cropr

macplusplus said:

cropr said:

sflocal said:

Peza said:

sflocal said:

dysamoria said:

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 

If it does not bring "real value" then you do not pay 30% either. How can Apple get 30% while your app doesn't sell? Do you pay an upront fee we're not aware of?

sflocal said:

Peza said:

sflocal said:

dysamoria said:

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.

lkrupp said:

Schiller told Hey what they needed to do and they did it. There was no change of heart on Apple's part. It was all about offering a non-functioning app in the App Store because Hey didn't want to pay Apple for the privilege of being in the App Store.