6 ms·

This means that alternative app stores will essentially not be allowed to distribute free apps, right? As soon as they reach the install threshold they will sta

This means that alternative app stores will essentially not be allowed to distribute free apps, right? As soon as they reach the install threshold they will start owing Apple money. And distributing an update counts as an "install" for the purposes of the fee: https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/ https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/

the_duke 3y ago
The DMA gives realtively broad interpretation power to the the EU commission, so they can potentially shut this down without new regulation required. It's obviously malicious compliance that hopefully isn't justifiable.
tech234a 3y ago
Alternative app stores have to pay the fee on every install with no threshold.
- StayTrue 3y ago
  > One million free first annual installs. Membership in the Apple Developer Program includes one million first annual installs per year for free for apps distributed from the App Store and/or alternative marketplaces. [0] [0] https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/ https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/
  - tech234a 3y ago
    For alternative app stores specifically: "First annual installs included in your Apple Developer Program membership can’t be used for marketplace apps." [1]: https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-app-marketplace-in-the-eu/ https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-app-marketpl...
- rpgwaiter 3y ago
  If I run an alt app store, why the hell would I give apple a single penny? What are they gunna do, pull my store from their store?
  - pb7 3y ago
    Yes?
  - modeless 3y ago
    They won't sign your store app and it won't install on anyone's phone. And they'll probably add any previously signed versions to a revocation list so existing installs of your store will be deleted immediately along with all the apps you distributed. That's the power of remaining a gatekeeper...
    - arlcode 3y ago
      Now that weems only enforceable through notarization and the DMA clearly states that this is not allowed. (They'll argue that this fee is required to keep the platform save which is obviously bullshit)
      - MoonlitKnight 3y ago
        If only this company selling 1000€ phones were allowed to make money off those phones somehow.
  - AOsborn 3y ago
    What? How do you think they support developing the OS, running security, notarizing and reviewing your apps etc. This needs to be funded somehow. I'm surprised there are commenters who have such a strong view - that they should just be able to access all the benefits of the iOS ecosystem that Apple has built over many years, and then have all that access for free too.
    - xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
      I am equally surprised by your view. Apple sells hardware. They don't give away software for free, you (generally) need their hardware per their licensing agreements. You have to pay Apple $99/year to develop software for their ecosystem. I pay them for their hardware, I pay them to let me write software -- you want me to pay them when others use my software? What about when others view photos I take with my phone? Do they want a cut of that too? How anyone can think Apple's stance here is reasonable is beyond me. I haven't paid Microsoft anything in over a decade, I wonder how they can afford to fund Windows development?
dwallin 3y ago
I think this point is going to be the biggest sticking point to EU regulators. Third party app stores not being able to reasonably distribute free apps is a massive competitive disadvantage.
- shuckles 3y ago
  How is it a competitive disadvantage when even regular App Store free apps also have to pay the fee? Oh I see: it seems like you only pay the fee if you choose to distribute outside the App Store.
- judge2020 3y ago
  I think the EU is going to have a hard time changing this, though. Because if Apple can't make money from licensing fees, they're asking Apple to spend all the engineering time developing APIs, xCode, etc. for free. They have the money, but in business it's not great to have a business unit operate without its own revenue or a path to profitability.
  - mvdtnz 3y ago
    If you've ever worked in an engineering team in a regulated market, this is commonplace. Regulators aren't here to ensure you, the regulated party, can make money. They are in place to ensure the marketplace as a whole is fair(ish). Compliance is costly.
    - judge2020 3y ago
      Funny how compliance costing money is precisely what discourages new competitors in the market.
      - microtonal 3y ago
        Except that this regulation only applies to so-called gatekeepers, so it doesn't affect 99.9% of the companies out there. Even if you made your own phone with it's own app store, until you have a sizable part of the market, you won't be a gatekeeper under the DMA.
beeboobaa 3y ago
Apple is just trying to dodge regulations. They'll get slapped with a fine and told to behave soon enough.
- internetter 3y ago
  How can they be fined if they found a way to comply with the law? The law must first be ammended
  - microtonal 3y ago
    IANAL, but this probably doesn't pass the requirement of the DMA to be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. In many scenarios, these terms favor choosing the old terms where apps can only be distributed through Apple's App Store. In other words, Apple is using its gatekeeper position to benefit themselves, which is exactly what can't be done in the DMA.
  - hamandcheese 3y ago
    It remains to be tested if this truly complies with the law.
kivle 3y ago
Apple's lawyers have been working hard to make it non-viable for third-party app stores while still complying with the law I guess. Sounds like this will be a no go in it's first incarnation and EU will have to come back with an even stricter version probably removing all control from Apple. EU does not fuck around when it comes down to it with things like this.
- modeless 3y ago
  Sadly I bet they will get away with it. Apple is very good at this sort of thing.
  - Hamuko 3y ago
    For how long? EU is also pretty good at coming after companies. Remember when Apple dodged switching from Lightning when micro-USB was a thing and now they're forced into USB-C?
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      Which I think is a better outcome than if we’d gotten iPhones stuck on a local maxima of microUSB. As a consumer, lightning is a more pleasant to use connector than micro and therefore, I’m glad Apple didn’t cave at that time.
      - dzhiurgis 3y ago
        But you could've got USB-C almost a decade earlier tho
        sokoloff 3y ago
        What was the advantage to me as a consumer if a 2015 iPhone got USB-C? IMO, USB-C wasn’t an advantage over Lightning then. (USB-C was not yet a common connector and most Apple users already had Lightning cables or could get by with the one included with the phone. Apple users had 3 years of orientation-independent convenience before USB-C arrived.) I still find plugging in the Lightning cable to be easier (less precise alignment needed) than a USB-C and by the time the iPhone 8 arrived with magnetic charging, any charging advantage to USB-C went away.
charcircuit 3y ago
It's not free for Apple to host free apps either. Free apps get subsidized by IAP and other paid apps. An alternate app store would subsidize the install cost for free apps with the money they make from their cut of IAP and paid apps.
- EricE 3y ago
  Which is why the real solution is for a mechanism to install code on an iOS device 100% outside of Apple's control similar to side loading on Android. I don't trust Apple at all with their capricious and arbitrary blocking of apps/updates. It was bad enough when it appeared to be mostly due to incompetence, but after what they did politically (and in concert with Google, Twitter and Facebook) to Parlor that's when any creditability they had for me in curating the app store went out the window. I don't care where you are on the political spectrum, when a company starts to go down that path it's a danger for all of us.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  I didn't realize that the fee was for apps and not app stores.
AOsborn 3y ago
But why? Apple is providing the whole ecosystem, operating system, security, notarization etc - there are costs to be covered. Of course there are costs incurred per install. Previously there were covered by a higher 30% fee on app costs. Now, with opening up the platform to alternative stores, the EU has pushed Apple to a per-install model. So to me, this seems completely reasonable as a standard iPhone user. I understand the security and performance of the platform costs more - that is why I use an iPhone not an Android.
- coolspot 3y ago
  > Apple is providing the whole ecosystem, operating system, security, notarization etc - there are costs to be covered. I paid $1300+ for my iPhone, I already covered those costs.
- tomp 3y ago
  What costs are incurred per install? Exactly zero, for alternate App Stores.
- qwytw 3y ago
  > Apple is providing the whole ecosystem, operating system, security, notarization etc - there are costs to be covered How are they covering it on macOS?
layer8 3y ago
Yes, except for nonprofits, educational organizations and such.

