PERockwell
About
- Username
- PERockwell
- Joined
- Visits
- 34
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 82
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 35
Reactions
-
Arizona bill that could force Apple App Store to allow third-party payments one step close...
This law is so brain dead it's sickening. So what's the difference between Apple/Google and Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo for in-game purchases? Answer: they're not Apple or Google.
The question I have is that in the context of this legislation, who does the software distribution? The expectation should not be that Apple should do it for free. I'm not a lawyer - but the way this reads any attempt for Apple to charge for use of its distribution infrastructure or deny the use of it since Apple receives no revenue could be interpreted as "retaliation"
Would it also be considered "retaliation" if Apple decides not to do business with a developer because Apple does not make money on the relationship?
-
Minnesota the latest to introduce bill that allows developers to bypass App Store billing
22july2013 said:It's possible that we're on the same general side of the argument, but I have to call out errors, even if the person I'm arguing with is on my side.PERockwell said:Apple can't drop free apps. It would hurt the independent small developer community.
Epic - your moral high ground is eroded when your business model is based on in-game add-ons that people have to purchase to continue play - one might call it feeding an addiction that you created with your "free game". (witness a local story in my neighborhood where a kid purchased $10,000+ of in-game add-ons billed to his mom's Apple ID".
But with the uproar against "big tech", Apple must navigate these waters so that they don't appear "monopolisitc/anti-competive" and at the same time don't kill the platform for users and developers. Politicians and the courts don't necessarily see the big picture outside of "big guy bad, little guy good".Any attempt by Apple to drop free apps would be viewed by regulators as anti-competitive, since the App Store is currently the only way to get apps onto the iOS ecosystem.
This is just another hilarious statement. Apple has no obligation to provide free services for free app developers. None whatsoever. It is not anti-competitive to charge app developers a fixed fee just for the privilege of getting onto the App Store since Apple is providing services for that fee. If Apple charged every developer $99 for any single app that goes on the App Store, even free apps, I think that would be of great help to consumers because it would stop all the pure junk apps that appear on the App Store. I've had to browse through dozens of totally useless apps "with no ratings" just to get to apps that people have used and that I might want.
Again, we do agree, but the precedent has been set to allow free apps with the developer's $99 subscription. I fear that any change to that policy would create an uproar that dwarfs what Epic et. al. are trying to do.
-
Minnesota the latest to introduce bill that allows developers to bypass App Store billing
22july2013 said:What is your estimate as to the revenue drop Apple will suffer if this proposal is adopted?dewme said:
I just think these lazy, self entitled POS entities like Epic are playing Apple for a rube and trying to bully Apple through the employment of lobbyists who know how to tweak these clueless and bought and paid-for politicians to do their bidding for them. Arming lobbyists with bags of cash and support from mobs of whiners and fakers is a whole lot cheaper than investing in R&D and doing the hard work required to create, grow, and foster an ecosystem that has broad appeal and staying power.- Apple can't drop free apps. It would hurt the independent small developer community.
- Any attempt by Apple to drop free apps would be viewed by regulators as anti-competitive, since the App Store is currently the only way to get apps onto the iOS ecosystem.
One would hope that legislators would see through the charade of what they're being asked to do, but I have little faith that they will take the time to think through the situation and will make their decision on pure emotion about what "sounds good for the public benefit". -
Minnesota the latest to introduce bill that allows developers to bypass App Store billing
Free apps with in-app purchases are really the problem here.
How about a compromise - You, Mr./Ms Developer can offer your own in-app purchases but...- Apps that use non-Apple in-app purchases can not be offered for free or for some ridiculously low price. It must be purchased from the App Store at some amount to cover the cost of Apple distributing your application. I don't know what that amount is so let's say $5 is a good starting point. (that's the equivalent of a $15-ish app).
- Apple keeps 100% of the purchase price of the app. You're keeping 100% (or more than 70%) of the in-app revenue which is where you've decided your business model is going to make you money. So why should you expect Apple to pay you for something you're not paying them for now.
- You may not use Apple's in-app purchase infrastructure as an option. You must provide your own in-app purchase infrastructure and customer service. Don't come crying to Apple about issues with in-app purchases.
- If you want to use Apple's in-app purchase mechanism, you can offer a free app, and Apple will take a commission on the in-app purchase like it does today.
-
Facebook preparing to take Apple to court over iOS 14 privacy features
I don’t personally agree with a lot that the EU does, but one area they are clearly leading us is in rights for individual privacy. It is long overdue for the US to pass a GDPR-like law that forces companies to declare what they are doing with your data, who they are sharing it with, and give you the right to correct and delete that data. I would expect those companies to lobby hard against it, though, as it puts up a big roadblock for their business model.