"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
Nailed it.
At what point in the history of competitive business endeavors did Apple's massive investment in building out and maintaining its App Store ecosystem and infrastructure be declared as a public domain, nationalized, free-to-use resource that anyone should be allowed to use at no cost to themselves? What kind of demented, twisted parallel universe, self serving entitlement sense of logic is driving this kind of illogical nonsense? I suppose these same idiots think that Apple should take over health care, transportation infrastructure, and perhaps even the military so taxpayers can reap the benefits at no cost to themselves. Yeah, let's demand that Apple pay for it all so we don't have to.
To developers - try getting Walmart to sell your product in their stores. They are not going to let you put your product on their shelves without taking a cut of the action. The cost to you will have to be negotiated behind closed doors and unless you have serious clout by virtue of already having a recognized product with huge consumer demand, they are calling all of the shots. If you're a startup with no established reputation, good luck. You may as well try EBay or selling at a local flea market or swap meet, which will get you an abundance of exposure within a radius of several hundred feet if you're lucky and throw in a ginsu knife as a free gift.
Developers that whine about this policies really chaff my backside. Absolute the most selfish, greedy, entitled people around. Apple does all the work creating a groundbreaking new product, getting a loyal - and profitable - user base, and created an ecosystem that allows anyone to develop software and have access to hundreds of millions of users at MINIMAL cost.
Don't think that developers deserve some praise for the success of iOS / iPadOS devices?
Those users are Apple's users, not yours. It's Apple's product, and their ecosystem. Not yours. You obviously were too young (or ignorant) about how us developers had to develop/market/sell/charge for software back in the pre-iPhone days. Otherwise, you'd be thanking Apple for taking "only" 30%.
The reality is, Android is a mess, piracy and IP theft is rampant, and security is non-existent, and these blowholes want to force Apple to adopt such a system? Good luck.
You are wrong here. User / customers are shared between Apple and the developer. What Apple has in their App Store is hard work from developers too, doesn't matter if it's inside the Apple ecosystem. Maybe it's an Apple's device, but it's the developer app.
Absolutely spot on. iPhones are ruling the high-end smartphone market, because of "Developers" creating high quality apps for the iOS platform. Their contribution CANNOT be washed away by anyone making silly claims.
No, I will put it so: Because of iPhones are ruling the high-end smartphone market, "Developers" are creating high quality apps for the iOS platform.
My iPhone is working perfectly fine with Apple’s only applications. That’s the reason I bought it! And not because I could play eventually some games. This is the first! Then I can go possibly to the AppStore and buy somethings from the developers. But only because I know: It is secur.
Are you so sure about the point bolded by me?????? Are you really, really serious???? You are fine with NO third party apps like uber/facebook/google maps/twitter/banking/food delivery apps etc???? And do you believe that almost ALL of the 1 billion users of iOS devices think likewise???
Yes, I am absolutely sure! And I am sure that nobody of that 1 billion users of iOS devices, will buy an iPhone or iPad, only because of apps like Uber/Facebook/Google maps/Twitter...etc!
It is ridiculous to think, that because I want Facebook app, therefore I will buy an iOS device
People buy an iPhone because it is an iPhone. And buying apps is something secondary, individual for each user.
Apps maybe a secondary reason for you, but for many (individuals and business / enterprises) are as important as the device itself. Personally, I didn't buy an iPhone because of Uber / Facebook / Google Maps / Twitter, but I would not had buy it if the apps I need were not available. For example, look what happened to Windows Phone. Excellent OS for it's time, with no developer support, and it failed You are wrong if you think developers are not an important part of the iPhone success.
I understand what you mean, but you are just confirming what I am saying. Windows Phone didn’t make it. Windows Phone didn’t had users. That is the reason why all the developers ran away from this platform. Why then the developers didn’t helped iWindows Phone to become the number one? I know, the developers are very, very important for the iOS. But iOS for the developers is it like the theater stage for the artists and musicians, the place where they can show them self’s and make money . Not opposite around. No stage, no performance, no money.
