20 ms·

The fee is to prevent spam.

Alupis 3y ago
Spam could be prevented with a listing fee if you want the app to list in the App Store. Spam is prevented by app reviews and policy enforcement, on the App store. A developer annual fee doesn't prevent spam. It's just there to be hostile to developers...
- blululu 3y ago
  I get that paying for stuff is a pain but apps are a business and there are a ton of expenses involved with any business (a websites, databases, cloud hosting are also not free). Having app reviews done by a human is fundamentally expensive. Given that a develop can easily submit a few apps in a year, I'm not really sure that Apple is even making much more than break even on the annual $100 fee. If they are it is small potatoes compared to the 15-33% fees on sales.
  - dingledork69 3y ago
    Not all of them. Did you forget that open source software exists? Or just good old hobbyists.
    - dev_tty01 3y ago
      I don't understand this. Why is it that we pay for the computer, storage, cloud services, etc. for a hobby but a $99 fee is somehow terrible? People spend thousands of dollars on all kinds of hobbies. Even if you get someone else to pay for the computer etc., a $99 dollar hobby is ridiculously cheap.
      - dingledork69 3y ago
        I started programming when I was 13. I did not have anywhere close near $99 to spend, so Apple was completely inaccessible to me. Eventually I did make a few thousand from an Android app at 16, which was huge. But at that point I had moved on to other things and never wound up giving Apple their $99. And I also didn't generate several thousand dollars in revenue which they could've taxed 30% of.
        brookst 3y ago
        And that's unfortunate, and Apple's loss. But for every person like you, that fee probably keeps out orders of magnitude more abuse, spam, trolls, other nonsense. Apple isn't dumb (their evilness is debatable). I'm sure they have tested price points and giving free dev accounts and looked at results. If it produced more harm than good, they'd remove it.
        dingledork69 3y ago
        And yet somehow Android, Windows, Linux and even MacOS itself all manage to be just fine while still allowing sideloading. Of course MacOS is going down the same dark path by hiding the install option in an obscure menu and lying to the user about potential security issues, but still. iOS is the only platform that supposedly NEEDS to extract this fee. Stop believing Apple's lies, they've been grifting everyone for years.
      - type0 3y ago
        > a $99 dollar hobby is ridiculously cheap. Yeah, go and tell that to hobbyist programmers in any non wealthy country
        dev_tty01 3y ago
        We shouldn't forget that hobbyist programmers can write and test apps without paying the $99 fee. The tools are freely downloadable. "You can learn how to develop apps for Apple platforms for free without enrolling. With just an Apple ID, you can access Xcode, software downloads, documentation, sample code, forums, and Feedback Assistant, as well as test your apps on devices. If you don’t already have an Apple ID, you can create one now. To distribute apps, join the Apple Developer Program." https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships So the poor hobbyist argument is really a moot point if the point is writing apps for yourself and to learn.
        dingledork69 3y ago
        But they won't. Nobody wants to work on something that they know they have no chance of sharing with their friends without paying a (for them, in that point of their life) significant sum of money for that privilege.
    - type0 3y ago
      Apple is against open source marketplaces, they would fight tooth and nail that something like F-droid could never happen on iOS. They spread FUD on their conferences that open source hobbyist software is full security holes and people should be afraid to use those, the "device owners" are actually renters for them.
      - dingledork69 3y ago
        They have already lost, but most users don't know it yet. The European Digital Market Act will force them to allow side loading. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-13/will-apple-allow-users-to-install-third-party-app-stores-sideload-in-europe https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-13/will-appl...
  - Apocryphon 3y ago
    They’re not arguing against all fees, just a fee that makes more sense (you pay per listing).
    - type0 3y ago
      That's not their goal, they want you to be "invested" i.e locked in their ecosystem, as a user and as a developer.
  - recursive 3y ago
    Why should apps be required to be businesses? A lot of the apps I use are not businesses. Sometimes people make good stuff just for fun, or any other reason.
    - ryandrake 3y ago
      This is a great question. Apple's fee basically says: "Software development should either be money-losing (developer pays Apple and releases a free app), or it should be a business (developer pays Apple and attempts to make a profit)." There is no room for developers who want to release pure hobby apps with no expectation of commerce. I don't release any of the iOS apps I write. First of all, I would never charge for them, and therefore I cannot justify paying $X/year for the ability to release them. So I do them for my own pleasure and education and that's it.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > hobby apps with no expectation of commerce 99% of this in the real world is spam. Not because it’s malicious. But the app is built for the developer, not the user. That’s not Apple’s MO.
        fsflover 3y ago
        How many percents of the Linux repositories is spam? What about F-Droid?
