5 ms·

If I understand it right, Apple was clever. The serious issue is for apps having more than 1 million installs (YouTube, Zoom, Slack, Outlook, Amazon, etc.). St

by mk89 3y ago

If I understand it right, Apple was clever. The serious issue is for apps having more than 1 million installs (YouTube, Zoom, Slack, Outlook, Amazon, etc.). Strong "coincidence": these are the companies you don't want to allow to create alternative stores to, because they have their own payments methods: how long would it take Amazon, Google or Microsoft (the only one without a payment service, AFAIK) to run their brand new "Google/Amazon Store for iOS"? Probably they have it already half baked there waiting to be released. Now, they will have to either accept to use the App Store "way" (the current way, so all good) or pay huge fees for their own apps. Will they do it? Is it worth it? I am very curious! Alternative, smaller stores for smaller apps, instead, will be there and should be OK, as long as the apps don't exceed 1 million installs in a year (which is a lot, I guess). EDIT: I missed Meta Pay, apparently another payment method from one of the companies with the most downloaded apps. Yeah, it seems really that Apple doesn't want other stores from big companies.

rahkiin 3y ago
App installs through alternative stores can not use the ‘1 million install credit’ that comes with the apple developer program. As in, you pay from the first install. (Except as ngo)
- FateOfNations 3y ago
  No, that's only for the alternative store app itself. Epic will have to pay the €0.50 fee on the first install of Epic Games Store but not on the first million installs of Fortnight.
robocat 3y ago
Also steam/valve?
- mk89 3y ago
  I would say yes. They definitely want to "demotivate" big players from running the show. If they do, they'll have to pay huge fees, so it's a big win for Apple.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  More like Epic. Valve had 15 years to consider a steam store on Android games (and honestly that was my biggest hope with all this disruption. Proper premium games to come back to IOS/Android), but they only really have a front end for the PC store in that time. Epic has had an Android store in the roadmap since the beginning of the EGS. They still seem years out but I imagine this news will accellerate development for that.
kaba0 3y ago
Non-profits are exempted, so an fdroid alternative becomes possible, which is the only alt store I (and probably anyone) care about. This is a win.
- Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
  App notarisation will likely prohibit F-Droid self-building of apps, as developers would still have to provide 'notarised' binaries to third-party app-stores, which kinda kills the model of F-Droid. And Apple will charge developers directly for their installs, so F-Droid being non-profit doesn't really matter. This is just a farce at this point.
- mk89 3y ago
  Wow cool this is nice to know! What about the payment methods? Are these also exempted?
- dns_snek 3y ago
  This is absolutely not a win by any stretch of the imagination, it's a farce. Every single app will still require Apple's blessings and approval to exist in any app store on iOS. The moment any app on "f-droid for iOS" does something that Apple disapproves of, they can revoke its notarization and banish its developer from their walled garden.
  - xvector 3y ago
    Notarization has been a massive win for iOS and macOS. If your app store distributes malware, it deserves to get banned.
    - ruszki 3y ago
      So should Apple’s own app store be banned?
    - dns_snek 3y ago
      Notarization has added nothing but another mandatory fee to develop for Apple's platforms. Your app can also get banned if it doesn't distribute malware. It will be abused as means of censorship (porn, drugs, gambling, etc.) https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/31/apple-repeatedly-approved-malware-for-mac/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/31/apple-repeatedly-approv... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29569561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29569561
NorwegianDude 3y ago
Alphabet, Meta, Amazon, Netflix and Microsoft should just demand 30 % of the device purchase price before allowing access to any services. If Apple is allowed to limit access at their own terms then others should be able to do so too. I don't think any company with a huge market share should be able to do so, so I hope Apple will have to open up at least to the degree Android has done.
- natdempk 3y ago
  They are literally free to charge whatever they want right now, they just don't because no consumer would put up with it.
Hugsun 3y ago
I really hope this cleverness/circumvention attempt will trigger the DMA's anti circumvention clause.
lxgr 3y ago
I don't think it's necessarily required for an alternative app store itself to be an iOS app, so Google, Microsoft etc. could presumably at the same time be running a (web-based) iOS app store and continue publishing their own apps (Youtube, Gmail, Outlook etc.) via the old terms without a per-install fee. This is just my very preliminary reading of the terms though, I might be wrong and the two might actually be coupled!
- mk89 3y ago
  You're right - in my previous message I made the mistake of implicitly "mixing" the apps with the app stores. However, this is due to the fact that no average company typically has the time/money/interest to run an app store as their side project, except for the big players, which in many cases happen to be the same people producing high volume apps and having payment methods capabilities. You could claim that Telegram or Zoom have no app store and they would never plan to do so, and you'd probably be right, but the BIG or very BIG ones are MS, Google, Amazon and Meta one way or another have already their own app stores. They even mention that "less than 1% of the developers would be affected by the Core Technology Fee". You want to really keep these guys on your app store, because imagine if you didn't find office, zoom, gmail, youtube on the official App Store. That'd be really weird - it reminds me of the microsoft store (on some old windows phone I had the pleasure to setup...) that didn't have some important apps. To answer the other question - they could be running an app store...: Why would Google or Valve run a store for lower-volume apps? Please note that they mention "less than 1% of the developers", not "less than 1% of the apps hosted". It means: google, facebook, ms, epic games, etc. Those are the guys that you will probably never have on the alternative app store (because of the huge fees that they might have to pay). EDIT: In 2022 there were about 34 million registered developers [0]. 1% is 340'000. This is where the big money is. [0]: https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/06/06/apple-now-has-over-34-million-registered-developers https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/06/06/apple-now-has-ove...