I posted about Windows because I had one for some months, and although it was very good, even better than the iPhone in some tasks, what you could do with it was limited because the few apps it had. Customers would not go to a platform where they cannot work, see their social media, play their games or watch their movies / series. In the beginning what Apple did with the iPhone move customers to purchase it, and developers followed. But today is a different story. Suppose that Apple close the App Store and block 3rd party apps. Don't you think sales will drop drastically? I think so, specially when you consider that Apple don't have a dominant app or service. I don't think most people would buy a device that only can use Apple Apps and services. As today, Facebook and Twitter control social media. MS is the leader in business and enterprise with MS Office and Microsoft 365 cloud services. Google is miles ahead of iCloud, Maps and other Apple services. And Neflix and Spotify lead in streaming movies / series and music. These are some of the services most people use in their devices, including iPhone. And there are other essentials, as banks and local news apps. Just remove the apps I mentioned, and I'm sure sales will slow down. Following your comparison, customers pay to go to the theater to see the musician. They will not pay just to sit in an empty theater, with no artist.
Non of the apps you’ve listed hire, are on my iOS devices. Pages and Numbers do a perfect job and I simply convert the file if I have to send it to someone who is using MS Office. Google service’s I don’t use at all. And I have good reason therefore. Even my search engine is not Google. And Apple’s maps for me are more reliable than Google’s Wase. But I would like to remind you that the discussion here goes over something different: is the Apple’s AppStore policy correct or not.
"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
Nailed it.
At what point in the history of competitive business endeavors did Apple's massive investment in building out and maintaining its App Store ecosystem and infrastructure be declared as a public domain, nationalized, free-to-use resource that anyone should be allowed to use at no cost to themselves? What kind of demented, twisted parallel universe, self serving entitlement sense of logic is driving this kind of illogical nonsense? I suppose these same idiots think that Apple should take over health care, transportation infrastructure, and perhaps even the military so taxpayers can reap the benefits at no cost to themselves. Yeah, let's demand that Apple pay for it all so we don't have to.
To developers - try getting Walmart to sell your product in their stores. They are not going to let you put your product on their shelves without taking a cut of the action. The cost to you will have to be negotiated behind closed doors and unless you have serious clout by virtue of already having a recognized product with huge consumer demand, they are calling all of the shots. If you're a startup with no established reputation, good luck. You may as well try EBay or selling at a local flea market or swap meet, which will get you an abundance of exposure within a radius of several hundred feet if you're lucky and throw in a ginsu knife as a free gift.
Walmart allow you to buy things in their stores with cash, credit cards, Walmart gift cards, and possibly more besides. Moreover the things you buy from Walmart (including iPhones) aren't locked into a Walmart payment ecosystem where Walmart gets a kickback on any subsequent value-add purchase.
Youy've choosen your analogy pretty badly there.
If Apple wants to charge developers for putting apps on the shelves then that's up to them. The free tier is entirely of Apple's making.
"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
B. You don’t know that. No one has had an opportunity to see if it would happen or not. Even if they pocket the difference it won’t make much difference to the user.
Oh yes I do. First if each developer absorbed the overhead of setting up their own store it would cost at least as much if not more. Second if they went with another company to provide the storefront service, the cost would be roughly the same. Lastly if by some miracle Apple or someone else offered a digital storefront for free with no % cut for the cost, the developers would simply pocket the difference. Most developers work on thin margins and an extra 30% would be better plowed back into the business rather than dropping prices for likely no increase in sales.
The 30% would NEVER go back to the customers.
From this very article, Epic only charges 12% for their store. If you didn’t need a specific store front, there are any number of online payment processing services available that many companies use. Paying to host an image of your installer is likewise very cheap. Distributing software via the internet is not complex or expensive in 2020. The point is options are there if not for Apple’s artificial barrier. 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option.