        Alupis 3y ago
        Just because someone cobbles together some code doesn't mean it's going to be listed in the App Store. iOS isn't the only Apple operating system either. There is no "anti-spam" argument that can hold water.
        pdntspa 3y ago
        Then we should have an alternate means of installing applications. Like sideloading. Whatever happened to the EU Digital Markets act? That was supposed to force apple's hand.
  - pdntspa 3y ago
    blah blah blah blah people make software for fun too... This industry has forgotten its roots.
- Euphorbium 3y ago
  It works totally perfect, just go to the garbage dump that is android store and compare.
  - idle_zealot 3y ago
    Speaking as someone who regularly uses both iOS and Android (Pixel) phones: The App store and Play store are indistinguishable in terms of app quality. Both are absolutely filled with garbage, and the only way to find anything worthwhile is to search off-platform, then punch your desired app name into the store's search.
    - Alupis 3y ago
      Not to mention the Play Store requires $25 per listed app - removing the "anti-spam" argument some are making. The issue is paying $99 to even be allowed to think about making an app - plus the arbitrary requirement it must be built using a Mac. Not all apps are commercial, and not all apps generate revenue, and not all apps are even on the App Store! It's just an absurd requirement. Stockholm Syndrome, anyone?
      - lapcat 3y ago
        > Not to mention the Play Store requires $25 per listed app This is also false: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/6112435 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/112622 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... I say "also" because you were also wrong about the Apple Developer Program: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36235313 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36235313
        Alupis 3y ago
        Getting nit picky I see. Yes, it does appear I was incorrect about it being a per app fee, which makes this model even better than I had realized.
- tcmart14 3y ago
  This is an interesting idea, but I can see it being either good or bad, especially depending on the fee. Lets say Apple does this, its $25 per year to list an app on the app store. If you have less than 4 apps, its a deal. If you have 4 apps, its a wash. But if your an indie developer with 6 apps, not it is costing you more. Of course, if they went this route, I guess they could offer both pricing. $99 for developer and you get, theoretically, unlimited app entries, but you can also pay per app.
  - Alupis 3y ago
    This isn't an idea - this is how it works everywhere except Apple. You pay for the benefits of being listed in a curated app store - such as Play Store, Microsoft Store, Steam store, etc. The benefits include discovery, audience, services (billing, distribution), etc. But you don't pay anything for the privilege of making an app. That's just absurd.
    - lockhouse 3y ago
      It doesn't cost anything (other than hardware costs) to make a hobby app for personal use on Apple platforms either. They charge for the App Store and notarization (app signing).

Spam could be prevented with a listing fee if you want the app to list in the App Store. Spam is prevented by app reviews and policy enforcement, on the App store. A developer annual fee doesn't prevent spam. It's just there to be hostile to developers...

blululu 3y ago
I get that paying for stuff is a pain but apps are a business and there are a ton of expenses involved with any business (a websites, databases, cloud hosting are also not free). Having app reviews done by a human is fundamentally expensive. Given that a develop can easily submit a few apps in a year, I'm not really sure that Apple is even making much more than break even on the annual $100 fee. If they are it is small potatoes compared to the 15-33% fees on sales.
- dingledork69 3y ago
  Not all of them. Did you forget that open source software exists? Or just good old hobbyists.
  - dev_tty01 3y ago
    I don't understand this. Why is it that we pay for the computer, storage, cloud services, etc. for a hobby but a $99 fee is somehow terrible? People spend thousands of dollars on all kinds of hobbies. Even if you get someone else to pay for the computer etc., a $99 dollar hobby is ridiculously cheap.
    - dingledork69 3y ago
      I started programming when I was 13. I did not have anywhere close near $99 to spend, so Apple was completely inaccessible to me. Eventually I did make a few thousand from an Android app at 16, which was huge. But at that point I had moved on to other things and never wound up giving Apple their $99. And I also didn't generate several thousand dollars in revenue which they could've taxed 30% of.
      - brookst 3y ago
        And that's unfortunate, and Apple's loss. But for every person like you, that fee probably keeps out orders of magnitude more abuse, spam, trolls, other nonsense. Apple isn't dumb (their evilness is debatable). I'm sure they have tested price points and giving free dev accounts and looked at results. If it produced more harm than good, they'd remove it.
        dingledork69 3y ago
        And yet somehow Android, Windows, Linux and even MacOS itself all manage to be just fine while still allowing sideloading. Of course MacOS is going down the same dark path by hiding the install option in an obscure menu and lying to the user about potential security issues, but still. iOS is the only platform that supposedly NEEDS to extract this fee. Stop believing Apple's lies, they've been grifting everyone for years.