by mk89 3y ago

rahkiin 3y ago

App installs through alternative stores can not use the ‘1 million install credit’ that comes with the apple developer program. As in, you pay from the first install. (Except as ngo)

FateOfNations 3y ago
No, that's only for the alternative store app itself. Epic will have to pay the €0.50 fee on the first install of Epic Games Store but not on the first million installs of Fortnight.

robocat 3y ago

Also steam/valve?

mk89 3y ago
I would say yes. They definitely want to "demotivate" big players from running the show. If they do, they'll have to pay huge fees, so it's a big win for Apple.
johnnyanmac 3y ago
More like Epic. Valve had 15 years to consider a steam store on Android games (and honestly that was my biggest hope with all this disruption. Proper premium games to come back to IOS/Android), but they only really have a front end for the PC store in that time. Epic has had an Android store in the roadmap since the beginning of the EGS. They still seem years out but I imagine this news will accellerate development for that.

kaba0 3y ago

Non-profits are exempted, so an fdroid alternative becomes possible, which is the only alt store I (and probably anyone) care about. This is a win.

Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
App notarisation will likely prohibit F-Droid self-building of apps, as developers would still have to provide 'notarised' binaries to third-party app-stores, which kinda kills the model of F-Droid. And Apple will charge developers directly for their installs, so F-Droid being non-profit doesn't really matter. This is just a farce at this point.
mk89 3y ago
Wow cool this is nice to know! What about the payment methods? Are these also exempted?
dns_snek 3y ago
This is absolutely not a win by any stretch of the imagination, it's a farce. Every single app will still require Apple's blessings and approval to exist in any app store on iOS. The moment any app on "f-droid for iOS" does something that Apple disapproves of, they can revoke its notarization and banish its developer from their walled garden.
- xvector 3y ago
  Notarization has been a massive win for iOS and macOS. If your app store distributes malware, it deserves to get banned.
  - ruszki 3y ago
    So should Apple’s own app store be banned?
  - dns_snek 3y ago
    Notarization has added nothing but another mandatory fee to develop for Apple's platforms. Your app can also get banned if it doesn't distribute malware. It will be abused as means of censorship (porn, drugs, gambling, etc.) https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/31/apple-repeatedly-approved-malware-for-mac/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/31/apple-repeatedly-approv... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29569561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29569561

NorwegianDude 3y ago

Alphabet, Meta, Amazon, Netflix and Microsoft should just demand 30 % of the device purchase price before allowing access to any services. If Apple is allowed to limit access at their own terms then others should be able to do so too. I don't think any company with a huge market share should be able to do so, so I hope Apple will have to open up at least to the degree Android has done.

natdempk 3y ago
They are literally free to charge whatever they want right now, they just don't because no consumer would put up with it.

Hugsun 3y ago

I really hope this cleverness/circumvention attempt will trigger the DMA's anti circumvention clause.

lxgr 3y ago

I don't think it's necessarily required for an alternative app store itself to be an iOS app, so Google, Microsoft etc. could presumably at the same time be running a (web-based) iOS app store and continue publishing their own apps (Youtube, Gmail, Outlook etc.) via the old terms without a per-install fee. This is just my very preliminary reading of the terms though, I might be wrong and the two might actually be coupled!

mk89 3y ago
You're right - in my previous message I made the mistake of implicitly "mixing" the apps with the app stores. However, this is due to the fact that no average company typically has the time/money/interest to run an app store as their side project, except for the big players, which in many cases happen to be the same people producing high volume apps and having payment methods capabilities. You could claim that Telegram or Zoom have no app store and they would never plan to do so, and you'd probably be right, but the BIG or very BIG ones are MS, Google, Amazon and Meta one way or another have already their own app stores. They even mention that "less than 1% of the developers would be affected by the Core Technology Fee". You want to really keep these guys on your app store, because imagine if you didn't find office, zoom, gmail, youtube on the official App Store. That'd be really weird - it reminds me of the microsoft store (on some old windows phone I had the pleasure to setup...) that didn't have some important apps. To answer the other question - they could be running an app store...: Why would Google or Valve run a store for lower-volume apps? Please note that they mention "less than 1% of the developers", not "less than 1% of the apps hosted". It means: google, facebook, ms, epic games, etc. Those are the guys that you will probably never have on the alternative app store (because of the huge fees that they might have to pay). EDIT: In 2022 there were about 34 million registered developers [0]. 1% is 340'000. This is where the big money is. [0]: https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/06/06/apple-now-has-over-34-million-registered-developers https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/06/06/apple-now-has-ove...