“ 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option. ”
YES... There are other options!.... Options the CEO of Epic Games has decided not to pay... In choosing to pay Apple’s 30%.
What are these options you claim the ceo is not taking? There is only one way to get software installed onto an iphone, and that is by going through apple’s store.
"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
Nailed it.
At what point in the history of competitive business endeavors did Apple's massive investment in building out and maintaining its App Store ecosystem and infrastructure be declared as a public domain, nationalized, free-to-use resource that anyone should be allowed to use at no cost to themselves? What kind of demented, twisted parallel universe, self serving entitlement sense of logic is driving this kind of illogical nonsense? I suppose these same idiots think that Apple should take over health care, transportation infrastructure, and perhaps even the military so taxpayers can reap the benefits at no cost to themselves. Yeah, let's demand that Apple pay for it all so we don't have to.
To developers - try getting Walmart to sell your product in their stores. They are not going to let you put your product on their shelves without taking a cut of the action. The cost to you will have to be negotiated behind closed doors and unless you have serious clout by virtue of already having a recognized product with huge consumer demand, they are calling all of the shots. If you're a startup with no established reputation, good luck. You may as well try EBay or selling at a local flea market or swap meet, which will get you an abundance of exposure within a radius of several hundred feet if you're lucky and throw in a ginsu knife as a free gift.
This is a terrible analogy. Walmart BUYS the products they offer at prices they negotiate with manufacturers distributors. They then resell at retail prices.
Now they charge a fee for third parties using their online store to sell but it is no where close to 30%.
Apple loves control, any freedom to use their devices outside of their envisioned workflow is severely hampered, it's Apple's way or the highway - to the detriment of iOS/iPadOS.
“Detriment”? With platform/store profitability and customer satisfaction ratings beyond anything else, I think you mean ‘Benefit’
TheNubi said: This is a terrible analogy. Walmart BUYS the products they offer at prices they negotiate with manufacturers distributors. They then resell at retail prices.
And what price is WalMart paying when they buy it? A price that gives the seller razor thin margins, i.e., WalMart wants to pay as close to the cost to manufacture as possible. That's not an example of a better deal. Apps sold on the App Store get to keep 70% of their RETAIL PRICE. Someone who sells to WalMart might only get 25% above their COST TO MANUFACTURE.
TheNubi said: This is a terrible analogy. Walmart BUYS the products they offer at prices they negotiate with manufacturers distributors. They then resell at retail prices.
And what price is WalMart paying when they buy it? A price that gives the seller razor thin margins, i.e., WalMart wants to pay as close to the cost to manufacture as possible. That's not an example of a better deal. Apps sold on the App Store get to keep 70% of their RETAIL PRICE. Someone who sells to WalMart might only get 25% above their COST TO MANUFACTURE.
I think we've conclusively proved by this point that the analogy is deeply flawed. Physical stores and digital stores do not compare.
crowley said: I think we've conclusively proved by this point that the analogy is deeply flawed. Physical stores and digital stores do not compare.
It's not that hard to compare what the seller can expect to pocket from a sale or what the customer can expect in terms of prices. Did the App Store reduce the take for software developers? No. Did the App Store increase prices for consumers? No. Is the App Store the only place a developer can sell their product? No. Is the App Store the only place a consumer can buy the developers product? No.
TheNubi said:What are these options you claim the ceo is not taking? There is only one way to get software installed onto an iphone, and that is by going through apple’s store.
Desktop/laptops provide multiple ways to get software onto the hardware. Does that make the software less expensive for consumers? No.
crowley said: I think we've conclusively proved by this point that the analogy is deeply flawed. Physical stores and digital stores do not compare.
It's not that hard to compare what the seller can expect to pocket from a sale or what the customer can expect in terms of prices. Did the App Store reduce the take for software developers? No. Did the App Store increase prices for consumers? No. Is the App Store the only place a developer can sell their product? No. Is the App Store the only place a consumer can buy the developers product? No.
