4 ms·

Maybe this is not a popular opinion but I think that Apple do provide the value. They created the device, the OS, the marketing behind it, the physical stores,

Maybe this is not a popular opinion but I think that Apple do provide the value. They created the device, the OS, the marketing behind it, the physical stores, all of that. The iPhone is an iconic device because of all the investment Apple put into it. Yes, there are also the millions of developers and apps out there. But the one thing that Apple did right (for me and I guess most iOS users) is that they kept control over the UI & UX. This was my main driver into getting an iPhone. The fact that I interact with Apple and not just every developer in the world. I want to keep that interaction. What I don't want is for most apps to force me to enter my personal info (email) and card details store them somewhere "securely". I want to have a single vendor I trust (arguable this might not be Apple atm). But for me and for most ppl I know that single place is the thing that is the driving factor to keep in the eco system. What I don't understand is why developers feel entitled (maybe the wrong word) to harming my UX by requesting external payment methods. Again, the investment for this "great" eco system comes from both sides and Apple do deserve a % of that. Maybe 15/30% is not fair but this is the free market. You can always decide not to develop for iOS - nobody is forcing you. Except your customers who I feel in this case developers/companies ignore as per the given theory above.

mkishi 5y ago
Remove all third-party apps from the ecosystem. How long do iDevices survive in this scenario? Even now that it's already such a behemoth of a platform? Now do the opposite—make Apple as a whole disappear. What would app developers do? I'm not saying Apple doesn't provide value, but let's not pretend they don't need the third-party developers they are so keen on squeezing no matter what. More than they need Apple, at least.
- martimarkov 5y ago
  Yes they do. I don’t think I was arguing the opposite. On the contrary. I think it’s a relationship. But one where Apple from day 1 have set the expectations on what and how they want that to work. In the end it’s their platform. Developers make the choice to create apps there and they are not happy with the rules. (Ignoring the Apple Watch keyboard and other features stealing issues here as Apple are 110% at fault there). What my arguments is: Apple want their devices to have a specific feel and UX - so they enforce rules for iAP. But it’s the feel of an Apple product and customers vote with their money they like that feel. I know you can make the case of let ppl vote when you have alternative forms of payment but we all know that if that is allowed a certain part of the UX will be hurt. Apple simply do not want to compromise their “vision”, “magic” , “feel” or whatever they want to call it so that developers earn more money.
they4kman 5y ago
The customer wants convenience, the developer wants to give convenience, and Apple charges 10-30x the going rate of merchant fees for it. And neither the developer nor the customer can pick a different style of convenience. I don't think it can be a free market if customers can't choose another option and developers can't compete with existing options.
- martimarkov 5y ago
  Well I disagree. You can choose Android. What I feel normally lacks from the discussion is that the consumer has consciously chosen the OS and device. That choice needs to be respected and I think developers are now trying to augment what platform is doing. Apart from making more money I can’t see a reason how this benefits the customer (except edge cases - happy to be proven wrong here but haven’t really thought of a good example when this actually very useful). Also it’s more convenient for me to use Apple Pay and manage my subscriptions from the Settings app than from the 20 diff apps I have subscribed to and each one has an incentive to incorporate dark patterns in order to keep me from cancelling. Apple on the other hand cares for me being the next iPhone, watch, Mac, iPad so they Are not too fussed by me cancelling a subscription which I don’t use or want anymore.
  - saagarjha 5y ago
    How sure are you that customers chose iOS solely for their ability to pay Netflix via IAP, and not like the fact that Apple makes the sexiest, fastest phones that run iMessage and let them call their mom using FaceTime? Like, this is how people choose operating systems, I doubt most users even know how the 30% cut works (not that Apple makes it easy for you to tell them…)
- EugeneG 5y ago
  "It's not a free market! Apple sucks and I want to use different products... and sure there are countless alternatives available for purchase online and in stores... but I can't and I don't switch because I love Apple and it has the best product and the others aren't as easy to use. Tyranny!"
- 5y ago
caf 5y ago
If an app was allowed to say "you can sign up in the App Store for $X, or you can sign up directly on our website for $(0.7 X)", shouldn't that satisfy you? You'd be able to have your convenient UX and keep your financial relationship solely with Apple - paying the full price for that benefit - and others who are happy for the less convenient UX and having a direct financial relationship with the developer will not have to pay for something they don't want.
- martimarkov 5y ago
  No because you are breaking the UX with the price reduction incentive. Let’s say we care about the customer’s choice of OS and that they chose to have that single UX. If the app choice is: pay $X using iAP or pay $X using our own payment system: which one would most ppl choose? I’d argue that it will be the iAP. So they prefer the UX Apple provides. Now if we start adding incentives towards the other method you are pushing them more to what YOU prefer they do. You as a single developer would always be incentivised to take as much money from as many customers - hence dark patterns. And sure not every product and not every developer but most. Overtime the trust in the “it just works” erodes as it doesn’t really work well anymore. I don’t think this is something that Apple want to see. I think I might be happy for a limited trial of same price diff gateways method and see the results. But as I always try to point out: I chose iOS for the look and feel. I don’t want the freedom in Android. I don’t want to have 30 subscriptions in random places my grandad got tricked into buying. Developers can always make the choice tell ppl to use Android & not develop for iOS and I respect that.
  - caf 5y ago
    No because you are breaking the UX with the price reduction incentive. I'm not breaking anything. I'm providing information about an alternate service. If you choose to use the IAP, you get the same UX you always did. So they prefer the UX Apple provides. With a price of zero they do, but how much is that UX worth to them? How much is it worth to you? I say lets expose it at its true cost and if people want to continue paying that cost then more power to them. Now if we start adding incentives towards the other method you are pushing them more to what YOU prefer they do. That's not true at all. Apple is charging 30% for that IAP experience, but right now you have no choice but to pay it. The "incentive" is just "pay a lower price for a lower grade of service", and without that we don't know if Apple are overcharging for the higher grade of service or not. If, as has been posited, Apple's IAP UX is absolutely worth that 30% to a significant number of consumers, then they'll rationally continue to pay that 30% for that service. You as a single developer would always be incentivised to take as much money from as many customers - hence dark patterns. With the 30% discount the developer is in fact making exactly the same money either way, so they don't care which you go with (in fact, they'll make slightly more with the IAP under that scenario, because they'll have to pay processing fees for the out-of-app purchases). Overtime the trust in the “it just works” erodes as it doesn’t really work well anymore. I don’t think this is something that Apple want to see. I don't see how. The IAP button is still there. I can also imagine consumers making the decision on whether the 30% is worth it on a case-by-case basis - you might be happy to pay Netflix or Amazon out of app, but maybe for some $2 purchase of magic beans in some throwaway game you'll figure the $0.60c is worth it not to have to stuff around creating some new account on some fly-by-night website.

