5 ms·

They have lots to fear as they get a 30% cut. One "simply" needs to launch their own app store and save millions, and aggregate other companies on their store.

They have lots to fear as they get a 30% cut. One "simply" needs to launch their own app store and save millions, and aggregate other companies on their store. I can think of Epic Games as a first thought, but I am sure the list is lengthy. Edit: P.S. Amazon is the other obvious one.

Aicy 4y ago
There is great risk in migrating your app to an app store that no one yet uses, even if you are amazon
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  What's the risk? Assuming that it's not exclusive, that is
  - enjo 4y ago
    Apple will make that decision for you. I'll bet anything they would require exclusivity for listing in their store (in the event they're forced to allow for third party installs).
- Gigachad 4y ago
  You can provide the app on both and make all IAPs 30% cheaper on the alt store. Most apps already make purchases 30% more on the app vs their web version.
  - kibwen 4y ago
    If Apple doesn't provide services that are worth the cost of the 30% cut, then they deserve to lose that revenue.
    - ethanbond 4y ago
      Their argument is that that service is provided continuously by virtue of people having (and buying year after year) the handsets that you’re trying to install on. So this all comports: you’re free to make your own App Store and not get the 30% cut, but in exchange you will not have a billion device user base on day 1 to ship your apps to.
      - Gigachad 4y ago
        This is about as correct as saying people support everything the government does because they voted for them. But the reality is there aren’t that many choices and too many results are bundled in with one choice. Maybe apple makes the nicest hardware and someone buys for that reason but it doesn’t mean they support the App Store lock-in.
      - MereInterest 4y ago
        By the same argument, I could say that you're free to start your own gasoline station, but in exchange you will not be compatible with the Ford Gasoline Nozzle which may only be used with a 30% cut going to Ford. The market for applications is entirely separate from the market for hardware. By tying the two together, Apple is dipping into a revenue stream that they have no right to, just as Ford has no right to profits from sale of gasoline.
        ethanbond 4y ago
        > the market for applications is entirely separate from the market for hardware. This seems like a matter of opinion, and one that Apple has disagreed with for decades as far as I can tell.
        MereInterest 4y ago
        Of course it's a matter of opinion. Practically all important questions are matters of opinion. Any preference you can possibly state about how the world should be is a matter of opinion. Whether the world is better for having eaten chocolate or vanilla ice cream is a matter of opunion. Whether a death is an accident to be ignored, a murder to be punished, or a heroic act to be praised is a matter of opinion. Any statement involving "should" or "ought" is a matter of opinion. So when you say that the lines between markets is a matter of opinion, of course it is. When you say that Apple has a different opinion on the matter, of course they do. Those were not in dispute, and so your comment on it being "a matter of opinion" is both true, and so widely applicable as to convey effectively no meaning. Instead, you could have responded with pointing out inconsistencies in the analogy given. You could have pointed out ongoing work done by Apple to justify the ongoing payments. These would have worked to shift the opinion on Apple's business practices, not merely to point out the general category of "matters of opinion".
  - juve1996 4y ago
    Apple could just remove you then from the App Store if you offer it on a 3rd party app, which I'm assuming they will
    - Gigachad 4y ago
      Regulation that forces alt app stores to be allowed can just as easily make this retaliation illegal too.
      - juve1996 4y ago
        These regulations take years to create. Then the court challenges. More than enough time for the amount of revenue loss to a developer to matter. It isn't even retaliation anymore, they can say "well they can use their own app store, which is what they wanted anyway." Don't get your hopes up.
        int_19h 4y ago
        Removing a competitor's apps in retaliation for them shipping their own app store sounds like exactly the kind of thing that existing anti-trust regulations would cover just fine, at least in EU.
- at-fates-hands 4y ago
  > even if you are amazon Or Microsoft. This is exactly what the case study looked like for Microsoft when they were producing phones and were just getting their app store up and running. People were hesitant because their app store didn't have all the apps they used like YouTune, Facebook and Twitter. The one classic example is how Google refused to allow MS to have a YouTube app in their store - that single app alone kept thousands of people from switching to the MS mobile platform which in turn contributed to their low market share and eventual collapse and MS killing off most of their mobile platform.
bmer 4y ago
I am wondering why Epic Games comes to mind, but not Steam? I see this happen quite often. I have nothing against Steam or Epic Games; rather, I am curious why the discourse around the two seems to be different, even though they're quite similar as services? Did Epic Games do "something wrong" (not sure what the right term here is, please do suggest a better one if it comes to mind) in comparison to what Steam does?
- XorNot 4y ago
  Steam doesn't sell games on iOS platforms. Epic does.
- gwillz 4y ago
  I feel like the introduction of "store exclusives" really grated badly on an already well established Steam user base. Gamers, and PC gamers in particular, are quite stubborn. I suspect there's a lot of loyalty to Steam for many reasons and Epic making their own copycat store split their already well-curated libraries. That and they literally yanked games already released on Steam and moved them to Epic, so I'd say that's where most of the bad blood comes from.
- moonchrome 4y ago
  Epic literally said 'screw you' to Apple store policies on in-app purchases, then went to court after they got pulled down. Valve doesn't have anything in the phone space AFAIK.
kmonsen 4y ago
Or create a new store that takes 5% cut but only allow apps Apple allow in their store so you get security for free.

