Why cant they make their own store? Is apple mandating things like signing
Comment on Apple’s biggest critics are big mad about the new 27 percent App Store tax
LWD@lemm.ee 8 months ago
So either app developers need to either stick to Apple’s proprietary payment platform, or they must…
- Find their own alternative payment processor
- Pay fees to the alternative
- Shuttle data to Apple about how much they were paid in the alternative processor
- Receive an extra bill from Apple for the privilege of having not used Apple services
This is Mafia-esque. It guarantees Apple will always be the cheapest option, unless they find an alternative that costs them pretty much nothing.
sarmale@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
jol@discuss.tchncs.de 8 months ago
There’s no way for users to install alternate stores in iOS
sarmale@lemmy.zip 8 months ago
Heared this will change with ios 17
AProfessional@lemmy.world 8 months ago
The exact details aren’t known yet, but likely its basic side loading, so no alternative stores, and probably only for EU phones.
520@kbin.social 8 months ago
How is that extra fee not getting struck down by courts? Developers already paid the fee to be on the app store.
kirklennon@kbin.social 8 months ago
It's a commission for access to a lucrative market that Apple created. Apple gives away the developer tools and charges an extremely modest annual App Store fee, which also covers the review process and hosting. It's been common for platform creators to charge third-party developers in some capacity for many decades. Some do it by charging high costs for the developer tools, others by charging a commission based on sales. I don't think any strategy is necessarily better or worse than the other on a legal or moral basis; they're just business decisions. Previously Apple has combined the commission and payment processing costs into one fee. Apple made a business decision on what they wanted to offer developers on that platform and Epic wasn't satisfied with it. They got a court to agree on what is ultimately a minor technical point in how Apple's deal is packaged so Apple is offering an alternative that they don't want to but complies with the law. It's, ultimately, a worse deal for the developer. Developers don't have a right to demand that some arbitrary percentage is the right one. It's a business proposition: take it or leave it.
520@kbin.social 8 months ago
Which Apple already got their money for. Or did you think those $1k iPhones were at cost?
A review process they themselves mandate. You also forget they also charge 30% for anything sold through their store. Which they also mandate you use.
Not for services they aren't providing, it isn't.
Again, these are for services that are being provided. Apple is charging people to not use their own payment service.
kirklennon@kbin.social 8 months ago
That’s literally what we’re discussing.
Third-party console game developers paid money to the console maker even for physical sales.
The payment service is 3%; the commission is the other 27%. That’s what a commission is. It’s for access to the market.
Telodzrum@lemmy.world 8 months ago
No one has brought an action regarding it, yet. That’s all.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world 8 months ago
This structure was literally offered by the judge in the Epic case. The judge said that Apple is entitled to the fees whether the transactions are completed by Apple or not as long as they originated on the platform that Apple maintains and grows.