4 ms·
You aren’t the only party in the transaction. There’s also the entity providing the application in the first place. Don’t use loaded phrases like “none of their
by cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
You aren’t the only party in the transaction. There’s also the entity providing the application in the first place. Don’t use loaded phrases like “none of their business” which make the privacy wonks start salivating when that’s is not what this is about.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wiseowise 3y ago> You aren’t the only party in the transaction. I am. And even if I’m not, I don’t give a rats ass. If entity providing the application wants money, it can talk to me.
- mjhagen 3y agoAs I understand it, the application is using Apple's APIs which could include things Apple needs to pay license fees to other parties for.
- johnnyanmac 3y agoSure. And you'd think that is built in when an IOS dev pays their $100/year licensing fee. If not, I wouldn't be opposed to the paying to review apps outside of the App Store (where their 30% cut assumedly takes into account for App store apps), as long as the review is purely for security and not to comply with App Store rules (since I am not hosting it on the app store). But charging everytime someone download a semi-popular app, or worse, updates that app (since the install fee is per year) starts to go beyond "what value am I bringing to this feature?"
- crowcroft 3y agoSomehow we figured this out for desktop OSes.
- simiones 3y agoThe point is that if I'm buying an app from, say, some Facebook store to install on my iPhone, Apple is not involved in this transaction, so they shouldn't get a cut.
- bandergirl 3y agoI bet somewhere along the flow a Mac will be used to build your app, so they’re definitely involved — not that I justify it.
- agos 3y agothe mac (and the developer program subscription) has already been paid, too