4 ms·
They could have made small concessions and avoided so much of this. But every step of the way they act like a child throwing a tantrum, adhering to an interpret
by voidwtf 2y ago
They could have made small concessions and avoided so much of this. But every step of the way they act like a child throwing a tantrum, adhering to an interpretation of the rulings that obviously don’t fall within the spirit of the rulings. My 10 year old pulls these kind of stunts, ever careful to do what I said, knowing exactly what the intent was.
- harshaxnim 2y agoWith the kind of stakes involved for Apple, they are okay expending a bit of goodwill.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- refulgentis 2y agoYou're right. I can only hope this sort of short-sightedness bites it the same way it has always bitten groaning lurching too-big-to-fail beancounters running tech companies.
- pjmlp 2y agoWell, guess why most developers in the Apple ecosystem aren't really bothering with the Vision Pro.
- jncfhnb 2y agoBecause it sucks
- summerlight 2y agoThey could adjust the app store tax to a more reasonable level, such as flat 15%. Even 20% would make it much less severe. But those bean counters never wanted to take charge of this revenue drop and losing competitive price advantage from the 30% fee on other services, so there they are.
- tpmoney 2y agoThe thing is a flat 30% used to be the "reasonable level". For an example of the "before times", here's some information about Qualcomm's BREW system: https://www.developer.com/mobile/what-is-brew/ https://www.developer.com/mobile/what-is-brew/ You needed Visual C++ (which if you could use the standard edition, looks like it would run you ~$120). $400 annual signing certificate, $1500 for the BREW Builder compiler, anywhere from $750 to $3,600 in testing and certification costs depending on what functionality your app needed, what additional testing the carriers required and how fast you wanted it done. Finally after all of that, you still needed to negotiate your pricing plan with each carrier, of which you as a developer got to keep 80% of the wholesale (not retail) price of your application. So in sum, to start developing for phones, you needed to have between ~$2,700 and ~$5,500 in up front cash costs. Not counting the costs for phones to test on because realistically you need that today too. Then you got 80% of your wholesale price to each carrier. And while I don't have numbers for the retail markup the carriers were applying, I'd bet it was higher than 10%. Given that, what's Apple's incentive to voluntarily go down to 15%. If 10 years from now they're fighting the same battles again and people are asking why they don't just go to a "reasonable 7.5%", what good did they do dropping the price before they absolutely had to?
- pjmlp 2y agoThey weren't alone, BlackBerry, Symbian, J2ME app stores were similar. The question is, who is going to play Apple's move, now almost 20 years later.
- summerlight 2y ago> The thing is a flat 30% used to be the "reasonable level". That's almost 20 years ago and the market size was significantly smaller, so they could justify 30% to run the ecosystem. In fact, Phil Schiller actually thought 30% won't last forever if there's any competition. The only reason they could keep the 30% tax is the mobile market duopoly.
- pjmlp 2y agoPhil Schiller is in the process of following SEGA footsteps, turning XBox into a brand for Microsoft Game Studios, where the XBox console becomes irrelevant, if it stays around even. So naturally he cares about what other stores outside XBox charge. You won't see him proposing cheaper charges for game devs targeting the XBox console.