of the app that works the way Samsung thinks it should(how do you deliver and restore purchases might differ from Apple). 2) Then I need to go through paperwork and payments that will enable me to sell Korea software from UK. I haven't look at the trade agreements between UK and Korea, I guess the easiest way is to pay a specialist that knows it. That's something that I would rather don't go through. Probably it's not possible unless I make significant money from it anyway.
    - WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
      Well, Korean government is likely to prioritize their local developers. And their darling, Samsung. UK and US have to jump through some hoops, sorry not sorry.

ethbr0 5y ago

Developers (and users) deserve choice. If you want to pay 30% to Apple to take care of that for you, then you should be able to. If someone else doesn't want to pay 30% to Apple, then they should have that right too. I've lived through both fragmented platforms and unified platforms, and I'll take the former any day. They're messy, but fair and dynamic. And critically, they evolve and allow new competition to emerge.

simondotau 5y ago
> If someone else doesn't want to pay 30% to Apple, then they should have that right That right? Are you saying developers should have the right to all of Apple's stuff for free, no matter what? Is Apple not allowed to distribute their tools and libraries under a license of their choosing? Should we ignore licenses altogether? Perhaps I don't want to pay the "cost" associated with use of a GPL-licensed library in my proprietary application. Should I have the right to just ignore the GPL license?
- jpambrun 5y ago
  This argument is nonsensical.. I should be able to use my fully-paid-for device how I see fit.
  - simondotau 5y ago
    Apologies if I wasn't clear. I'm talking about the relationship between Apple and developers who are building applications using Apple's proprietary software libraries. I completely agree that consumers should have very wide rights to the device they purchased.
    - seanalltogether 5y ago
      Should I pay Apple for the right to build a Mac app, or Windows for using their desktop apis? Maybe I should have to pay mozilla and google every time someone visiting my website and I use a piece of javascript that executes in their browsers?

boudin 5y ago

I think it's going to be better for users and developers. On the ios store it will be possible to add a link to a website, tell the user that an external registration is necessary for apps that are companion app of a web service. For the case above, it should also be possible for customers with one user account only to use ios apps. What I just say above might seems to make no sense, but that's the current user experience that Apple enforces us to provide. From a dev experience, I can only see thinga getting better. If we can get to the point when an app store allows to publish apps that can be built on something else than a mac and with a good CI and CD, that could be a dev dream come true. From a business point of view, it can only be positive, having ways out of the random death sentenced decided randomly by Apple and Google using their store obscure rules and review process to kill apps. On android it's already fragmented in a way (Huawei has its own store now that their phones doesn't ship with the google layer). So it can just push more devs to take this into consideration.

yobbo 5y ago

> I despise platform fragmentations It is fair to point out that "platform fragmentation" occurs because of the policies of Apple and Google, not because of regulation. If they had some altruistic care for user/dev experience, the platforms would be open and frictionless to begin with. Their aim is to insert friction at all points of interoperability, and remove friction inside of their own platform.

mrtksn 5y ago
Nothing is altruistic. It's simply business and business is about to get harder for smaller developers.
- commoner 5y ago
  Smaller developers now have more payment processing options in South Korea. In addition to Apple's and Google's own systems, they can also choose from a wide variety of third-party systems that charge ~3% instead of 15%/30%. I don't see how this would be anything but a benefit for smaller developers.
  - mrtksn 5y ago
    Do you have know-how on distributing apps and getting paid for? This sounds to me like ideological talk. "We wouldn't need to spend money on cleaning staff if everyone clean their door front." Yeah, sure.
    - commoner 5y ago
      I do, and your arguments in this thread don't convince me at all. Is there something incorrect in my comment? Developers went from having one payment processor that charges 15%/30% to many payment processors that can charge as little as under 3%. Revenue-wise, there is no downside to having these additional options.
      - mrtksn 5y ago

WastingMyTime89 5y ago

> Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal arrangements would be needed as each country has different laws and processes. Remember the agreements and forms we fill for different countries when we want to sell paid apps/features on App Store? I also can't wait to pay account fees for many app stores and modify my apps to fit specific app store rules. The ruling force platforms to allow developers to use different payment processors. It doesn't force developers to use these processors. Digital payments predate app stores by a decade. It's mostly a solved issue. > As for the users, people will start forgetting where they paid what. It's just a charge on your bank account in the end. I'm not sure the where is really significant. > I think the regulators should intervene for market fairness You must be happy then because that's exactly what they are doing.

sleepydog 5y ago

I think what will happen is that most developers will offer in-app payments with a discount if you don’t pay through Google or Apple, to reflect the lower cut that alternative payment services would take. This should put pressure on Google and Apple to compete with those payment services, which is a good thing, IMO. It may reduce the revenue Google and Apple receive, but honestly I think that could be a good thing. They both do much more than maintain their OS. Both companies have suites of apps that they develop in-house and offer for free.

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago

You realize that you don't have to deal with "boring complexity" when you use plenty of other payment processors, like Stripe, right? And instead of being charged 30%, you get charged a transaction fee, plus ~3%.

mrtksn 5y ago
It doesn't work like that. Here is the Stipe page with description of what you need to do: https://stripe.com/docs/tax/registering https://stripe.com/docs/tax/registering Essentially, you need to register with the authorities of all the markets you would like to support. Different trade agreements with each country, different documents, different language. So you pay %3 instead %30 and then give the rest to the lawyers and accountants. Good luck with that.
- Vespasian 5y ago
  Your app might only be targeted at a single country or a single market with "easy" taxation rules across borders like the EU. Companies do that all the time and if they see the value of being available globally by paying apple 30% that's fine as well. However right now we don't know whether such a service is in fact worth 30% percent because Google and Apple effectively prevent a competitor from offering lower prices
  - mrtksn 5y ago
    Obviously everyone can do whatever they like, I am pointing out the burden this puts on smaller developers. Suddenly, creating and distributing apps can get prohibitive for smaller developers.
    - commoner 5y ago
      > Suddenly, creating and distributing apps can get prohibitive for smaller developers. That's not true, because the law does not prohibit developers from using Apple's or Google's current payment systems. It enables more payment processing options (with lower fees) without removing existing ones. Developers can also choose different payment processors for different regions.

sam0x17 5y ago

Users definitely want to have third party app stores. One of the most obvious use cases for a smartphone imo, running a GBA emulator, isn't even possible in Apple's ecosystem because of the stringent app store regulations. How crazy is it that my $1200 phone can't play pokemon red but a $80 linux handheld (or any android device if you know what you're doing) can. Simply pathetic. 9-year-old 90s me is laughing at these pathetic devices of the future. Side note if Nintendo had played their cards right they could have made the entire library of GBA games available in a Nintendo smart phone app, like 10 years ago...