4 ms·

The PC game market is a nothingburger compared to console. So the same people who aren’t willing to walk away from ios with 50% market share are going to sugge

The PC game market is a nothingburger compared to console. So the same people who aren’t willing to walk away from ios with 50% market share are going to suggest walking away from all consoles which combined have a much larger than 50% market share in the games market? People have been complaining for years that Apple is holding the PWA market back. Where are all of the companies that are releasing iOS + web only and telling Android users to use the web app?

piva00 4y ago
Would it be ok for you then if Apple took a 30% cut of every sale made through an app distributed by their App Store? Like Amazon, or food delivery, or grocery apps, and any other app that sells something through the app?
- scarface74 4y ago
  No I wouldn’t. But software has a zero marginal cost and even server costs are minuscule on a per user basis. 80% of all Apple revenue from the App Store comes from pay to win games (came out in the Epic trial)
  - piva00 4y ago
    What does it matter if software has marginal costs or not? The principle is the same, it's a product being sold by a 3rd party which Apple has no involvement at all in its production costs being distributed by the App Store which Apple takes a fee of 30% off. The costs of software services are part of the cost of a subscription, as the cost of production of something Amazon is selling is part of its cost. Streaming services have ongoing costs for development, maintenance, etc. that physical goods don't have after they're sold. You are just paying one upfront and the other one is ongoing. > 80% of all Apple revenue from the App Store comes from pay to win games (came out in the Epic trial) And what's the argument here? That those are easier to produce they deserve to get taken a 30% cut because marginal costs are near zero? Netflix and other streaming services have much higher costs than these P2W games if that's your argument; costs for licencing content, maintaining infrastructure, paying for development. Nothing of that is cheap, what is the big difference between a product such as a streaming service and physical goods sold by Amazon that makes you not support Apple taking 30% from Amazon per purchase? Do you think it'd be fair if every Netflix subscriber using Android devices had to share a slice of the 30% Apple takes if Netflix allowed subscriptions through their iOS app and Apple took a cut? Because it's either that or Netflix having different subscription prices between iOS and Android, both are bad for Netflix and good for Apple. All while Apple also produces a competitor. In what world is this a fair market practice when you have so much power over a platform? And even directly competes with some companies that you are putting in a natural disadvantage?
    - scarface74 4y ago
      Why is Netflix even relevant to the discussion? Netflix hasn’t allowed in app subscription prices for years
      - piva00 4y ago
        They don't allow it exactly because they have to pay the 30% on top, the same with Kindle books, etc. that's exactly why it's relevant in this discussion, mate... Not sure how to be clearer, I've been playing around with your analogies and get just a brick wall in return, exhausting.
        scarface74 4y ago
        The whole argument is that they didn’t have a choice but to pay the fee when they in fact chose not to go through in app purchasing. They were not forced to pay Apple to be on iOS

piva00 4y ago

Would it be ok for you then if Apple took a 30% cut of every sale made through an app distributed by their App Store? Like Amazon, or food delivery, or grocery apps, and any other app that sells something through the app?

scarface74 4y ago
No I wouldn’t. But software has a zero marginal cost and even server costs are minuscule on a per user basis. 80% of all Apple revenue from the App Store comes from pay to win games (came out in the Epic trial)
- piva00 4y ago
  What does it matter if software has marginal costs or not? The principle is the same, it's a product being sold by a 3rd party which Apple has no involvement at all in its production costs being distributed by the App Store which Apple takes a fee of 30% off. The costs of software services are part of the cost of a subscription, as the cost of production of something Amazon is selling is part of its cost. Streaming services have ongoing costs for development, maintenance, etc. that physical goods don't have after they're sold. You are just paying one upfront and the other one is ongoing. > 80% of all Apple revenue from the App Store comes from pay to win games (came out in the Epic trial) And what's the argument here? That those are easier to produce they deserve to get taken a 30% cut because marginal costs are near zero? Netflix and other streaming services have much higher costs than these P2W games if that's your argument; costs for licencing content, maintaining infrastructure, paying for development. Nothing of that is cheap, what is the big difference between a product such as a streaming service and physical goods sold by Amazon that makes you not support Apple taking 30% from Amazon per purchase? Do you think it'd be fair if every Netflix subscriber using Android devices had to share a slice of the 30% Apple takes if Netflix allowed subscriptions through their iOS app and Apple took a cut? Because it's either that or Netflix having different subscription prices between iOS and Android, both are bad for Netflix and good for Apple. All while Apple also produces a competitor. In what world is this a fair market practice when you have so much power over a platform? And even directly competes with some companies that you are putting in a natural disadvantage?
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Why is Netflix even relevant to the discussion? Netflix hasn’t allowed in app subscription prices for years
    - piva00 4y ago
      They don't allow it exactly because they have to pay the 30% on top, the same with Kindle books, etc. that's exactly why it's relevant in this discussion, mate... Not sure how to be clearer, I've been playing around with your analogies and get just a brick wall in return, exhausting.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        The whole argument is that they didn’t have a choice but to pay the fee when they in fact chose not to go through in app purchasing. They were not forced to pay Apple to be on iOS