Depends. If the product is "an iOS app", then yes, the App Store is the only place you can buy it (bar a couple of niche exceptions). If it's just "an app" then you're correct. But since they aren't completely substitutable then the former seems like a valid view.
crowley said: Depends. If the product is "an iOS app", then yes, the App Store is the only place you can buy it (bar a couple of niche exceptions). If it's just "an app" then you're correct. But since they aren't completely substitutable then the former seems like a valid view.
Developers aren't limited to selling it as an iOS app. Cross-platform development is quite common.
"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
Nailed it.
At what point in the history of competitive business endeavors did Apple's massive investment in building out and maintaining its App Store ecosystem and infrastructure be declared as a public domain, nationalized, free-to-use resource that anyone should be allowed to use at no cost to themselves? What kind of demented, twisted parallel universe, self serving entitlement sense of logic is driving this kind of illogical nonsense? I suppose these same idiots think that Apple should take over health care, transportation infrastructure, and perhaps even the military so taxpayers can reap the benefits at no cost to themselves. Yeah, let's demand that Apple pay for it all so we don't have to.
To developers - try getting Walmart to sell your product in their stores. They are not going to let you put your product on their shelves without taking a cut of the action. The cost to you will have to be negotiated behind closed doors and unless you have serious clout by virtue of already having a recognized product with huge consumer demand, they are calling all of the shots. If you're a startup with no established reputation, good luck. You may as well try EBay or selling at a local flea market or swap meet, which will get you an abundance of exposure within a radius of several hundred feet if you're lucky and throw in a ginsu knife as a free gift.
This is a terrible analogy. Walmart BUYS the products they offer at prices they negotiate with manufacturers distributors. They then resell at retail prices.
Now they charge a fee for third parties using their online store to sell but it is no where close to 30%.
Never mind that unsold inventory gets returned to the manufacturer at their loss or that a certain percentage of inventory is automatically discounted for theft.
crowley said: Depends. If the product is "an iOS app", then yes, the App Store is the only place you can buy it (bar a couple of niche exceptions). If it's just "an app" then you're correct. But since they aren't completely substitutable then the former seems like a valid view.
Developers aren't limited to selling it as an iOS app. Cross-platform development is quite common.
The same code bundle won't run on different operating systems. Therefore they're differrent products.
Developers that whine about this policies really chaff my backside. Absolute the most selfish, greedy, entitled people around. Apple does all the work creating a groundbreaking new product, getting a loyal - and profitable - user base, and created an ecosystem that allows anyone to develop software and have access to hundreds of millions of users at MINIMAL cost.
Don't think that developers deserve some praise for the success of iOS / iPadOS devices?
Those users are Apple's users, not yours. It's Apple's product, and their ecosystem. Not yours. You obviously were too young (or ignorant) about how us developers had to develop/market/sell/charge for software back in the pre-iPhone days. Otherwise, you'd be thanking Apple for taking "only" 30%.
The reality is, Android is a mess, piracy and IP theft is rampant, and security is non-existent, and these blowholes want to force Apple to adopt such a system? Good luck.
You are wrong here. User / customers are shared between Apple and the developer. What Apple has in their App Store is hard work from developers too, doesn't matter if it's inside the Apple ecosystem. Maybe it's an Apple's device, but it's the developer app.
Absolutely spot on. iPhones are ruling the high-end smartphone market, because of "Developers" creating high quality apps for the iOS platform. Their contribution CANNOT be washed away by anyone making silly claims.
No, I will put it so: Because of iPhones are ruling the high-end smartphone market, "Developers" are creating high quality apps for the iOS platform.
My iPhone is working perfectly fine with Apple’s only applications. That’s the reason I bought it! And not because I could play eventually some games. This is the first! Then I can go possibly to the AppStore and buy somethings from the developers. But only because I know: It is secur.
Are you so sure about the point bolded by me?????? Are you really, really serious???? You are fine with NO third party apps like uber/facebook/google maps/twitter/banking/food delivery apps etc???? And do you believe that almost ALL of the 1 billion users of iOS devices think likewise???
