Developers who choose to scream and cry to the media to get attention for their app should be summarily banned from the App Store. Don’t all devs sign a pretty rock solid NDA before being allowed to sell through Apple’s system?
I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
And I’m firmly in the Apple camp. Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps. If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.
70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.
whiners.
I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second.
It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
Boy are you one entitled person.
But you’ll learn; after one or two good con-jobs fleeces you out of your money, your identity, or both.
I would bet that, if you go to Downward Doggerel’s site, they don’t even offer a way to pay without giving-over CC information. One of the advantages to the User from Apple handling Subscriptions is that the Vendor never gets Payment Info directly. Just like paying for things with PayPal.
But all you can see is their crocodile tears, as they dpin their carefully-constructed tale of victimhood.
I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
And I’m firmly in the Apple camp. Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps. If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.
70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.
whiners.
I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second.
It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
Baloney. That claim is a smoke screen. This developer thought they had figured out how to get around paying Apple its cut by offering a free trial and then telling their customer to visit their website if they wanted to buy/subscribe.
"Purchasing through our website avoids commission fees commonly charged by Apple or Google," says the site, "and will usually get you the best price!"
There it is, right out in the open.
They are free to post what ever they like on their own website, that has absolutely nothing to do with Apple or it’s policies, and it’s also a fact that they were stating, so because they want to save their customers money they are the nasty bad person as it’s removing that money from Apples greed? For a trial... Sorry but I find your statement to be incorrect, this article and the tweet clearly stated the unfair customer treatment, NOT developer treatment, for a trial of the app. What’s next? Apple forcing minimum 12 month subscriptions with no refund? It’s quite obvious if this story is true Apple is putting its greed first and foremost, not the customer, and the last time I checked it was making a pretty few billion in profit from the App Store alone every quarter, so I think it’s more then covering the cost of any ‘services’ it’s supplying.
It should be up to the developer how it wants to offer free trials of its software, as this sets the impression of the company, to be forced by Apple to be seen as the typical greedy one who wants all your payment details up front is disgraceful I find.
The part about telling your customer to bypass the App Store you, is part of the now multiple on going anti competition investigations into Aplles App Store practices, we shall await the outcome of those.
Wow!
We are not smart. We look for things. Things to make us go.
DAalseth said: This is precisely why Apple is being investigated for, and will get nailed for, abusive monopolistic behaviour.
I doubt anyone can put together a convincing antitrust case using the 30% cut. It's never been increased, so you'd have to find a way of arguing that the App Store harmed customers right from the start.
And, as no one has yet pointed-out, that automatically drops to 15% after one year.
Apple should start thinking of the US and European governments as the Apple app review review. When an app fails Apple's review, it can't be released to the App Store. When Apple fails the government app review review, it will cost Apple billions of dollars and force it to change its app review process. In other words, Apple should be very very careful right now when rejecting apps for silly arbitrary reasons. It should review its own rejections and ask itself if it is really worth risking the wrath of government oversight? As it stands, Apple is proceeding with maximum hubris and it is going to cost them. Apple would really hate to be broken up but it could happen easily. Imagine if iOS was a separate company from iPad OS and Mac OS and Watch OS.
You have absolutely no idea how any if this actually works, do you?
Apple should start thinking of the US and European governments as the Apple app review review. When an app fails Apple's review, it can't be released to the App Store. When Apple fails the government app review review, it will cost Apple billions of dollars and force it to change its app review process. In other words, Apple should be very very careful right now when rejecting apps for silly arbitrary reasons. It should review its own rejections and ask itself if it is really worth risking the wrath of government oversight? As it stands, Apple is proceeding with maximum hubris and it is going to cost them. Apple would really hate to be broken up but it could happen easily. Imagine if iOS was a separate company from iPad OS and Mac OS and Watch OS.
This is what I don't understand - well, I do; it's Apple's notoriously stubborn attitude that "we know best for everyone" but still. A simple tweak to the rules or even a small reduction in their App Store cut may cost them a little in the short run, but it will keep the governments from sniffing around. It'll cost one hell of a lot less in the long run than the fine they'll get if they lose the EU/US antitrust cases - plus most likely the installation of a government official to monitor things. In any case if it wasn't for third party devs, the iPhone would be nowhere near as popular as it is now, and Apple could reward them with a small fee cut.