    - type0 3y ago
      > a $99 dollar hobby is ridiculously cheap. Yeah, go and tell that to hobbyist programmers in any non wealthy country
      - dev_tty01 3y ago
        We shouldn't forget that hobbyist programmers can write and test apps without paying the $99 fee. The tools are freely downloadable. "You can learn how to develop apps for Apple platforms for free without enrolling. With just an Apple ID, you can access Xcode, software downloads, documentation, sample code, forums, and Feedback Assistant, as well as test your apps on devices. If you don’t already have an Apple ID, you can create one now. To distribute apps, join the Apple Developer Program." https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships https://developer.apple.com/support/compare-memberships So the poor hobbyist argument is really a moot point if the point is writing apps for yourself and to learn.
        dingledork69 3y ago
        But they won't. Nobody wants to work on something that they know they have no chance of sharing with their friends without paying a (for them, in that point of their life) significant sum of money for that privilege.
  - type0 3y ago
    Apple is against open source marketplaces, they would fight tooth and nail that something like F-droid could never happen on iOS. They spread FUD on their conferences that open source hobbyist software is full security holes and people should be afraid to use those, the "device owners" are actually renters for them.
    - dingledork69 3y ago
      They have already lost, but most users don't know it yet. The European Digital Market Act will force them to allow side loading. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-13/will-apple-allow-users-to-install-third-party-app-stores-sideload-in-europe https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-13/will-appl...
- Apocryphon 3y ago
  They’re not arguing against all fees, just a fee that makes more sense (you pay per listing).
  - type0 3y ago
    That's not their goal, they want you to be "invested" i.e locked in their ecosystem, as a user and as a developer.
- recursive 3y ago
  Why should apps be required to be businesses? A lot of the apps I use are not businesses. Sometimes people make good stuff just for fun, or any other reason.
  - ryandrake 3y ago
    This is a great question. Apple's fee basically says: "Software development should either be money-losing (developer pays Apple and releases a free app), or it should be a business (developer pays Apple and attempts to make a profit)." There is no room for developers who want to release pure hobby apps with no expectation of commerce. I don't release any of the iOS apps I write. First of all, I would never charge for them, and therefore I cannot justify paying $X/year for the ability to release them. So I do them for my own pleasure and education and that's it.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > hobby apps with no expectation of commerce 99% of this in the real world is spam. Not because it’s malicious. But the app is built for the developer, not the user. That’s not Apple’s MO.
      - fsflover 3y ago
        How many percents of the Linux repositories is spam? What about F-Droid?
      - Alupis 3y ago
        Just because someone cobbles together some code doesn't mean it's going to be listed in the App Store. iOS isn't the only Apple operating system either. There is no "anti-spam" argument that can hold water.
      - pdntspa 3y ago
        Then we should have an alternate means of installing applications. Like sideloading. Whatever happened to the EU Digital Markets act? That was supposed to force apple's hand.
- pdntspa 3y ago
  blah blah blah blah people make software for fun too... This industry has forgotten its roots.
Euphorbium 3y ago
It works totally perfect, just go to the garbage dump that is android store and compare.
- idle_zealot 3y ago
  Speaking as someone who regularly uses both iOS and Android (Pixel) phones: The App store and Play store are indistinguishable in terms of app quality. Both are absolutely filled with garbage, and the only way to find anything worthwhile is to search off-platform, then punch your desired app name into the store's search.
  - Alupis 3y ago
    Not to mention the Play Store requires $25 per listed app - removing the "anti-spam" argument some are making. The issue is paying $99 to even be allowed to think about making an app - plus the arbitrary requirement it must be built using a Mac. Not all apps are commercial, and not all apps generate revenue, and not all apps are even on the App Store! It's just an absurd requirement. Stockholm Syndrome, anyone?
    - lapcat 3y ago
      > Not to mention the Play Store requires $25 per listed app This is also false: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/6112435 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/112622 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ... I say "also" because you were also wrong about the Apple Developer Program: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36235313 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36235313
      - Alupis 3y ago
        Getting nit picky I see. Yes, it does appear I was incorrect about it being a per app fee, which makes this model even better than I had realized.
tcmart14 3y ago
This is an interesting idea, but I can see it being either good or bad, especially depending on the fee. Lets say Apple does this, its $25 per year to list an app on the app store. If you have less than 4 apps, its a deal. If you have 4 apps, its a wash. But if your an indie developer with 6 apps, not it is costing you more. Of course, if they went this route, I guess they could offer both pricing. $99 for developer and you get, theoretically, unlimited app entries, but you can also pay per app.
- Alupis 3y ago
  This isn't an idea - this is how it works everywhere except Apple. You pay for the benefits of being listed in a curated app store - such as Play Store, Microsoft Store, Steam store, etc. The benefits include discovery, audience, services (billing, distribution), etc. But you don't pay anything for the privilege of making an app. That's just absurd.
  - lockhouse 3y ago
    It doesn't cost anything (other than hardware costs) to make a hobby app for personal use on Apple platforms either. They charge for the App Store and notarization (app signing).