3 ms·
iOS 16.1 requires social media “boosts” be purchased as IAPs
- rahimnathwani 4y agoAs people's lives become increasingly lived through their smartphones, it's getting harder to draw the line between a 'digital good' and a 'real life good/service'. It seems obvious that Apple shouldn't get 30% of what Amazon charges for a physical book. It seems obvious that an in-game power-up only exists because Apple created the tools, devices and ecosystem for developers to reach (and monetize) so many users. But amplifying a social media post isn't so clear (to me at least). It's sort of like an in-game power up, in the sense that there's no marginal cost to the seller. On the other hand, it's also sort of like advertising, which seems to me like a 'real life' thing that has marginal costs (because you need properties on which to post ads). I don't have a conclusion here. But, if you accept that Apple is entitled to a 30% revenue cut of some category of services purchased and/or consumed within iOS apps, then it's not easy to say exactly what that covers.
- jshzglr 4y agoStupid question but why isn’t there more of a push by meta, twitter and the like to make the Linux phone a reality? I mean how much money do you need to give up through the app stores before it makes financial sense?
- jshzglr 4y agoAnd if it doesn’t make financial sense then maybe 30% is an appropriate figure.
- josephcsible 4y agoWhere does it end? Will the rules change again in iOS 17, such that if you send your friend money with Venmo, will that have to be an IAP that Apple gets 30% of too?
- Nextgrid 4y agoGreed doesn't have limits. The only place it ends is where law enforcement (in the form of astronomical fines) tells it to.
- bryan_w 4y agoThat's bold, also it might mess with Hulu's plans. * Grabs popcorn * I wonder what will happen when an apple pokes a mouse