Yes, I am absolutely sure! And I am sure that nobody of that 1 billion users of iOS devices, will buy an iPhone or iPad, only because of apps like Uber/Facebook/Google maps/Twitter...etc!
It is ridiculous to think, that because I want Facebook app, therefore I will buy an iOS device
People buy an iPhone because it is an iPhone. And buying apps is something secondary, individual for each user.
Apps maybe a secondary reason for you, but for many (individuals and business / enterprises) are as important as the device itself. Personally, I didn't buy an iPhone because of Uber / Facebook / Google Maps / Twitter, but I would not had buy it if the apps I need were not available. For example, look what happened to Windows Phone. Excellent OS for it's time, with no developer support, and it failed You are wrong if you think developers are not an important part of the iPhone success.
I understand what you mean, but you are just confirming what I am saying. Windows Phone didn’t make it. Windows Phone didn’t had users. That is the reason why all the developers ran away from this platform. Why then the developers didn’t helped iWindows Phone to become the number one? I know, the developers are very, very important for the iOS. But iOS for the developers is it like the theater stage for the artists and musicians, the place where they can show them self’s and make money . Not opposite around. No stage, no performance, no money.
I posted about Windows because I had one for some months, and although it was very good, even better than the iPhone in some tasks, what you could do with it was limited because the few apps it had. Customers would not go to a platform where they cannot work, see their social media, play their games or watch their movies / series. In the beginning what Apple did with the iPhone move customers to purchase it, and developers followed. But today is a different story. Suppose that Apple close the App Store and block 3rd party apps. Don't you think sales will drop drastically? I think so, specially when you consider that Apple don't have a dominant app or service. I don't think most people would buy a device that only can use Apple Apps and services. As today, Facebook and Twitter control social media. MS is the leader in business and enterprise with MS Office and Microsoft 365 cloud services. Google is miles ahead of iCloud, Maps and other Apple services. And Neflix and Spotify lead in streaming movies / series and music. These are some of the services most people use in their devices, including iPhone. And there are other essentials, as banks and local news apps. Just remove the apps I mentioned, and I'm sure sales will slow down. Following your comparison, customers pay to go to the theater to see the musician. They will not pay just to sit in an empty theater, with no artist.
Non of the apps you’ve listed hire, are on my iOS devices. Pages and Numbers do a perfect job and I simply convert the file if I have to send it to someone who is using MS Office. Google service’s I don’t use at all. And I have good reason therefore. Even my search engine is not Google. And Apple’s maps for me are more reliable than Google’s Wase.
And do you think the majority of users are the same as you, just using Apple apps and services? Considering the massive numbers of users connected to Google, MS, Facebook, Twitter, Spotify and Amazon services every day/month with their respective apps, you are in a very small group of iPhone customers. Like I said before, remove those apps and services from customers devices, and I'm sure most of them will move to another platform. As today, Apple platform is as important as the developers.
But I would like to remind you that the discussion here goes over something different: is the Apple’s AppStore policy correct or not.
If you look at the beginning of this conversation, it was about the importance of developers in the Apple platform, and Epic is one of them. So I think this discussion is related to the article.
Developers that whine about this policies really chaff my backside. Absolute the most selfish, greedy, entitled people around. Apple does all the work creating a groundbreaking new product, getting a loyal - and profitable - user base, and created an ecosystem that allows anyone to develop software and have access to hundreds of millions of users at MINIMAL cost.
Don't think that developers deserve some praise for the success of iOS / iPadOS devices?
Those users are Apple's users, not yours. It's Apple's product, and their ecosystem. Not yours. You obviously were too young (or ignorant) about how us developers had to develop/market/sell/charge for software back in the pre-iPhone days. Otherwise, you'd be thanking Apple for taking "only" 30%.
The reality is, Android is a mess, piracy and IP theft is rampant, and security is non-existent, and these blowholes want to force Apple to adopt such a system? Good luck.
