Phil Schiller puts App Store users before developers & profits
A profile of Phil Schiller claims that his insistence on the best user experience in the App Store is putting him at odds with Apple's business people.
Apple's Phil Schiller stepped down as senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing in 2020, to take on the much broader role of Apple Fellow. One aspect of his work that he retained, though, was control over the App Store.
Schiller took over the App Store from Eddy Cue in 2016, and right from then began making decisions that even angered Apple's business departments.
Even before his Apple Fellow role freed him up to concentrate on the Store, Schiller would reportedly review every piece of artwork before it went live. And he backed his team's proposal to add editorials to the Store.
The addition of the Today, Games, and Apps sections of the App Store was an expensive one because of the staffing it required. It was also not popular with Apple people who wanted users to automatically get the Search page when they opened the App Store.
Reportedly, Schiller insisted on the editorial curation because he believed the App Store had lost its old spontaneity and the fun of discovering new apps.
Then Apple's Carson Oliver and the rest of his App Store business management team, reportedly wanted the editorial team to at least spotlight apps by certain developers. Again, Schiller refused, and instead he gave the editorial team control over what they picked to highlight.
No app pays to be featured, but there are reportedly rules over what can be covered -- and the rules will change depending upon world events. First-person shooter games, which Schiller was initially entirely against, will cease to be promoted, or may even be delayed, following shooting incidents in the US.
Schiller also won't allow what are called social casino games, because of the risk of creating addiction. This also frustrated business management staff as it was claimed that such games could generate hundreds of millions of dollars income for Apple.
Phil Schiller is not quoted in The Information profile, nor has Apple responded to specific points in it. However, a spokesperson told the publication that driving revenue has never been a goal of the App Store editorial team.
Examples from the 2018 App Store redesign that Schiller backed
There have also been broader issues than the featuring or not featuring of certain categories of games. When Apple announced App Tracking Transparency in iOS 14, Carson Oliver's team is said to have warned Schiller that it could cost the App Store billions of dollars.
That was specifically because Apple predicted that marketing firms would spend less on iOS advertising, and even move more toward Android.
An unnamed source said to have direct knowledge of the situation, reportedly told The Information that Schiller's attitude was that he didn't care. Schiller believed that the privacy feature was the right thing to do for users, and also that advertisers would eventually adapt to it.
The App Store is changing, and Apple is preparing to feature more ads in it.
That does bring in to question how Apple's own ad business may be profiting from the same privacy features that are costing others money.
Such questions are likely to feature heavily in the many antitrust cases being brought, or considered, against Apple. Schiller has already been a key witness in those, and his App Store role looks to guarantee that he'll continue to be so.
Read on AppleInsider
Apple's Phil Schiller stepped down as senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing in 2020, to take on the much broader role of Apple Fellow. One aspect of his work that he retained, though, was control over the App Store.
Schiller took over the App Store from Eddy Cue in 2016, and right from then began making decisions that even angered Apple's business departments.
Even before his Apple Fellow role freed him up to concentrate on the Store, Schiller would reportedly review every piece of artwork before it went live. And he backed his team's proposal to add editorials to the Store.
The addition of the Today, Games, and Apps sections of the App Store was an expensive one because of the staffing it required. It was also not popular with Apple people who wanted users to automatically get the Search page when they opened the App Store.
Reportedly, Schiller insisted on the editorial curation because he believed the App Store had lost its old spontaneity and the fun of discovering new apps.
Then Apple's Carson Oliver and the rest of his App Store business management team, reportedly wanted the editorial team to at least spotlight apps by certain developers. Again, Schiller refused, and instead he gave the editorial team control over what they picked to highlight.
No app pays to be featured, but there are reportedly rules over what can be covered -- and the rules will change depending upon world events. First-person shooter games, which Schiller was initially entirely against, will cease to be promoted, or may even be delayed, following shooting incidents in the US.
Schiller also won't allow what are called social casino games, because of the risk of creating addiction. This also frustrated business management staff as it was claimed that such games could generate hundreds of millions of dollars income for Apple.
Phil Schiller is not quoted in The Information profile, nor has Apple responded to specific points in it. However, a spokesperson told the publication that driving revenue has never been a goal of the App Store editorial team.
Examples from the 2018 App Store redesign that Schiller backed
There have also been broader issues than the featuring or not featuring of certain categories of games. When Apple announced App Tracking Transparency in iOS 14, Carson Oliver's team is said to have warned Schiller that it could cost the App Store billions of dollars.
That was specifically because Apple predicted that marketing firms would spend less on iOS advertising, and even move more toward Android.
An unnamed source said to have direct knowledge of the situation, reportedly told The Information that Schiller's attitude was that he didn't care. Schiller believed that the privacy feature was the right thing to do for users, and also that advertisers would eventually adapt to it.
The App Store is changing, and Apple is preparing to feature more ads in it.
That does bring in to question how Apple's own ad business may be profiting from the same privacy features that are costing others money.
Such questions are likely to feature heavily in the many antitrust cases being brought, or considered, against Apple. Schiller has already been a key witness in those, and his App Store role looks to guarantee that he'll continue to be so.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
Too much of Apple is doing what everyone else is doing today. Phil knows better. Him being in charge of the app store is what keeps Apple, Apple. I did not know he was the guy who forced. developers to be up front on what they track. That is awesome. The "today" section is amazing for discoverability and really helps the App Store feel like a properly curated, well-run platform. Opening up to a Googlesque search page is pathetic.
Phil carries the heart of Apple in everything he does. Wish he was more visible these days.
The main purpose of the store is to sell apps, mainly games, to people based on their interests. If a user isn't interested in an app, they shouldn't be shown it again and there's no mechanism in place for this. This needs something more like a news feed where you can remove items you don't want to see and build your own profile with similar features to the Apple News feed where the users choose the publications to follow.
When a user's app gets an update like a new chapter, level, challenge, this can show up in the personal feed and it can include editorials from the developers.
It's good to see people like Phil Schiller trying to keep the money-driven people under control. Hopefully they keep people in place for that to continue long into the future.
This is what idiots like Sweeney the Weenie and related ilk don’t get. They ONLY look at things from the developer/business viewpoint. Which means how can they make more money. They only have their own interests at heart. They don’t care about users except when it’s time to collect money from them.
This is where it comes from. A while back Apple created "FOR DEVELOPERS" what they called iAd. This was a framework/API they created to help developers that wanted to be part of an ad network and have a backend feed the pipeline and making things easier for developers for their apps. All Apple did was offer this Framework/API to developers.
Well what happened was "crappy games" and Apps that had really horrible GUI/UI, and "quick" design, started using older HTML, and other ad networks that existed before, and created their own. And these other programmers and developers decided to just use those "channels" and Apple decided after awhile that: "Hey these guys are doing just fine putting ads in their Apps, we can go ahead and just cancel the iAd framework and servers"
So since Apple cancelled the iAd network (WHICH THEY WERE IN NO WAY TRYING TO MONOPOLIZE, USE, ABUSE, or do anything with, in any case), people run with this "narrative" that Apple failed at advertising. OMG it's the stupidest not know what the F, you're talking about argument I have ever heard. Sickening!
I like downloading an app that uses tricks to sneakily sell me a $80 a month subscription. It's great, who needs money anyway?
I like having my favourite accessibility app, that I have been using for years, blocked from updating because some reviewer felt like it. Who uses apps anyway?
I'm happy Phil is looking out for me.