the_duke 3y ago

The DMA gives realtively broad interpretation power to the the EU commission, so they can potentially shut this down without new regulation required. It's obviously malicious compliance that hopefully isn't justifiable.

tech234a 3y ago

Alternative app stores have to pay the fee on every install with no threshold.

StayTrue 3y ago
> One million free first annual installs. Membership in the Apple Developer Program includes one million first annual installs per year for free for apps distributed from the App Store and/or alternative marketplaces. [0] [0] https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/ https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/
- tech234a 3y ago
  For alternative app stores specifically: "First annual installs included in your Apple Developer Program membership can’t be used for marketplace apps." [1]: https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-app-marketplace-in-the-eu/ https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-app-marketpl...
rpgwaiter 3y ago
If I run an alt app store, why the hell would I give apple a single penny? What are they gunna do, pull my store from their store?
- pb7 3y ago
  Yes?
- modeless 3y ago
  They won't sign your store app and it won't install on anyone's phone. And they'll probably add any previously signed versions to a revocation list so existing installs of your store will be deleted immediately along with all the apps you distributed. That's the power of remaining a gatekeeper...
  - arlcode 3y ago
    Now that weems only enforceable through notarization and the DMA clearly states that this is not allowed. (They'll argue that this fee is required to keep the platform save which is obviously bullshit)
    - MoonlitKnight 3y ago
      If only this company selling 1000€ phones were allowed to make money off those phones somehow.
- AOsborn 3y ago
  What? How do you think they support developing the OS, running security, notarizing and reviewing your apps etc. This needs to be funded somehow. I'm surprised there are commenters who have such a strong view - that they should just be able to access all the benefits of the iOS ecosystem that Apple has built over many years, and then have all that access for free too.
  - xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
    I am equally surprised by your view. Apple sells hardware. They don't give away software for free, you (generally) need their hardware per their licensing agreements. You have to pay Apple $99/year to develop software for their ecosystem. I pay them for their hardware, I pay them to let me write software -- you want me to pay them when others use my software? What about when others view photos I take with my phone? Do they want a cut of that too? How anyone can think Apple's stance here is reasonable is beyond me. I haven't paid Microsoft anything in over a decade, I wonder how they can afford to fund Windows development?