I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
So you think developers should have free access to the App Store and Apple should get nothing in return. Because that's what this guy is wanting. He wants the marketing clout of the App Store but doesn't want to pay for it. He offers his app as a free trial but if you want to buy it you go to his website. Yeah, cut Apple out of the deal even though Apple provides the platform, the marketing, the server space. All the developer has to do is upload their app, get it approved and they enjoy all the clout of the world's most valuable marketing platform. The developer doesn't need to advertise, they don't even need a website.
Major developers like Facebook and Uber are getting a free ride. And that's just two examples. So that doesn't exactly hold water.
I didn’t think that Facebook charged users for their “service”. So 30% of zero is...?
There is tons of click-through revenue that Apple is not getting. Uber, GrubHub, Walmart, you name it But that is not their business model. Plus, all of those Apps are simply front-ends to an already-accessible website. And again, there is no “direct revenue”, like with a subscription video game, or “yoga classes”.
But an ongoing, monthly revenue-stream: Apple certainly deserves a cut of that (as does Google).
Keep in mind that the revenue drops in half after a year, too. No one bays about that, do they?
For me the issue is complicated by Family Sharing: My grandson can take out a trial subscription -- which often reverts to a full year subscription -- without my knowledge. The only notification I get is an email and, if I miss it, the subscription goes into affect.
But, so far, Apple has been good at dealing with this and providing refunds when needed.
Also, they have improved the visibility of these subscriptions so they are easier to find and manage.
But, that said, Apple should not be dictating that developers HAVE to auto-renew their trials. That is not necessary or fair -- and it makes no logical sense.
As the (assumed) Manager of your Family Sharing group, I am nearly 100% positive that you can make so you have to “approve” In-App-Purchases, and Can even deny them outright.
So, don’t abrogate your parenting responsibilities, especially when Apple has handed you the tools to help, and then blame Apple.
I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
And I’m firmly in the Apple camp. Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps. If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.
70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.
whiners.
I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second.
It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
As a developer myself, I remember easily the years of boxed software and the difficulty of actually making money in that market. Factor in overhead, marketing, distribution, and everything else associated with selling independently, a 30% cut to access that market is chump change.
Apple created this market that developers have access to. Not the other way around.
keep whining.
I am also a developer. My most profitable app manages elections for general assemblies of companies and non profit organizations. It is available on iOS , on Android and as a web application. I am offering a free trial version of my app: maximum 10 voters and 5 voting topics. Organizations must register and pay for more voters or more topics. There is no auto-billing. The app was approved without issues, but reading this article I am not so sure anymore if the next version will pass.
If I would only make the app for iOS, I would have no sales. My customers (the organizations) want a solution where all shareholders/members can vote, irrespective of the device the voters are using. A survey (110 organizations replied) revealed that exactly 0 discovered my app via the App Store. Which basically means that the marketing story you are telling does not apply for my app: Apple does not bring me any customers. But of course for your apps this could be different
After the survey I made the decision to limit the registration and the payment functionality to the web app only, so I don't have to pay 30% for something that does not bring real value. Voters can still use the iOS and Android app for all elections: paid and unpaid
Although not an "App" Developer, I am currently a software Dev.with over 40 years' paid experience, ok?
When you say that the (iOS) App Store was not the "discovery point" for any of your iOS Users, I am not surprised.
As I see it, you have a rather niche App, that depends on some kind of Cloud-based Hosting of ad-hoc, semi-customizable "Election Platforms"with a subscription-based backend as your primary revenue generator. And I think those Election Platforms are initially set-up via your Website, amirite?
So, when you say "provides no value" and "gets 30% of,,," (what, the Voters are not your Subscribers, per se. No direct revenue, no fee to Apple). And as far as "value", you still have the nice Hosting, Product-Page, chance for User Feedback, and Updating mechanism. For free...
I notice that you don't mention how many of your App Users by percentage are actually on iOS? That's probably a somewhat higher number than "exactly 0". So what is it?
