3 ms·

If you paid attention to Epic v.s. Apple, that was also the conclusion of the US court.[0] When you use Apple tools to to make and publish software, Apple is e

by mrtksn 5y ago

If you paid attention to Epic v.s. Apple, that was also the conclusion of the US court.[0] When you use Apple tools to to make and publish software, Apple is entitled to a cut. The limitations Apple imposes on the payment processors are simply to make it easy to collect their cut and streamline the user experience. I think the only scenario where Apple is not entitled to a cut is when you use non-Apple toolchain to develop your apps and spread it through non-Apple distribution channels, i.e. Cydia. Currently that requires a jailbroken device but maybe if Apple is forced to allow side loading, the cut for distribution can be collected by other companies instead of Apple. [0] https://9to5mac.com/2021/09/14/apple-can-still-charge-its-app-store-30-fee-even-after-epic-ruling-analysts-say/ https://9to5mac.com/2021/09/14/apple-can-still-charge-its-ap... “Apple has the legal right to do business with anyone they want,” said Paul Gallant, managing director at Cowen & Co. “So Apple could change the terms of the App Store and say to developers, regardless of where you collect your revenue, you owe us 30%, and if developers refuse to pay it, Apple would be free to de-platform them.”

GeekyBear 5y ago
There's an excellent overview of the US Federal court's 180 page decision on Youtube, but it's rather long. The diction is good, so it's still understandable when set to run at a faster speed. The first 15 minutes is a summary and the balance of the video is a more detailed look. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43CMV8KIs3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43CMV8KIs3E TL;DW, the judge makes it clear that Apple can still charge a cut even if developers use someone else's payment system. She also hints strongly that Epic screwed up by not challenging the size of Apple's cut instead of challenging their right to take a cut.
ls15 5y ago
If only they would allow sideloading. How cool would a F-Droid equivalent for iOS be? I can only hope that Apple or regulators will open up that walled garden a bit.
schmorptron 5y ago
Doesn't that still leave the problem with "using apple tools"? Currently, the only way I know of to compile apps that run on iPhones are xcode, on a macintosh. Even when using frameworks like flutter I'm pretty sure you still need to use an apple compiler to make the final build, right?
- viktorcode 5y ago
  Technically you don't need it. There's no mechanism preventing another toolchain from producing an iOS build. It's just nobody is interested in creating an alternative toolchain.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  I don't think that you have to use Apple toolchain, it's just way way easier to do so. I think there was some linux toolchain that you can use to build binaries for iOS. On a non-jailbroken devices you will need to sign your binary with Apple's help but on a jailbroken device you can install whatever you want. It's also perfectly legal. Besides, some hacking companies manage to install their malware on non-jailbroken devices.
  - kbuck 5y ago
    There is no 3rd-party toolchain that you can use for a complete iOS (or even MacOS) build. Even if you cross-compile the majority of your code, you will need to transfer the binaries to a Mac for code signing. Everywhere I've worked that has produced Mac builds has had at least a small cluster of Mac machines to perform code signing. (But usually at this point, you just give up and perform the entire build on the Mac cluster.)

by mrtksn 5y ago

GeekyBear 5y ago

There's an excellent overview of the US Federal court's 180 page decision on Youtube, but it's rather long. The diction is good, so it's still understandable when set to run at a faster speed. The first 15 minutes is a summary and the balance of the video is a more detailed look. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43CMV8KIs3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43CMV8KIs3E TL;DW, the judge makes it clear that Apple can still charge a cut even if developers use someone else's payment system. She also hints strongly that Epic screwed up by not challenging the size of Apple's cut instead of challenging their right to take a cut.

ls15 5y ago

If only they would allow sideloading. How cool would a F-Droid equivalent for iOS be? I can only hope that Apple or regulators will open up that walled garden a bit.

schmorptron 5y ago

Doesn't that still leave the problem with "using apple tools"? Currently, the only way I know of to compile apps that run on iPhones are xcode, on a macintosh. Even when using frameworks like flutter I'm pretty sure you still need to use an apple compiler to make the final build, right?

viktorcode 5y ago
Technically you don't need it. There's no mechanism preventing another toolchain from producing an iOS build. It's just nobody is interested in creating an alternative toolchain.
mrtksn 5y ago
I don't think that you have to use Apple toolchain, it's just way way easier to do so. I think there was some linux toolchain that you can use to build binaries for iOS. On a non-jailbroken devices you will need to sign your binary with Apple's help but on a jailbroken device you can install whatever you want. It's also perfectly legal. Besides, some hacking companies manage to install their malware on non-jailbroken devices.
- kbuck 5y ago
  There is no 3rd-party toolchain that you can use for a complete iOS (or even MacOS) build. Even if you cross-compile the majority of your code, you will need to transfer the binaries to a Mac for code signing. Everywhere I've worked that has produced Mac builds has had at least a small cluster of Mac machines to perform code signing. (But usually at this point, you just give up and perform the entire build on the Mac cluster.)