You are wrong here. User / customers are shared between Apple and the developer. What Apple has in their App Store is hard work from developers too, doesn't matter if it's inside the Apple ecosystem. Maybe it's an Apple's device, but it's the developer app.
Absolutely spot on. iPhones are ruling the high-end smartphone market, because of "Developers" creating high quality apps for the iOS platform. Their contribution CANNOT be washed away by anyone making silly claims.
No, I will put it so: Because of iPhones are ruling the high-end smartphone market, "Developers" are creating high quality apps for the iOS platform.
My iPhone is working perfectly fine with Apple’s only applications. That’s the reason I bought it! And not because I could play eventually some games. This is the first! Then I can go possibly to the AppStore and buy somethings from the developers. But only because I know: It is secur.
Are you so sure about the point bolded by me?????? Are you really, really serious???? You are fine with NO third party apps like uber/facebook/google maps/twitter/banking/food delivery apps etc???? And do you believe that almost ALL of the 1 billion users of iOS devices think likewise???
Yes, I am absolutely sure! And I am sure that nobody of that 1 billion users of iOS devices, will buy an iPhone or iPad, only because of apps like Uber/Facebook/Google maps/Twitter...etc!
It is ridiculous to think, that because I want Facebook app, therefore I will buy an iOS device
People buy an iPhone because it is an iPhone. And buying apps is something secondary, individual for each user.
Apps maybe a secondary reason for you, but for many (individuals and business / enterprises) are as important as the device itself. Personally, I didn't buy an iPhone because of Uber / Facebook / Google Maps / Twitter, but I would not had buy it if the apps I need were not available. For example, look what happened to Windows Phone. Excellent OS for it's time, with no developer support, and it failed You are wrong if you think developers are not an important part of the iPhone success.
I understand what you mean, but you are just confirming what I am saying. Windows Phone didn’t make it. Windows Phone didn’t had users. That is the reason why all the developers ran away from this platform. Why then the developers didn’t helped iWindows Phone to become the number one? I know, the developers are very, very important for the iOS. But iOS for the developers is it like the theater stage for the artists and musicians, the place where they can show them self’s and make money . Not opposite around. No stage, no performance, no money.
I posted about Windows because I had one for some months, and although it was very good, even better than the iPhone in some tasks, what you could do with it was limited because the few apps it had. Customers would not go to a platform where they cannot work, see their social media, play their games or watch their movies / series. In the beginning what Apple did with the iPhone move customers to purchase it, and developers followed. But today is a different story. Suppose that Apple close the App Store and block 3rd party apps. Don't you think sales will drop drastically? I think so, specially when you consider that Apple don't have a dominant app or service. I don't think most people would buy a device that only can use Apple Apps and services. As today, Facebook and Twitter control social media. MS is the leader in business and enterprise with MS Office and Microsoft 365 cloud services. Google is miles ahead of iCloud, Maps and other Apple services. And Neflix and Spotify lead in streaming movies / series and music. These are some of the services most people use in their devices, including iPhone. And there are other essentials, as banks and local news apps. Just remove the apps I mentioned, and I'm sure sales will slow down. Following your comparison, customers pay to go to the theater to see the musician. They will not pay just to sit in an empty theater, with no artist.
Non of the apps you’ve listed hire, are on my iOS devices. Pages and Numbers do a perfect job and I simply convert the file if I have to send it to someone who is using MS Office. Google service’s I don’t use at all. And I have good reason therefore. Even my search engine is not Google. And Apple’s maps for me are more reliable than Google’s Wase.
And do you think the majority of users are the same as you, just using Apple apps and services? Considering the massive numbers of users connected to Google, MS, Facebook, Twitter, Spotify and Amazon services every day/month with their respective apps, you are in a very small group of iPhone customers. Like I said before, remove those apps and services from customers devices, and I'm sure most of them will move to another platform. As today, Apple platform is as important as the developers.
