4 ms·

> For a start, everything would become much cheaper for you That, I doubt. Most stuff already is dirt-cheap on the App Store (and riddled with ads). It’s not l

> For a start, everything would become much cheaper for you That, I doubt. Most stuff already is dirt-cheap on the App Store (and riddled with ads). It’s not like, for example, getting into Apple’s App Store is so expensive that it adds dollars to the price of apps.

pjc50 2y ago
Merely being in the app store makes everything 30% more expensive! Including any subscriptions through the app, which is just ridiculous. This was the whole basis of the Epic lawsuit. And you can't tell people to sidestep the Apple cut by not putting the payment through them, that will get you banned from the app store.
- rahkiin 2y ago
  You’re saying if they drop the 30%, those cheap apps would cost 66 cents instead of 99? Or would they stay 99 and thus no change for the consumer? The DMA is about developer choice, not consumers
  - vmg12 2y ago
    There will always be beneficial change for consumers if input costs drop in competitive markets. Markets are dynamic systems. Even if the costs don't drop, the person that is actually providing you value via the app will get the money where they can use it to hire more people to improve the product you use.
  - moooo99 2y ago
    > The DMA is about developer choice, not consumers Ultimately it is about both. The idea behind that is pretty much the idea of capitalism: competition drives innovation. While I personally do not care about the alternative stores, I care very much about stuff like the in app purchases. I am not using Apples subscriptions and all the rules and steps to circumvent the rules make it horribly inconvenient to deal with subscriptions. I also hate the fact that I cannot buy an ebook in app because of Apple‘s 30% cut
- ben_w 2y ago
  I think that profit margin would often, though perhaps not always, go to the developers rather to the consumers. That some already offer same thing at 30% discount on their website may be a sign of cheaper future, or may be a way to get price sensitive people to buy more. Subs, kinda agree. Also it's only 30% for the top of the market (15% for a lot of apps), and only for digital goods (so not my banking apps or Amazon), and it has to be stuff bought in app (so not two of my last three employers). And even 30% was good when it was new. Only looks bad now because the market grew so much — but the market did grow, and I was expecting monopoly action around when they first passed one trillion dollar valuation. With Epic especially, that felt like one arrogant giant swiping at another giant. Especially due to concerns that Fortnite was designed to be addictive, that loot boxes are gambling.
- briandear 2y ago
  Devs under $1 million pay only 15%.. that’s far less than the retail markup of items in your local grocery store. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/small-business-program/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/small-business-program... I think many, especially smaller, developers don’t realize the value they get for that commission: distribution, payment processing, billing, tax processing/collection, dispute handling, marketing (i.e. a storefront,) management of versions/updates for users, not to mention security benefits (for users.) If people don’t like that, nothing is stopping them from choosing not to sell to Apple device owners. If Apple device owners don’t like it, they can switch to a competitor.
  - kevingadd 2y ago
    Apple is on record that the 15% cut applies to a vanishingly small amount of App Store purchases. So it's not particularly meaningful.
  - oblio 2y ago
    > Devs under $1 million pay only 15%.. that’s far less than the retail markup of items in your local grocery store. So now we're competing with the "local grocery store", even on the "information superhighway"?
  - pjc50 2y ago
    > If people don’t like that, nothing is stopping them from choosing not to sell to Apple device owners. If Apple device owners don’t like it, they can switch to a competitor. The whole point of this regulation is to enable both sides to make that choice without having to give up on the iPhone and the rest of their app purchases etc. in that ecosystem.
  - moooo99 2y ago
    But we’re not talking about a grocery store as a comparison, we’re dealing primarily with transaction processing. And for that Apples IAP fee of 30% is about ten times higher than elsewhere.
- vmg12 2y ago
  Things are more than 30% more expensive. For a developer to get the same profit on the apple app store with Apple taking 30% of revenue they have to charge 43% more.
Gareth321 2y ago
> Most stuff already is dirt-cheap on the App Store (and riddled with ads). Are we using the same App Store? Anything of worth is behind a $10 monthly subscription. Apple has intentionally made subscriptions the only viable commercial model on the App Store. Then they take 30% (with some exceptions). They forbid competition, so developers aren't free to distribute to iOS customers in any other way.
- happymellon 2y ago
  Your missing the $100 developer fee. Just Apple nickel and diming in every way possible. It's riddled with adverts because it's the only way to get revenue out of such a terrible system.
  - dijit 2y ago
    "I hate apple" "I love valve" ... but they have exactly the same business model, and people genuinely promote valve as if they want it to be a monopoly. (though I am aware that it's not one now- first-party launchers are universally reviled by gamers).
    - jonhohle 2y ago
      Steam was not appreciated when it launched. It made a foothold as a requirement for HL2. Valve has done a good job making relatively painless over the last 20 years, but it was originally reviled.
      - fph 2y ago
        And didn't Apple also have 20 years time to make their app store better?
    - happymellon 2y ago
      > they have exactly the same business model I'm not sure how. Valve allow you to install whatever game store you want on the Steam Deck. They win custom by making a better experience than everyone else, Apple win because they have formed an environment where you have no other option. If Apple wanted the same business model, they would allow alternative storefronts, they wouldn't block updates if they decided they didn't like you anymore, and they wouldn't block you from even replacing the OS on the device you bought if you wanted to. In fact, I'm not entirely sure apart from running stores that they are the same thing at all.