So, in reality, your smartphone Apps are a convenience item only, not a revenue source. Therefore, The App should be:
1. Free. Period. It's just that kind of App.
2. Driven by a "Badge"-Button on a Page on your Website. This Page will be linked-to by whoever is organizing a particular "Election", and distributed by them. Again, this is just that kind of an App.
It's annoyed me in the past that the default for trial was to auto renew on a paid subscription. I never knew that it was Apple mandated behaviour. Pretty shady policy.
Name me three “Free Trials” that, when expired, do not either:
1. Simply deny the user access to the software; or
2. Auto-Convert into Paid, based on Payment info required at Install-time.
Huh? Those are the two principal options, why do I have to name another? According to the developer, Apple is mandating that developers implement the latter. I'd prefer the former.
For me the issue is complicated by Family Sharing: My grandson can take out a trial subscription -- which often reverts to a full year subscription -- without my knowledge. The only notification I get is an email and, if I miss it, the subscription goes into affect.
But, so far, Apple has been good at dealing with this and providing refunds when needed.
Also, they have improved the visibility of these subscriptions so they are easier to find and manage.
But, that said, Apple should not be dictating that developers HAVE to auto-renew their trials. That is not necessary or fair -- and it makes no logical sense.
As the (assumed) Manager of your Family Sharing group, I am nearly 100% positive that you can make so you have to “approve” In-App-Purchases, and Can even deny them outright.
So, don’t abrogate your parenting responsibilities, especially when Apple has handed you the tools to help, and then blame Apple.
Unfortunately, that approval process thing you mention was not working well, so I was forced to turn it off. But nice try at the righteous, holier than thou routine.
Comments
But you’ll learn; after one or two good con-jobs fleeces you out of your money, your identity, or both.
I would bet that, if you go to Downward Doggerel’s site, they don’t even offer a way to pay without giving-over CC information. One of the advantages to the User from Apple handling Subscriptions is that the Vendor never gets Payment Info directly. Just like paying for things with PayPal.
But all you can see is their crocodile tears, as they dpin their carefully-constructed tale of victimhood.
We are not smart. We look for things. Things to make us go.
The EU needs some better things to do.
As does Congress...
If the EU or Congress has time for this b.s., they need (and actually have) some better things to do.
Talk about First-World “Problems”!
Do you even hear yourself?!?
I despise Google; but I would defend them on the same policy.
Those con-men disguised as App Publishers are simply trying to get World Class Distribution Platforms (App Store, Play Store) use FOR FREE, FOREVER!
Now, how is that fair?
can you not see that???
There is tons of click-through revenue that Apple is not getting. Uber, GrubHub, Walmart, you name it But that is not their business model. Plus, all of those Apps are simply front-ends to an already-accessible website. And again, there is no “direct revenue”, like with a subscription video game, or “yoga classes”.
But an ongoing, monthly revenue-stream: Apple certainly deserves a cut of that (as does Google).
Keep in mind that the revenue drops in half after a year, too. No one bays about that, do they?
So, don’t abrogate your parenting responsibilities, especially when Apple has handed you the tools to help, and then blame Apple.
When you say that the (iOS) App Store was not the "discovery point" for any of your iOS Users, I am not surprised.
As I see it, you have a rather niche App, that depends on some kind of Cloud-based Hosting of ad-hoc, semi-customizable "Election Platforms"with a subscription-based backend as your primary revenue generator. And I think those Election Platforms are initially set-up via your Website, amirite?
So, when you say "provides no value" and "gets 30% of,,," (what, the Voters are not your Subscribers, per se. No direct revenue, no fee to Apple). And as far as "value", you still have the nice Hosting, Product-Page, chance for User Feedback, and Updating mechanism. For free...
I notice that you don't mention how many of your App Users by percentage are actually on iOS? That's probably a somewhat higher number than "exactly 0". So what is it?
So, in reality, your smartphone Apps are a convenience item only, not a revenue source. Therefore, The App should be:
1. Free. Period. It's just that kind of App.
2. Driven by a "Badge"-Button on a Page on your Website. This Page will be linked-to by whoever is organizing a particular "Election", and distributed by them. Again, this is just that kind of an App.
Unfortunately, that approval process thing you mention was not working well, so I was forced to turn it off. But nice try at the righteous, holier than thou routine.