6 ms·

But, wait! It gets even better [1]: - Cannot also support IAP - Website links are all to a single URL specified in Info.plist with no parameters <-- !!! - M

But, wait! It gets even better [1]: - Cannot also support IAP - Website links are all to a single URL specified in Info.plist with no parameters <-- !!! - Must submit monthly report to Apple listing EVERY external transaction All for measly 27% of the sales proceeds. A total steal. Apple's really jerking on the regulators' chain. I sure hope they continue in the same vein, because the fallout will be spectacular. [1] https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489599440667168768 https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489599440667168768

jamil7 5y ago
They also don't provide a view controller or something you can present to display the warning as they do with other things like this, you have to build the view yourself according to their silly specs... Phil Schiller needs to go.
- sircastor 5y ago
  Hasn’t Phil Schiller gone already? I think Greg Joswiak is the VP in charge of the store now.
  - jamil7 5y ago
    Oh you might right, I thought he was still there.
- bogwog 5y ago
  Replacing execs won’t solve this. Even if you put someone in place that isn’t an asshole, they’re still accountable to Apple shareholders and need to act in the interests of the company. If they don’t, they’ll just be fired (or maybe even sued for violating their fiduciary duties or something like that) Stuff like this is in the interests of the company. The only way to prevent it is for regulators to make it no longer in their best interests.
- JimDabell 5y ago
  That’s totally reasonable. A new view controller would require a new version of iOS to provide that view controller, which would lock out all the people on older versions of iOS from the alternative payment methods. Any iOS developer can put together a screen like that in no time, it’s not a meaningful hurdle and it means more people can get the alternative payment method.
  - jamil7 5y ago
    That's true I forgot that it needs to work retroactively plus it's only in NL so it makes less sense to be available to everyone. Yes you can put it together quickly and no-doubt a package will appear on GitHub for those who don't want to but normally these things defer to an OS control.
thesimon 5y ago
> Apple's really jerking on the regulators' chain. It feels like a US management decision to win a court case in the US, not someone who knows European anti-trust regulators. Really bizarre.
notyourday 5y ago
Netherlands should respond with passing a law that any platform company that does that is subject to a 97% tax on the revenue generated via platform stores, payable 5 years in advance with the overpayments refunded at the end of the tax year. When a company goes to war with the government, the company always loses. It is time for Cook to learn it. He is under a delusion that he is god.
- scarface74 5y ago
  The Netherlands population is a little more than half of Texas’s population. Apple could completely pull out of the Netherlands and wouldn’t even feel the affect.
  - notyourday 5y ago
    Nah, Apple would never pull out of a country. If it does that in Netherlands, the next country is going to do the same..
  - rpadovani 5y ago
    Except they cannot. If you have an EU point of sale, you cannot deny service to any EU citizen based on nationality. So, they can stop _selling_ in the Netherlands, but given how close is any Dutch to another EU state, I don't see it as a problem for purchasing a phone. Apple will sustain that, given the phone wasn't bought in the Netherlands, they are not subject to their laws. Good luck with that.
    - scarface74 5y ago
      How do you punish a company because people bought a product that wasn’t for sale in your country?
    - gruez 5y ago
      >> Apple could completely pull out of the Netherlands and wouldn’t even feel the affect. >Except they cannot[...] >[...] they can stop _selling_ in the Netherlands I don't get it. Aren't you agreeing with the parent poster?
realusername 5y ago
Apple is just asking to get hammered, I've never seen such a level of contempt, let's hope they get what they are deserving. There's soon going to be a domino effect in the EU.
_fat_santa 5y ago
He continues. Apple seems to have picked 27% because most payment processors charge 2-3% percent which, after you're done paying the processor, your margin over iAP is going to be 1% at best.
judge2020 5y ago
So how much should they charge developers for access to continued iOS improvements and updates? What if they had to pay a license fee for access to each new iOS version's APIs?
- Aldo_MX 5y ago
  99 / year is not enough???
  - gruez 5y ago
    Is it surprising that it isn't? To operate a car in the US, not only do you have to pay for vehicle registration fees, you also have to pay drivers license renewal fees and fuel surcharges.
    - BenjiWiebe 5y ago
      It makes more sense to charge the end user of infrastructure to help pay for the development and maintenance of the infrastructure (fuel surcharges / iDevices cost money) than it does to charge the developers and maintainers of the infrastructure (the $99/yr). That's like charging mechanics for repairing cars or charging road workers for the privilege of repairing roads.
asimpletune 5y ago
It's just to stem any bleeding while they appeal.
- sangnoir 5y ago
  Using the tail of a temperamental sleeping dog as a tourniquet may risk worse bleeding later.
floatingatoll 5y ago
In what way are any of these jerking the regulators’ chain? You list four facts, and you claim that these four facts are insufficient to regulators. Please provide the remainder of your viewpoint, so that we who don’t understand you yet can have a chance to consider it and be persuaded by it. For example, here’s a question I can’t answer from this tweet or from this entire HN discussion: “In what way do each of these four facts conflict with one country’s regulators’ decisions, characteristics, or historical tendencies?” (However, if your goal is simply to preach to the choir, then your comment is certainly sufficient for that purpose — so long as it’s acceptable that it won’t persuade anyone that doesn’t already agree with whatever viewpoint is left unexplained here.)

