Malicious Compliance? Welcome to what companies do. Apple is not going to just sit back and make less money.
And as a shareholder I am very happy they’re not just sitting back and allowing those EU geriatrics to negatively, and purposefully, manipulate their bottom line.
Sweeney wants a free ride. He wants Apple to provide and maintain a platform that delivers an enormous and lucrative customer base to him, for free. He then wants to be free to ignore the quality, safety and security standards that is the hallmark of that platform, so that he has open access to foist his predatory practices on Apple's customers who would have no recourse short of legal action or pleading for more regulatory actions and penalties.
Lest anyone forget the record, Sweeney just wants to do the things that Apple won't let him do:
Sweeney wants a free ride. He wants Apple to provide and maintain a platform that delivers an enormous and lucrative customer base to him, for free. He then wants to be free to ignore the quality, safety and security standards that is the hallmark of that platform, so that he has open access to foist his predatory practices on Apple's customers who would have no recourse short of legal action or pleading for more regulatory actions and penalties.
Lest anyone forget the record, Sweeney just wants to do the things that Apple won't let him do:
Sweeney works for the Chinese communists. The entire EU is like a vessel for Chinese communists because they are so dependent on China. Why is anyone surprised ?
As a developer myself, the 30% fee is chump change when you consider what us developers had to do prior to the App Store, and prior to the modern smartphone. We had to advertise our software, handle payments, and provide packaged software products, etc... it was hard. For Apple, its bread-and-butter are the customers that buy its products and works hard to keep those customers coming back for more. Customers are where Apple keeps its focus on, NOT developers. Developers have the privilege of accessing hundreds of millions of those hard-earned customers on a platform that is provided, maintained, and improved upon BY Apple. Developers nowadays have it easy, yet a vocal few demand that Apple provide that entire infrastructure for free. Screw you. You're an embarrassment to us legit developers.
Those losers essentially want the iPhone to be like Android. Good luck with that.
As a developer myself, the 30% fee is chump change when you consider what us developers had to do prior to the App Store, and prior to the modern smartphone. We had to advertise our software, handle payments, and provide packaged software products, etc... it was hard. For Apple, its bread-and-butter are the customers that buy its products and works hard to keep those customers coming back for more. Customers are where Apple keeps its focus on, NOT developers. Developers have the privilege of accessing hundreds of millions of those hard-earned customers on a platform that is provided, maintained, and improved upon BY Apple. Developers nowadays have it easy, yet a vocal few demand that Apple provide that entire infrastructure for free. Screw you. You're an embarrassment to us legit developers.
Those losers essentially want the iPhone to be like Android. Good luck with that.
This right here is it. Only sixteen years ago, the software market was a lot harder for developers and likewise, a lot harder for customers. Because of the reasons above, it was usually expensive, and particularly when considering buying a program from a small, unfamiliar-to-you developer had a real downside risk. Would it be compatible with your hardware, or your operating system, or your other applications, etc.? Would the UI be confusing? If ordered from the software vendor, could you trust them with your credit card info? Software was generally expensive, particularly for small developers, because they couldn't rely on volume sales, so recovering up-front costs for printing, packaging, payment systems etc, had to be priced in, which immediately decreases the number of customers who will take a risk and try something new.
By eliminating complications and costs for developers, the App Store presented a marketplace with a lot of active customers, and a low per-unit distribution cost, resulting in inexpensively priced apps that are easy and low-risk for customers to download and try. It's only 99¢ and I pay for it through Apple, who already have my payment info? There's no risk it'll crash my phone? I can completely delete it if I don't like it? Okay! I'll try that! That's not how any of this worked only sixteen years ago. Now, there's a multi-billion-dollar market built just on that.
Problem is the €0,50 fee for free apps (that includes apps that are initially free and require an optional subscription). If many users download those apps are only a small percentage is willing to subscribe this can be really bad for the developer of the app. Looks like a poison pill that was added to prevent developers to choose the EU model.
As a developer myself, the 30% fee is chump change when you consider what us developers had to do prior to the App Store, and prior to the modern smartphone. We had to advertise our software, handle payments, and provide packaged software products, etc... it was hard. For Apple, its bread-and-butter are the customers that buy its products and works hard to keep those customers coming back for more. Customers are where Apple keeps its focus on, NOT developers. Developers have the privilege of accessing hundreds of millions of those hard-earned customers on a platform that is provided, maintained, and improved upon BY Apple. Developers nowadays have it easy, yet a vocal few demand that Apple provide that entire infrastructure for free. Screw you. You're an embarrassment to us legit developers.
