3 ms·

>There is zero good arguments for why Apple deserves 30% of gross transactions for ebooks, music, movies, etc that are merely purchased on their customer's phon

>There is zero good arguments for why Apple deserves 30% of gross transactions for ebooks, music, movies, etc that are merely purchased on their customer's phones. If you're starting with that premise, then you've already made up your mind. The fact is that the 30% covers more than just the purchase and you have to ignore that completely to maintain your "zero good arguments" position.

zchrykng 5y ago
I could rephrase that to “I’ve seen zero good arguments”, but since I’ve read more arguments/comments/articles about this stuff than I can count over the last few years, I’m assuming that if there was actually a good argument I would have seen it by now. I’m not saying Apple should get nothing, but they need to justify why they are entitled to that much. Sure they created the phone, operating system, etc, but without those third party apps the iPhone would be a stupid toy not a bajillion dollar a year business. If you want to justify the 30% because it funds development of the developer resources and frameworks and such, I would say that Apple would be doing all that stuff regardless of money from the App Store since without it they aren’t going to keep selling phones at massive premiums.
- dkonofalski 5y ago
  >Sure they created the phone, operating system, etc, but without those third party apps the iPhone would be a stupid toy not a bajillion dollar a year business. But then it's a chicken or egg scenario. The iPhone was one of the best-selling smartphones of all time even before the App Store existed. If those third-party apps didn't exist without the ecosystem Apple set up and maintains to this day, the whole progression stops cold. Apple uses the 30% to justify the entire App Store ecosystem (payments, reviews, localization, distribution, updates, etc.) because it guarantees that it's scalable and sustainable. If the App Store and apps become more popular, they're still covering the costs. Console manufacturers and other platform manufacturers (hardware/software) have agreed and set their prices at nearly the same levels independently of Apple. That's not a coincidence.

zchrykng 5y ago

I could rephrase that to “I’ve seen zero good arguments”, but since I’ve read more arguments/comments/articles about this stuff than I can count over the last few years, I’m assuming that if there was actually a good argument I would have seen it by now. I’m not saying Apple should get nothing, but they need to justify why they are entitled to that much. Sure they created the phone, operating system, etc, but without those third party apps the iPhone would be a stupid toy not a bajillion dollar a year business. If you want to justify the 30% because it funds development of the developer resources and frameworks and such, I would say that Apple would be doing all that stuff regardless of money from the App Store since without it they aren’t going to keep selling phones at massive premiums.

dkonofalski 5y ago
>Sure they created the phone, operating system, etc, but without those third party apps the iPhone would be a stupid toy not a bajillion dollar a year business. But then it's a chicken or egg scenario. The iPhone was one of the best-selling smartphones of all time even before the App Store existed. If those third-party apps didn't exist without the ecosystem Apple set up and maintains to this day, the whole progression stops cold. Apple uses the 30% to justify the entire App Store ecosystem (payments, reviews, localization, distribution, updates, etc.) because it guarantees that it's scalable and sustainable. If the App Store and apps become more popular, they're still covering the costs. Console manufacturers and other platform manufacturers (hardware/software) have agreed and set their prices at nearly the same levels independently of Apple. That's not a coincidence.