7 ms·

Go back in time 20 years and tell someone that the most popular personal computer taxes every transaction that runs on it for 30% and has absolute control over

by gary_0 2y ago

Go back in time 20 years and tell someone that the most popular personal computer taxes every transaction that runs on it for 30% and has absolute control over what software runs on it including banning any programs it doesn't like, and they'd look at you like you were crazy. And then be like, "Fucking Bill Gates! How'd he pull that off?"

coob 2y ago
They’d snap your hands off for distribution and marketing costs as low as 30%. Retail markups were much higher on physical software.
- msh 2y ago
  For retail software yes, but distributing for next to nothing over the internet was also common (depending on the target group) 20 years ago.
  - HatchedLake721 2y ago
    You mean distributing .mob files on xda-developers and needing to speak with carriers to distribute your app? There’s a reason most developers moved in droves to Apple ecosystem for amazing APIs, software and hardware, abandoned Symbian/blackberry/etc and had no issues with the 30% fee since they instantly got market access to millions of consumers. 30% was never an issue to begin with. People just feel today that everyone should get access to a marketplace with billion users for free, often forgetting what it took to build this market in the first place.
    - jncfhnb 2y ago
      > People just feel today that everyone should get access to a marketplace with billion users for free Exactly > often forgetting what it took to build this market in the first place. Don’t give a fuck
    - heavyset_go 2y ago
      > 30% was never an issue to begin with The confiscation of 30% of all revenue earned online has always been an issue for any company and developer here on planet Earth. There are countless useful apps and companies that will never serve people's needs because it is not financially feasible to run a business where your total revenue is confiscated to the tune of 30%.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - msh 2y ago
      Well there was no real mobile market 20 years ago, but for desktop software there was a huge industry of software you would download from websites.
    - troupo 2y ago
      >30% was never an issue to begin with. It has always been an issue. It's just better than the status quo before the iPhone. > People just feel today that everyone should get access to a marketplace with billion users for free, often forgetting what it took to build this market in the first place. 1. It's not for free. Users (and developers) pay for it when they buy the iPhone. iPhone revenue is 3x Apple's R&D expenses. That is, iPhone sales alone cover the R&D on every single of Apple's products: from iPhone and iOS to Macs and MacOS, AppleTV, HomePods, Vision Pro, all of Apple's software running on those devices etc. 2. This market was built in no small part by the actual developers you now so snidely dismiss. iPhone is nothing without the app ecosystem.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
paulddraper 2y ago
"Micro$oft amiright"
- misswaterfairy 2y ago
  Appl€ as well now.
Spivak 2y ago
What Apple does is bad but they don't tax 30% of every transaction. Apple isn't taking a 30% of your Uber or DoorDash, they charge 30% for sales made on their platform for digital goods and services redeemed on that platform. I think it's harder to argue that Sony shouldn't be allowed to take a cut of game sales on the PS5 outside of "well we all decided collectively to make that illegal because we don't like it." And honestly that's plenty enough for legislation but it's not going to be without consequences because Apple will extract their pound of flesh somewhere, can't have profits go down. > The commission says a fee for such matchmaking is justifiable but what Apple charges goes “beyond what is strictly necessary”. The EU commission is a hair away from just telling Apple what they're allowed to charge which I don't love. Either how Apple extracts fees is legal and how much is up to the market, or it isn't. Saying "it's legal as long as the percent is small enough" is silly.
- fireflash38 2y ago
  > Either how Apple extracts fees is legal and how much is up to the market, or it isn't. Whose market? The one that Apple controls? Arguably PS5/Nintendo stuff is just as obnoxious... just in smaller scale. Do you really own that device you bought?
- pocketarc 2y ago
  > Saying "it's legal as long as the percent is small enough" is silly. Credit card companies have had caps on their fee percentages in the EU for a long time, it's not unusual for the EU to set these limits.
- LunaSea 2y ago
  Should Google Chrome ask for 30% of web purchases?
  - Spivak 2y ago
    I think it's funny people argue this when Google already does extract a massive pound of flesh from web purchases and uses Chrome to push "the web" where they control the market. I have to pay the Apple tax to reach my customers where they are, iOS. I have to pay the Google tax to reach my customers where they are, the web dominated by Doubleclick and Google search. Do you care that a tech company is extracting huge sums from digital markets or do you just care how? Does it make a lick of difference that with ad spend it feels like you're buying something or when you put ads on your site you never see the money they took off the top?
DigiEggz 2y ago
Gave me a good laugh.
circuit10 2y ago
To be clear I don’t think this is an acceptable practice, but the concept wouldn’t be completely unfamiliar because Nintendo did this with the NES and their lockout chip/seal of quality system
- noapologies 2y ago
  I agree. Though to be fair Nintendo's NES is a gaming console (not that they are right, just contrasting the use-cases). Consider Apple's very own Mac - another general-purpose computing device like the iPhone, only in a different form-factor. Surely Mac developers must be tripping over themselves to throw 30% of their total revenue at Apple, as reward for their laser focus on privacy and security and for developing a nanny-platform that makes their users feel warm and fuzzy inside? Surely Mac users must not be allowed to do business with literally any entity in the world without involving Apple as the gatekeeper? Oh wait.
- nox101 2y ago
  The differences are scale and utility. A company that has control of such a large market gets different rules because of the power they weld. Apple's market is 1-2 billion people and affects 100,000+ companies. Nintendo's market is 2-3 orders of magnitude less and the number of companies affected is similarly much much smaller.
  - account42 2y ago
    Plus a gaming console is for entertainment only while a smarphone is becoming almost a requirement for participation in modern society.
  - wang_li 2y ago
    >Apple's market is 1-2 billion people and affects 100,000+ companies. It's a bit disingenuous to use customer base and the number of people who develop for the platform as a excuse to bring legal action against the company. Customers know what they were getting when they bought the phones and companies knew the rules when they chose to develop for the platform.
leptons 2y ago
>and has absolute control over what software runs on it including banning any programs it doesn't like Don't forget taking the idea from an app developer, implementing it themselves, and then banning the app from the developer that came up with the idea. Apple has done this so many times, and it's completely abusive.
- worik 2y ago
  > Apple has done this so many times, and it's completely abusive. Interesting I must be living under a rock.... Have you some examples?
  - newzisforsukas 2y ago
    Sherlocking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_(software)#:~:text=Some%20disagree%20with%20this%20claim,only%20in%20Mac%20OS%20X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_(software)#:~:text=So.... > The phenomenon of Apple releasing a feature that supplants or obviates third-party software is so well known that being Sherlocked has become an accepted term used within the Mac and iOS developer community.
  - zuhsetaqi 2y ago
    Keyboard on Apple Watch https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/14/flicktype-developer-suing-apple-again-over-apple-watch-keyboard https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/14/flicktype-develop...
  - talldayo 2y ago
    Directly copying the licensed design of the Swiss railway clock: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock
  - neop1x 2y ago
    Also stealing ideas from the jailbreak community https://ios.gadgethacks.com/how-to/60-ios-features-apple-stole-from-jailbreakers-0188093/ https://ios.gadgethacks.com/how-to/60-ios-features-apple-sto...