mkishi 5y ago

Remove all third-party apps from the ecosystem. How long do iDevices survive in this scenario? Even now that it's already such a behemoth of a platform? Now do the opposite—make Apple as a whole disappear. What would app developers do? I'm not saying Apple doesn't provide value, but let's not pretend they don't need the third-party developers they are so keen on squeezing no matter what. More than they need Apple, at least.

martimarkov 5y ago
Yes they do. I don’t think I was arguing the opposite. On the contrary. I think it’s a relationship. But one where Apple from day 1 have set the expectations on what and how they want that to work. In the end it’s their platform. Developers make the choice to create apps there and they are not happy with the rules. (Ignoring the Apple Watch keyboard and other features stealing issues here as Apple are 110% at fault there). What my arguments is: Apple want their devices to have a specific feel and UX - so they enforce rules for iAP. But it’s the feel of an Apple product and customers vote with their money they like that feel. I know you can make the case of let ppl vote when you have alternative forms of payment but we all know that if that is allowed a certain part of the UX will be hurt. Apple simply do not want to compromise their “vision”, “magic” , “feel” or whatever they want to call it so that developers earn more money.

they4kman 5y ago

The customer wants convenience, the developer wants to give convenience, and Apple charges 10-30x the going rate of merchant fees for it. And neither the developer nor the customer can pick a different style of convenience. I don't think it can be a free market if customers can't choose another option and developers can't compete with existing options.