Those losers essentially want the iPhone to be like Android. Good luck with that.
This right here is it. Only sixteen years ago, the software market was a lot harder for developers and likewise, a lot harder for customers. Because of the reasons above, it was usually expensive, and particularly when considering buying a program from a small, unfamiliar-to-you developer had a real downside risk. Would it be compatible with your hardware, or your operating system, or your other applications, etc.? Would the UI be confusing? If ordered from the software vendor, could you trust them with your credit card info? Software was generally expensive, particularly for small developers, because they couldn't rely on volume sales, so recovering up-front costs for printing, packaging, payment systems etc, had to be priced in, which immediately decreases the number of customers who will take a risk and try something new.
By eliminating complications and costs for developers, the App Store presented a marketplace with a lot of active customers, and a low per-unit distribution cost, resulting in inexpensively priced apps that are easy and low-risk for customers to download and try. It's only 99¢ and I pay for it through Apple, who already have my payment info? There's no risk it'll crash my phone? I can completely delete it if I don't like it? Okay! I'll try that! That's not how any of this worked only sixteen years ago. Now, there's a multi-billion-dollar market built just on that.
1 )IIRC, the app stores that did exist before the iOS App Store charged even more money and had a considerably smaller user base.
2) These people that think Apple should get nothing don't seem to understand (or maybe they simply don't care) that Apple earning revenue from the App Store drives the IDE, APIs, frameworks, and all other aspects that have made building apps on all of Apple's HW a comparably great experience. As a user, I don't want this development to go away because there's no longer a carrot to be had.
Malicious Compliance? Welcome to what companies do. Apple is not going to just sit back and make less money.
And presumably the EU won't just sit back and allow malicious compliance. It won't be long before we see how Apple's concessions (?) play out with competition authorities.
Malicious Compliance? Welcome to what companies do. Apple is not going to just sit back and make less money.
And presumably the EU won't just sit back and allow malicious compliance. It won't be long before we see how Apple's concessions (?) play out with competition authorities.
It will never be enough.........The EU wants tech parity with the USA any way they can get it.
Malicious Compliance? Welcome to what companies do. Apple is not going to just sit back and make less money.
And presumably the EU won't just sit back and allow malicious compliance. It won't be long before we see how Apple's concessions (?) play out with competition authorities.
If the EU regulators just start making up new rules as they go along, and maybe also hit Apple for tens of billions in fines for not correctly predicting those new rules in advance, and if the EU appellate courts allow a system like that to stand, then Apple will just have to realize that the EU is no longer a viable marketplace.
Malicious Compliance? Welcome to what companies do. Apple is not going to just sit back and make less money.
And presumably the EU won't just sit back and allow malicious compliance. It won't be long before we see how Apple's concessions (?) play out with competition authorities.
If the EU regulators just start making up new rules as they go along, and maybe also hit Apple for tens of billions in fines for not correctly predicting those new rules in advance, and if the EU appellate courts allow a system like that to stand, then Apple will just have to realize that the EU is no longer a viable marketplace.
Considering most people own smartphones and that isn't going to change any time soon, the market is very viable as well as huge.
The EU isn't making up new rules as they go. The are the result of numerous steps (including industry consultation and impact assessments) that will be refined over time.
I met someone that works for Epic what they thought about the whole Apple vs Epic debate. “No comment”, is all you get. That is all they’re allowed and told to say.
Comments
so can Apple
Lest anyone forget the record, Sweeney just wants to do the things that Apple won't let him do:
Fortnite Video Game Maker Epic Games to Pay More Than Half a Billion Dollars over FTC Allegations of Privacy Violations and Unwanted Charges
By eliminating complications and costs for developers, the App Store presented a marketplace with a lot of active customers, and a low per-unit distribution cost, resulting in inexpensively priced apps that are easy and low-risk for customers to download and try. It's only 99¢ and I pay for it through Apple, who already have my payment info? There's no risk it'll crash my phone? I can completely delete it if I don't like it? Okay! I'll try that! That's not how any of this worked only sixteen years ago. Now, there's a multi-billion-dollar market built just on that.
2) These people that think Apple should get nothing don't seem to understand (or maybe they simply don't care) that Apple earning revenue from the App Store drives the IDE, APIs, frameworks, and all other aspects that have made building apps on all of Apple's HW a comparably great experience. As a user, I don't want this development to go away because there's no longer a carrot to be had.
The EU isn't making up new rules as they go. The are the result of numerous steps (including industry consultation and impact assessments) that will be refined over time.