by gary_0 2y ago

coob 2y ago

They’d snap your hands off for distribution and marketing costs as low as 30%. Retail markups were much higher on physical software.

msh 2y ago
For retail software yes, but distributing for next to nothing over the internet was also common (depending on the target group) 20 years ago.
- HatchedLake721 2y ago
  You mean distributing .mob files on xda-developers and needing to speak with carriers to distribute your app? There’s a reason most developers moved in droves to Apple ecosystem for amazing APIs, software and hardware, abandoned Symbian/blackberry/etc and had no issues with the 30% fee since they instantly got market access to millions of consumers. 30% was never an issue to begin with. People just feel today that everyone should get access to a marketplace with billion users for free, often forgetting what it took to build this market in the first place.
  - jncfhnb 2y ago
    > People just feel today that everyone should get access to a marketplace with billion users for free Exactly > often forgetting what it took to build this market in the first place. Don’t give a fuck
  - heavyset_go 2y ago
    > 30% was never an issue to begin with The confiscation of 30% of all revenue earned online has always been an issue for any company and developer here on planet Earth. There are countless useful apps and companies that will never serve people's needs because it is not financially feasible to run a business where your total revenue is confiscated to the tune of 30%.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - msh 2y ago
    Well there was no real mobile market 20 years ago, but for desktop software there was a huge industry of software you would download from websites.
  - troupo 2y ago
    >30% was never an issue to begin with. It has always been an issue. It's just better than the status quo before the iPhone. > People just feel today that everyone should get access to a marketplace with billion users for free, often forgetting what it took to build this market in the first place. 1. It's not for free. Users (and developers) pay for it when they buy the iPhone. iPhone revenue is 3x Apple's R&D expenses. That is, iPhone sales alone cover the R&D on every single of Apple's products: from iPhone and iOS to Macs and MacOS, AppleTV, HomePods, Vision Pro, all of Apple's software running on those devices etc. 2. This market was built in no small part by the actual developers you now so snidely dismiss. iPhone is nothing without the app ecosystem.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

paulddraper 2y ago

"Micro$oft amiright"

misswaterfairy 2y ago
Appl€ as well now.