dwallin 3y ago

I think this point is going to be the biggest sticking point to EU regulators. Third party app stores not being able to reasonably distribute free apps is a massive competitive disadvantage.

shuckles 3y ago
How is it a competitive disadvantage when even regular App Store free apps also have to pay the fee? Oh I see: it seems like you only pay the fee if you choose to distribute outside the App Store.
judge2020 3y ago
I think the EU is going to have a hard time changing this, though. Because if Apple can't make money from licensing fees, they're asking Apple to spend all the engineering time developing APIs, xCode, etc. for free. They have the money, but in business it's not great to have a business unit operate without its own revenue or a path to profitability.
- mvdtnz 3y ago
  If you've ever worked in an engineering team in a regulated market, this is commonplace. Regulators aren't here to ensure you, the regulated party, can make money. They are in place to ensure the marketplace as a whole is fair(ish). Compliance is costly.
  - judge2020 3y ago
    Funny how compliance costing money is precisely what discourages new competitors in the market.
    - microtonal 3y ago
      Except that this regulation only applies to so-called gatekeepers, so it doesn't affect 99.9% of the companies out there. Even if you made your own phone with it's own app store, until you have a sizable part of the market, you won't be a gatekeeper under the DMA.

beeboobaa 3y ago

Apple is just trying to dodge regulations. They'll get slapped with a fine and told to behave soon enough.

internetter 3y ago
How can they be fined if they found a way to comply with the law? The law must first be ammended
- microtonal 3y ago
  IANAL, but this probably doesn't pass the requirement of the DMA to be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. In many scenarios, these terms favor choosing the old terms where apps can only be distributed through Apple's App Store. In other words, Apple is using its gatekeeper position to benefit themselves, which is exactly what can't be done in the DMA.
- hamandcheese 3y ago
  It remains to be tested if this truly complies with the law.

kivle 3y ago

Apple's lawyers have been working hard to make it non-viable for third-party app stores while still complying with the law I guess. Sounds like this will be a no go in it's first incarnation and EU will have to come back with an even stricter version probably removing all control from Apple. EU does not fuck around when it comes down to it with things like this.

modeless 3y ago
Sadly I bet they will get away with it. Apple is very good at this sort of thing.
- Hamuko 3y ago
  For how long? EU is also pretty good at coming after companies. Remember when Apple dodged switching from Lightning when micro-USB was a thing and now they're forced into USB-C?
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    Which I think is a better outcome than if we’d gotten iPhones stuck on a local maxima of microUSB. As a consumer, lightning is a more pleasant to use connector than micro and therefore, I’m glad Apple didn’t cave at that time.
    - dzhiurgis 3y ago
      But you could've got USB-C almost a decade earlier tho
      - sokoloff 3y ago
        What was the advantage to me as a consumer if a 2015 iPhone got USB-C? IMO, USB-C wasn’t an advantage over Lightning then. (USB-C was not yet a common connector and most Apple users already had Lightning cables or could get by with the one included with the phone. Apple users had 3 years of orientation-independent convenience before USB-C arrived.) I still find plugging in the Lightning cable to be easier (less precise alignment needed) than a USB-C and by the time the iPhone 8 arrived with magnetic charging, any charging advantage to USB-C went away.

charcircuit 3y ago

It's not free for Apple to host free apps either. Free apps get subsidized by IAP and other paid apps. An alternate app store would subsidize the install cost for free apps with the money they make from their cut of IAP and paid apps.

EricE 3y ago
Which is why the real solution is for a mechanism to install code on an iOS device 100% outside of Apple's control similar to side loading on Android. I don't trust Apple at all with their capricious and arbitrary blocking of apps/updates. It was bad enough when it appeared to be mostly due to incompetence, but after what they did politically (and in concert with Google, Twitter and Facebook) to Parlor that's when any creditability they had for me in curating the app store went out the window. I don't care where you are on the political spectrum, when a company starts to go down that path it's a danger for all of us.
charcircuit 3y ago
I didn't realize that the fee was for apps and not app stores.

AOsborn 3y ago

But why? Apple is providing the whole ecosystem, operating system, security, notarization etc - there are costs to be covered. Of course there are costs incurred per install. Previously there were covered by a higher 30% fee on app costs. Now, with opening up the platform to alternative stores, the EU has pushed Apple to a per-install model. So to me, this seems completely reasonable as a standard iPhone user. I understand the security and performance of the platform costs more - that is why I use an iPhone not an Android.

coolspot 3y ago
> Apple is providing the whole ecosystem, operating system, security, notarization etc - there are costs to be covered. I paid $1300+ for my iPhone, I already covered those costs.
tomp 3y ago
What costs are incurred per install? Exactly zero, for alternate App Stores.
qwytw 3y ago
> Apple is providing the whole ecosystem, operating system, security, notarization etc - there are costs to be covered How are they covering it on macOS?

layer8 3y ago

Yes, except for nonprofits, educational organizations and such.