But I would like to remind you that the discussion here goes over something different: is the Apple’s AppStore policy correct or not.
If you look at the beginning of this conversation, it was about the importance of developers in the Apple platform, and Epic is one of them. So I think this discussion is related to the article.
Ok, I am maybe not a typical user, but I am not the only one. And I still believe the most important thing is the platform in combination with very good devices, in this case iOS in combination with iPhone/iPad. No such combination, no 3-th party apps. Don’t get me wrong , I have enormously respect for the developers. I know that they make our life easier, but to do this, they need a ground, they need a platform
"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
B. You don’t know that. No one has had an opportunity to see if it would happen or not. Even if they pocket the difference it won’t make much difference to the user.
Oh yes I do. First if each developer absorbed the overhead of setting up their own store it would cost at least as much if not more. Second if they went with another company to provide the storefront service, the cost would be roughly the same. Lastly if by some miracle Apple or someone else offered a digital storefront for free with no % cut for the cost, the developers would simply pocket the difference. Most developers work on thin margins and an extra 30% would be better plowed back into the business rather than dropping prices for likely no increase in sales.
The 30% would NEVER go back to the customers.
From this very article, Epic only charges 12% for their store. If you didn’t need a specific store front, there are any number of online payment processing services available that many companies use. Paying to host an image of your installer is likewise very cheap. Distributing software via the internet is not complex or expensive in 2020. The point is options are there if not for Apple’s artificial barrier. 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option.
“ 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option. ”
YES... There are other options!.... Options the CEO of Epic Games has decided not to pay... In choosing to pay Apple’s 30%.
What are these options you claim the ceo is not taking? There is only one way to get software installed onto an iphone, and that is by going through apple’s store.
BS. Register for a free developer account and learn how to install an app you write onto the device you own. No app store required.
I'm sure you can figure out a way to charge people for the source code of an app you write; the costs of such an effort are unknown (presumably high) and the end revenue is also unknown (presumably low). Compare to the costs of dealing with Apple's software stores and the estimated revenue of such. Also compare the time to implement for each approach. Make the decision that feels right for you.
"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
B. You don’t know that. No one has had an opportunity to see if it would happen or not. Even if they pocket the difference it won’t make much difference to the user.
Oh yes I do. First if each developer absorbed the overhead of setting up their own store it would cost at least as much if not more. Second if they went with another company to provide the storefront service, the cost would be roughly the same. Lastly if by some miracle Apple or someone else offered a digital storefront for free with no % cut for the cost, the developers would simply pocket the difference. Most developers work on thin margins and an extra 30% would be better plowed back into the business rather than dropping prices for likely no increase in sales.
The 30% would NEVER go back to the customers.
From this very article, Epic only charges 12% for their store. If you didn’t need a specific store front, there are any number of online payment processing services available that many companies use. Paying to host an image of your installer is likewise very cheap. Distributing software via the internet is not complex or expensive in 2020. The point is options are there if not for Apple’s artificial barrier. 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option.
“ 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option. ”
YES... There are other options!.... Options the CEO of Epic Games has decided not to pay... In choosing to pay Apple’s 30%.
What are these options you claim the ceo is not taking? There is only one way to get software installed onto an iphone, and that is by going through apple’s store.
BS. Register for a free developer account and learn how to install an app you write onto the device you own. No app store required.
I'm sure you can figure out a way to charge people for the source code of an app you write; the costs of such an effort are unknown (presumably high) and the end revenue is also unknown (presumably low). Compare to the costs of dealing with Apple's software stores and the estimated revenue of such. Also compare the time to implement for each approach. Make the decision that feels right for you.
That's not a solution. Even with the most generous reading that's a workaround at best.
"If every developer could accept their own payments and avoid the 30% tax by Apple and Google we could pass the savings along to all our consumers and players would get a better deal on items."
A: This ignores the cost to the developers of setting up and running their own stores. B: No they wouldn't "pass the savings along". they'd pocket it.
