5 ms·

how much do you think is fair? the platform, APIs, and developer liasing are not free. what “tax” is fair so that apple can build the platform that enables deve

how much do you think is fair? the platform, APIs, and developer liasing are not free. what “tax” is fair so that apple can build the platform that enables developers to make money?

mouse_ 3y ago
You should be able to install any software you like on devices you paid full price for. Apple should make their money selling phones, computers, tablets, an operating system which should run on every PC, and digital content like music and books.
- scarface74 3y ago
  Do you feel the same way about consoles?
  - deadbunny 3y ago
    No GP but yes, absolutely.
  - flangola7 3y ago
    Yes of course.
afthonos 3y ago
Microsoft did quite well for decades with Windows, never once charging developers to distribute on the platform. Apple does quite well with macOS. The value proposition of the App Store is access, period.
- ascagnel_ 3y ago
  Instead, Microsoft charged thousands of dollars per seat per development tool, and even more for access to documentation (I have an old set of MSDN CDs around somewhere). It’s two sides of the same coin, and I think the idea of taking a percentage of revenue does a better job of aligning platform owners and developers.
  - umeshunni 3y ago
    Indeed. In the Microsoft model, small developers, who couldn't pay the thousands of dollars for development cost and figure out their own distribution lost. In the App Store model, everything is free (or very cheap, $99), till you make revenue.
    - nightski 3y ago
      This is not really true. It was relatively easy to obtain a copy of visual studio for rather cheap if you tried. I know because I used their tools all through high school, college, and beyond and was rather poor during those times in the late 90s/2000s. I always managed to stumble on free licenses. They never tried to leech your revenue later on either.
      - ascagnel_ 3y ago
        Microsoft was very active in giving free licenses out for education, but those licenses often wouldn't allow for commercial use. If you've never been through a license audit, their legal team would usually make you pay through the nose or suffer through a lawsuit if they found you weren't using the right license for your dev tools. That said, they'd generally target bigger businesses over smaller dev-only shops.
- throwaway-blaze 3y ago
  Microsoft charged $1500/seat for MSDN access...
stale2002 3y ago
What would be fair is for people to be able to install apps from alternative app stores, and to drive that percentage down via competition. Some competitor app stores may charge as low as 5%, to pay for processing fees. And others will charge different fees. And the app store that is the most competitive will get most of the business.

how much do you think is fair? the platform, APIs, and developer liasing are not free. what “tax” is fair so that apple can build the platform that enables developers to make money?

mouse_ 3y ago

You should be able to install any software you like on devices you paid full price for. Apple should make their money selling phones, computers, tablets, an operating system which should run on every PC, and digital content like music and books.

scarface74 3y ago
Do you feel the same way about consoles?
- deadbunny 3y ago
  No GP but yes, absolutely.
- flangola7 3y ago
  Yes of course.

afthonos 3y ago

Microsoft did quite well for decades with Windows, never once charging developers to distribute on the platform. Apple does quite well with macOS. The value proposition of the App Store is access, period.

ascagnel_ 3y ago
Instead, Microsoft charged thousands of dollars per seat per development tool, and even more for access to documentation (I have an old set of MSDN CDs around somewhere). It’s two sides of the same coin, and I think the idea of taking a percentage of revenue does a better job of aligning platform owners and developers.
- umeshunni 3y ago
  Indeed. In the Microsoft model, small developers, who couldn't pay the thousands of dollars for development cost and figure out their own distribution lost. In the App Store model, everything is free (or very cheap, $99), till you make revenue.
  - nightski 3y ago
    This is not really true. It was relatively easy to obtain a copy of visual studio for rather cheap if you tried. I know because I used their tools all through high school, college, and beyond and was rather poor during those times in the late 90s/2000s. I always managed to stumble on free licenses. They never tried to leech your revenue later on either.
    - ascagnel_ 3y ago
      Microsoft was very active in giving free licenses out for education, but those licenses often wouldn't allow for commercial use. If you've never been through a license audit, their legal team would usually make you pay through the nose or suffer through a lawsuit if they found you weren't using the right license for your dev tools. That said, they'd generally target bigger businesses over smaller dev-only shops.
throwaway-blaze 3y ago
Microsoft charged $1500/seat for MSDN access...

stale2002 3y ago

What would be fair is for people to be able to install apps from alternative app stores, and to drive that percentage down via competition. Some competitor app stores may charge as low as 5%, to pay for processing fees. And others will charge different fees. And the app store that is the most competitive will get most of the business.