martimarkov 5y ago
Well I disagree. You can choose Android. What I feel normally lacks from the discussion is that the consumer has consciously chosen the OS and device. That choice needs to be respected and I think developers are now trying to augment what platform is doing. Apart from making more money I can’t see a reason how this benefits the customer (except edge cases - happy to be proven wrong here but haven’t really thought of a good example when this actually very useful). Also it’s more convenient for me to use Apple Pay and manage my subscriptions from the Settings app than from the 20 diff apps I have subscribed to and each one has an incentive to incorporate dark patterns in order to keep me from cancelling. Apple on the other hand cares for me being the next iPhone, watch, Mac, iPad so they Are not too fussed by me cancelling a subscription which I don’t use or want anymore.
- saagarjha 5y ago
  How sure are you that customers chose iOS solely for their ability to pay Netflix via IAP, and not like the fact that Apple makes the sexiest, fastest phones that run iMessage and let them call their mom using FaceTime? Like, this is how people choose operating systems, I doubt most users even know how the 30% cut works (not that Apple makes it easy for you to tell them…)
EugeneG 5y ago
"It's not a free market! Apple sucks and I want to use different products... and sure there are countless alternatives available for purchase online and in stores... but I can't and I don't switch because I love Apple and it has the best product and the others aren't as easy to use. Tyranny!"
5y ago

caf 5y ago

If an app was allowed to say "you can sign up in the App Store for $X, or you can sign up directly on our website for $(0.7 X)", shouldn't that satisfy you? You'd be able to have your convenient UX and keep your financial relationship solely with Apple - paying the full price for that benefit - and others who are happy for the less convenient UX and having a direct financial relationship with the developer will not have to pay for something they don't want.

martimarkov 5y ago
No because you are breaking the UX with the price reduction incentive. Let’s say we care about the customer’s choice of OS and that they chose to have that single UX. If the app choice is: pay $X using iAP or pay $X using our own payment system: which one would most ppl choose? I’d argue that it will be the iAP. So they prefer the UX Apple provides. Now if we start adding incentives towards the other method you are pushing them more to what YOU prefer they do. You as a single developer would always be incentivised to take as much money from as many customers - hence dark patterns. And sure not every product and not every developer but most. Overtime the trust in the “it just works” erodes as it doesn’t really work well anymore. I don’t think this is something that Apple want to see. I think I might be happy for a limited trial of same price diff gateways method and see the results. But as I always try to point out: I chose iOS for the look and feel. I don’t want the freedom in Android. I don’t want to have 30 subscriptions in random places my grandad got tricked into buying. Developers can always make the choice tell ppl to use Android & not develop for iOS and I respect that.
- caf 5y ago
  No because you are breaking the UX with the price reduction incentive. I'm not breaking anything. I'm providing information about an alternate service. If you choose to use the IAP, you get the same UX you always did. So they prefer the UX Apple provides. With a price of zero they do, but how much is that UX worth to them? How much is it worth to you? I say lets expose it at its true cost and if people want to continue paying that cost then more power to them. Now if we start adding incentives towards the other method you are pushing them more to what YOU prefer they do. That's not true at all. Apple is charging 30% for that IAP experience, but right now you have no choice but to pay it. The "incentive" is just "pay a lower price for a lower grade of service", and without that we don't know if Apple are overcharging for the higher grade of service or not. If, as has been posited, Apple's IAP UX is absolutely worth that 30% to a significant number of consumers, then they'll rationally continue to pay that 30% for that service. You as a single developer would always be incentivised to take as much money from as many customers - hence dark patterns. With the 30% discount the developer is in fact making exactly the same money either way, so they don't care which you go with (in fact, they'll make slightly more with the IAP under that scenario, because they'll have to pay processing fees for the out-of-app purchases). Overtime the trust in the “it just works” erodes as it doesn’t really work well anymore. I don’t think this is something that Apple want to see. I don't see how. The IAP button is still there. I can also imagine consumers making the decision on whether the 30% is worth it on a case-by-case basis - you might be happy to pay Netflix or Amazon out of app, but maybe for some $2 purchase of magic beans in some throwaway game you'll figure the $0.60c is worth it not to have to stuff around creating some new account on some fly-by-night website.