jamil7 5y ago

They also don't provide a view controller or something you can present to display the warning as they do with other things like this, you have to build the view yourself according to their silly specs... Phil Schiller needs to go.

sircastor 5y ago
Hasn’t Phil Schiller gone already? I think Greg Joswiak is the VP in charge of the store now.
- jamil7 5y ago
  Oh you might right, I thought he was still there.
bogwog 5y ago
Replacing execs won’t solve this. Even if you put someone in place that isn’t an asshole, they’re still accountable to Apple shareholders and need to act in the interests of the company. If they don’t, they’ll just be fired (or maybe even sued for violating their fiduciary duties or something like that) Stuff like this is in the interests of the company. The only way to prevent it is for regulators to make it no longer in their best interests.
JimDabell 5y ago
That’s totally reasonable. A new view controller would require a new version of iOS to provide that view controller, which would lock out all the people on older versions of iOS from the alternative payment methods. Any iOS developer can put together a screen like that in no time, it’s not a meaningful hurdle and it means more people can get the alternative payment method.
- jamil7 5y ago
  That's true I forgot that it needs to work retroactively plus it's only in NL so it makes less sense to be available to everyone. Yes you can put it together quickly and no-doubt a package will appear on GitHub for those who don't want to but normally these things defer to an OS control.

thesimon 5y ago

> Apple's really jerking on the regulators' chain. It feels like a US management decision to win a court case in the US, not someone who knows European anti-trust regulators. Really bizarre.

notyourday 5y ago

Netherlands should respond with passing a law that any platform company that does that is subject to a 97% tax on the revenue generated via platform stores, payable 5 years in advance with the overpayments refunded at the end of the tax year. When a company goes to war with the government, the company always loses. It is time for Cook to learn it. He is under a delusion that he is god.

scarface74 5y ago
The Netherlands population is a little more than half of Texas’s population. Apple could completely pull out of the Netherlands and wouldn’t even feel the affect.
- notyourday 5y ago
  Nah, Apple would never pull out of a country. If it does that in Netherlands, the next country is going to do the same..
- rpadovani 5y ago
  Except they cannot. If you have an EU point of sale, you cannot deny service to any EU citizen based on nationality. So, they can stop _selling_ in the Netherlands, but given how close is any Dutch to another EU state, I don't see it as a problem for purchasing a phone. Apple will sustain that, given the phone wasn't bought in the Netherlands, they are not subject to their laws. Good luck with that.
  - scarface74 5y ago
    How do you punish a company because people bought a product that wasn’t for sale in your country?
  - gruez 5y ago
    >> Apple could completely pull out of the Netherlands and wouldn’t even feel the affect. >Except they cannot[...] >[...] they can stop _selling_ in the Netherlands I don't get it. Aren't you agreeing with the parent poster?

realusername 5y ago

Apple is just asking to get hammered, I've never seen such a level of contempt, let's hope they get what they are deserving. There's soon going to be a domino effect in the EU.

_fat_santa 5y ago

He continues. Apple seems to have picked 27% because most payment processors charge 2-3% percent which, after you're done paying the processor, your margin over iAP is going to be 1% at best.

judge2020 5y ago

So how much should they charge developers for access to continued iOS improvements and updates? What if they had to pay a license fee for access to each new iOS version's APIs?

Aldo_MX 5y ago
99 / year is not enough???
- gruez 5y ago
  Is it surprising that it isn't? To operate a car in the US, not only do you have to pay for vehicle registration fees, you also have to pay drivers license renewal fees and fuel surcharges.
  - BenjiWiebe 5y ago
    It makes more sense to charge the end user of infrastructure to help pay for the development and maintenance of the infrastructure (fuel surcharges / iDevices cost money) than it does to charge the developers and maintainers of the infrastructure (the $99/yr). That's like charging mechanics for repairing cars or charging road workers for the privilege of repairing roads.

asimpletune 5y ago

It's just to stem any bleeding while they appeal.

sangnoir 5y ago
Using the tail of a temperamental sleeping dog as a tourniquet may risk worse bleeding later.

floatingatoll 5y ago

In what way are any of these jerking the regulators’ chain? You list four facts, and you claim that these four facts are insufficient to regulators. Please provide the remainder of your viewpoint, so that we who don’t understand you yet can have a chance to consider it and be persuaded by it. For example, here’s a question I can’t answer from this tweet or from this entire HN discussion: “In what way do each of these four facts conflict with one country’s regulators’ decisions, characteristics, or historical tendencies?” (However, if your goal is simply to preach to the choir, then your comment is certainly sufficient for that purpose — so long as it’s acceptable that it won’t persuade anyone that doesn’t already agree with whatever viewpoint is left unexplained here.)