This is totally self serving and disingenuous statement by Sweeney.
B. You don’t know that. No one has had an opportunity to see if it would happen or not. Even if they pocket the difference it won’t make much difference to the user.
Oh yes I do. First if each developer absorbed the overhead of setting up their own store it would cost at least as much if not more. Second if they went with another company to provide the storefront service, the cost would be roughly the same. Lastly if by some miracle Apple or someone else offered a digital storefront for free with no % cut for the cost, the developers would simply pocket the difference. Most developers work on thin margins and an extra 30% would be better plowed back into the business rather than dropping prices for likely no increase in sales.
The 30% would NEVER go back to the customers.
From this very article, Epic only charges 12% for their store. If you didn’t need a specific store front, there are any number of online payment processing services available that many companies use. Paying to host an image of your installer is likewise very cheap. Distributing software via the internet is not complex or expensive in 2020. The point is options are there if not for Apple’s artificial barrier. 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option.
“ 30% for distribution has always been too much, but its a ransom that has to be paid because there is no other option. ”
YES... There are other options!.... Options the CEO of Epic Games has decided not to pay... In choosing to pay Apple’s 30%.
What are these options you claim the ceo is not taking? There is only one way to get software installed onto an iphone, and that is by going through apple’s store.
BS. Register for a free developer account and learn how to install an app you write onto the device you own. No app store required.
I'm sure you can figure out a way to charge people for the source code of an app you write; the costs of such an effort are unknown (presumably high) and the end revenue is also unknown (presumably low). Compare to the costs of dealing with Apple's software stores and the estimated revenue of such. Also compare the time to implement for each approach. Make the decision that feels right for you.
That's not a solution. Even with the most generous reading that's a workaround at best.
Well, I apologise for the snark. But my refutation of Nubi's claim is accurate: there is more than one way to install software on an iPhone.
Comments
At what point in the history of competitive business endeavors did Apple's massive investment in building out and maintaining its App Store ecosystem and infrastructure be declared as a public domain, nationalized, free-to-use resource that anyone should be allowed to use at no cost to themselves? What kind of demented, twisted parallel universe, self serving entitlement sense of logic is driving this kind of illogical nonsense? I suppose these same idiots think that Apple should take over health care, transportation infrastructure, and perhaps even the military so taxpayers can reap the benefits at no cost to themselves. Yeah, let's demand that Apple pay for it all so we don't have to.
To developers - try getting Walmart to sell your product in their stores. They are not going to let you put your product on their shelves without taking a cut of the action. The cost to you will have to be negotiated behind closed doors and unless you have serious clout by virtue of already having a recognized product with huge consumer demand, they are calling all of the shots. If you're a startup with no established reputation, good luck. You may as well try EBay or selling at a local flea market or swap meet, which will get you an abundance of exposure within a radius of several hundred feet if you're lucky and throw in a ginsu knife as a free gift.
But I would like to remind you that the discussion here goes over something different: is the Apple’s AppStore policy correct or not.
Youy've choosen your analogy pretty badly there.
If Apple wants to charge developers for putting apps on the shelves then that's up to them. The free tier is entirely of Apple's making.
Now they charge a fee for third parties using their online store to sell but it is no where close to 30%.
Desktop/laptops provide multiple ways to get software onto the hardware. Does that make the software less expensive for consumers? No.
If you look at the beginning of this conversation, it was about the importance of developers in the Apple platform, and Epic is one of them. So I think this discussion is related to the article.
No such combination, no 3-th party apps. Don’t get me wrong , I have enormously respect for the developers. I know that they make our life easier, but to do this, they need a ground, they need a platform
I'm sure you can figure out a way to charge people for the source code of an app you write; the costs of such an effort are unknown (presumably high) and the end revenue is also unknown (presumably low). Compare to the costs of dealing with Apple's software stores and the estimated revenue of such. Also compare the time to implement for each approach. Make the decision that feels right for you.