Aicy 4y ago

There is great risk in migrating your app to an app store that no one yet uses, even if you are amazon

yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
What's the risk? Assuming that it's not exclusive, that is
- enjo 4y ago
  Apple will make that decision for you. I'll bet anything they would require exclusivity for listing in their store (in the event they're forced to allow for third party installs).
Gigachad 4y ago
You can provide the app on both and make all IAPs 30% cheaper on the alt store. Most apps already make purchases 30% more on the app vs their web version.
- kibwen 4y ago
  If Apple doesn't provide services that are worth the cost of the 30% cut, then they deserve to lose that revenue.
  - ethanbond 4y ago
    Their argument is that that service is provided continuously by virtue of people having (and buying year after year) the handsets that you’re trying to install on. So this all comports: you’re free to make your own App Store and not get the 30% cut, but in exchange you will not have a billion device user base on day 1 to ship your apps to.
    - Gigachad 4y ago
      This is about as correct as saying people support everything the government does because they voted for them. But the reality is there aren’t that many choices and too many results are bundled in with one choice. Maybe apple makes the nicest hardware and someone buys for that reason but it doesn’t mean they support the App Store lock-in.
    - MereInterest 4y ago
      By the same argument, I could say that you're free to start your own gasoline station, but in exchange you will not be compatible with the Ford Gasoline Nozzle which may only be used with a 30% cut going to Ford. The market for applications is entirely separate from the market for hardware. By tying the two together, Apple is dipping into a revenue stream that they have no right to, just as Ford has no right to profits from sale of gasoline.
      - ethanbond 4y ago
        > the market for applications is entirely separate from the market for hardware. This seems like a matter of opinion, and one that Apple has disagreed with for decades as far as I can tell.
        MereInterest 4y ago
        Of course it's a matter of opinion. Practically all important questions are matters of opinion. Any preference you can possibly state about how the world should be is a matter of opinion. Whether the world is better for having eaten chocolate or vanilla ice cream is a matter of opunion. Whether a death is an accident to be ignored, a murder to be punished, or a heroic act to be praised is a matter of opinion. Any statement involving "should" or "ought" is a matter of opinion. So when you say that the lines between markets is a matter of opinion, of course it is. When you say that Apple has a different opinion on the matter, of course they do. Those were not in dispute, and so your comment on it being "a matter of opinion" is both true, and so widely applicable as to convey effectively no meaning. Instead, you could have responded with pointing out inconsistencies in the analogy given. You could have pointed out ongoing work done by Apple to justify the ongoing payments. These would have worked to shift the opinion on Apple's business practices, not merely to point out the general category of "matters of opinion".
- juve1996 4y ago
  Apple could just remove you then from the App Store if you offer it on a 3rd party app, which I'm assuming they will
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    Regulation that forces alt app stores to be allowed can just as easily make this retaliation illegal too.
    - juve1996 4y ago
      These regulations take years to create. Then the court challenges. More than enough time for the amount of revenue loss to a developer to matter. It isn't even retaliation anymore, they can say "well they can use their own app store, which is what they wanted anyway." Don't get your hopes up.
      - int_19h 4y ago
        Removing a competitor's apps in retaliation for them shipping their own app store sounds like exactly the kind of thing that existing anti-trust regulations would cover just fine, at least in EU.
at-fates-hands 4y ago
> even if you are amazon Or Microsoft. This is exactly what the case study looked like for Microsoft when they were producing phones and were just getting their app store up and running. People were hesitant because their app store didn't have all the apps they used like YouTune, Facebook and Twitter. The one classic example is how Google refused to allow MS to have a YouTube app in their store - that single app alone kept thousands of people from switching to the MS mobile platform which in turn contributed to their low market share and eventual collapse and MS killing off most of their mobile platform.

bmer 4y ago

I am wondering why Epic Games comes to mind, but not Steam? I see this happen quite often. I have nothing against Steam or Epic Games; rather, I am curious why the discourse around the two seems to be different, even though they're quite similar as services? Did Epic Games do "something wrong" (not sure what the right term here is, please do suggest a better one if it comes to mind) in comparison to what Steam does?

XorNot 4y ago
Steam doesn't sell games on iOS platforms. Epic does.
gwillz 4y ago
I feel like the introduction of "store exclusives" really grated badly on an already well established Steam user base. Gamers, and PC gamers in particular, are quite stubborn. I suspect there's a lot of loyalty to Steam for many reasons and Epic making their own copycat store split their already well-curated libraries. That and they literally yanked games already released on Steam and moved them to Epic, so I'd say that's where most of the bad blood comes from.
moonchrome 4y ago
Epic literally said 'screw you' to Apple store policies on in-app purchases, then went to court after they got pulled down. Valve doesn't have anything in the phone space AFAIK.

kmonsen 4y ago

Or create a new store that takes 5% cut but only allow apps Apple allow in their store so you get security for free.