pjc50 2y ago

Merely being in the app store makes everything 30% more expensive! Including any subscriptions through the app, which is just ridiculous. This was the whole basis of the Epic lawsuit. And you can't tell people to sidestep the Apple cut by not putting the payment through them, that will get you banned from the app store.

rahkiin 2y ago
You’re saying if they drop the 30%, those cheap apps would cost 66 cents instead of 99? Or would they stay 99 and thus no change for the consumer? The DMA is about developer choice, not consumers
- vmg12 2y ago
  There will always be beneficial change for consumers if input costs drop in competitive markets. Markets are dynamic systems. Even if the costs don't drop, the person that is actually providing you value via the app will get the money where they can use it to hire more people to improve the product you use.
- moooo99 2y ago
  > The DMA is about developer choice, not consumers Ultimately it is about both. The idea behind that is pretty much the idea of capitalism: competition drives innovation. While I personally do not care about the alternative stores, I care very much about stuff like the in app purchases. I am not using Apples subscriptions and all the rules and steps to circumvent the rules make it horribly inconvenient to deal with subscriptions. I also hate the fact that I cannot buy an ebook in app because of Apple‘s 30% cut
ben_w 2y ago
I think that profit margin would often, though perhaps not always, go to the developers rather to the consumers. That some already offer same thing at 30% discount on their website may be a sign of cheaper future, or may be a way to get price sensitive people to buy more. Subs, kinda agree. Also it's only 30% for the top of the market (15% for a lot of apps), and only for digital goods (so not my banking apps or Amazon), and it has to be stuff bought in app (so not two of my last three employers). And even 30% was good when it was new. Only looks bad now because the market grew so much — but the market did grow, and I was expecting monopoly action around when they first passed one trillion dollar valuation. With Epic especially, that felt like one arrogant giant swiping at another giant. Especially due to concerns that Fortnite was designed to be addictive, that loot boxes are gambling.
briandear 2y ago
Devs under $1 million pay only 15%.. that’s far less than the retail markup of items in your local grocery store. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/small-business-program/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/small-business-program... I think many, especially smaller, developers don’t realize the value they get for that commission: distribution, payment processing, billing, tax processing/collection, dispute handling, marketing (i.e. a storefront,) management of versions/updates for users, not to mention security benefits (for users.) If people don’t like that, nothing is stopping them from choosing not to sell to Apple device owners. If Apple device owners don’t like it, they can switch to a competitor.
- kevingadd 2y ago
  Apple is on record that the 15% cut applies to a vanishingly small amount of App Store purchases. So it's not particularly meaningful.
- oblio 2y ago
  > Devs under $1 million pay only 15%.. that’s far less than the retail markup of items in your local grocery store. So now we're competing with the "local grocery store", even on the "information superhighway"?
- pjc50 2y ago
  > If people don’t like that, nothing is stopping them from choosing not to sell to Apple device owners. If Apple device owners don’t like it, they can switch to a competitor. The whole point of this regulation is to enable both sides to make that choice without having to give up on the iPhone and the rest of their app purchases etc. in that ecosystem.
- moooo99 2y ago
  But we’re not talking about a grocery store as a comparison, we’re dealing primarily with transaction processing. And for that Apples IAP fee of 30% is about ten times higher than elsewhere.
vmg12 2y ago
Things are more than 30% more expensive. For a developer to get the same profit on the apple app store with Apple taking 30% of revenue they have to charge 43% more.

Gareth321 2y ago

> Most stuff already is dirt-cheap on the App Store (and riddled with ads). Are we using the same App Store? Anything of worth is behind a $10 monthly subscription. Apple has intentionally made subscriptions the only viable commercial model on the App Store. Then they take 30% (with some exceptions). They forbid competition, so developers aren't free to distribute to iOS customers in any other way.

happymellon 2y ago
Your missing the $100 developer fee. Just Apple nickel and diming in every way possible. It's riddled with adverts because it's the only way to get revenue out of such a terrible system.
- dijit 2y ago
  "I hate apple" "I love valve" ... but they have exactly the same business model, and people genuinely promote valve as if they want it to be a monopoly. (though I am aware that it's not one now- first-party launchers are universally reviled by gamers).
  - jonhohle 2y ago
    Steam was not appreciated when it launched. It made a foothold as a requirement for HL2. Valve has done a good job making relatively painless over the last 20 years, but it was originally reviled.
    - fph 2y ago
      And didn't Apple also have 20 years time to make their app store better?
  - happymellon 2y ago
    > they have exactly the same business model I'm not sure how. Valve allow you to install whatever game store you want on the Steam Deck. They win custom by making a better experience than everyone else, Apple win because they have formed an environment where you have no other option. If Apple wanted the same business model, they would allow alternative storefronts, they wouldn't block updates if they decided they didn't like you anymore, and they wouldn't block you from even replacing the OS on the device you bought if you wanted to. In fact, I'm not entirely sure apart from running stores that they are the same thing at all.