Spivak 2y ago

What Apple does is bad but they don't tax 30% of every transaction. Apple isn't taking a 30% of your Uber or DoorDash, they charge 30% for sales made on their platform for digital goods and services redeemed on that platform. I think it's harder to argue that Sony shouldn't be allowed to take a cut of game sales on the PS5 outside of "well we all decided collectively to make that illegal because we don't like it." And honestly that's plenty enough for legislation but it's not going to be without consequences because Apple will extract their pound of flesh somewhere, can't have profits go down. > The commission says a fee for such matchmaking is justifiable but what Apple charges goes “beyond what is strictly necessary”. The EU commission is a hair away from just telling Apple what they're allowed to charge which I don't love. Either how Apple extracts fees is legal and how much is up to the market, or it isn't. Saying "it's legal as long as the percent is small enough" is silly.

fireflash38 2y ago
> Either how Apple extracts fees is legal and how much is up to the market, or it isn't. Whose market? The one that Apple controls? Arguably PS5/Nintendo stuff is just as obnoxious... just in smaller scale. Do you really own that device you bought?
pocketarc 2y ago
> Saying "it's legal as long as the percent is small enough" is silly. Credit card companies have had caps on their fee percentages in the EU for a long time, it's not unusual for the EU to set these limits.
LunaSea 2y ago
Should Google Chrome ask for 30% of web purchases?
- Spivak 2y ago
  I think it's funny people argue this when Google already does extract a massive pound of flesh from web purchases and uses Chrome to push "the web" where they control the market. I have to pay the Apple tax to reach my customers where they are, iOS. I have to pay the Google tax to reach my customers where they are, the web dominated by Doubleclick and Google search. Do you care that a tech company is extracting huge sums from digital markets or do you just care how? Does it make a lick of difference that with ad spend it feels like you're buying something or when you put ads on your site you never see the money they took off the top?

DigiEggz 2y ago

Gave me a good laugh.

circuit10 2y ago

To be clear I don’t think this is an acceptable practice, but the concept wouldn’t be completely unfamiliar because Nintendo did this with the NES and their lockout chip/seal of quality system

noapologies 2y ago
I agree. Though to be fair Nintendo's NES is a gaming console (not that they are right, just contrasting the use-cases). Consider Apple's very own Mac - another general-purpose computing device like the iPhone, only in a different form-factor. Surely Mac developers must be tripping over themselves to throw 30% of their total revenue at Apple, as reward for their laser focus on privacy and security and for developing a nanny-platform that makes their users feel warm and fuzzy inside? Surely Mac users must not be allowed to do business with literally any entity in the world without involving Apple as the gatekeeper? Oh wait.
nox101 2y ago
The differences are scale and utility. A company that has control of such a large market gets different rules because of the power they weld. Apple's market is 1-2 billion people and affects 100,000+ companies. Nintendo's market is 2-3 orders of magnitude less and the number of companies affected is similarly much much smaller.
- account42 2y ago
  Plus a gaming console is for entertainment only while a smarphone is becoming almost a requirement for participation in modern society.
- wang_li 2y ago
  >Apple's market is 1-2 billion people and affects 100,000+ companies. It's a bit disingenuous to use customer base and the number of people who develop for the platform as a excuse to bring legal action against the company. Customers know what they were getting when they bought the phones and companies knew the rules when they chose to develop for the platform.

leptons 2y ago

>and has absolute control over what software runs on it including banning any programs it doesn't like Don't forget taking the idea from an app developer, implementing it themselves, and then banning the app from the developer that came up with the idea. Apple has done this so many times, and it's completely abusive.

worik 2y ago
> Apple has done this so many times, and it's completely abusive. Interesting I must be living under a rock.... Have you some examples?
- newzisforsukas 2y ago
  Sherlocking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_(software)#:~:text=Some%20disagree%20with%20this%20claim,only%20in%20Mac%20OS%20X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_(software)#:~:text=So.... > The phenomenon of Apple releasing a feature that supplants or obviates third-party software is so well known that being Sherlocked has become an accepted term used within the Mac and iOS developer community.
- zuhsetaqi 2y ago
  Keyboard on Apple Watch https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/14/flicktype-developer-suing-apple-again-over-apple-watch-keyboard https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/14/flicktype-develop...
- talldayo 2y ago
  Directly copying the licensed design of the Swiss railway clock: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_railway_clock
- neop1x 2y ago
  Also stealing ideas from the jailbreak community https://ios.gadgethacks.com/how-to/60-ios-features-apple-stole-from-jailbreakers-0188093/ https://ios.gadgethacks.com/how-to/60-ios-features-apple-sto...