Xed
About
- Username
- Xed
- Joined
- Visits
- 152
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 9,767
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 2,816
Reactions
-
Apple TV+ hits #1 in streaming movies, Top 10 in streaming TV series
-
EU's antitrust head is ignoring Spotify's dominance and wants to punish Apple instead
tmay said:avon b7 said:foregoneconclusion said:avon b7 said:Xed said:avon b7 said:Xed said:avon b7 said:dewme said:jimh2 said:VictorMortimer said:Apple's 30% is highway robbery.Once Apple is forced to allow normal software installation on iDevices, I won't care what they charge. As far as I'm concerned, they can charge 99% on their app store, and I wish they would, it would encourage developers to pull their apps off of it and distribute from their own websites.But since Apple still doesn't let us install software normally, I'm looking forward to the EU punishing them.
Apple will win as the software tools to create an App are not free and $99 is a token amount that assumes they will make money off of the App Store.
It is safe to assume if Apple added a setting to block 3rd party app stores the vast majority of users would select it. The EU is catering to a bunch of grifters with Spotify being the largest. Were I Apple I would drop the price of Apple Music to $0 and choke Spotify out of business.I’ve always felt that Apple priced its developer plans and App Store fees to allow individual and small independent software d
We know, from the billions it has paid out to those developers who charge for their apps, that it's a profitable business.
It's definitely a good deal from a software development perspective but charging for the actual cost of development would definitely deter developers from writing apps for the platform.
This is similar to major OS upgrades that used to be around $129 but then it made more sense for them to be offered for free and increase the amount of people moving up to the latest OS release which developers can then target more easily.
It makes business sense to keep the fees low although I suppose they could even be offered free and still be 'profitable' as a revenue driver and through commissions of the final product.
You may not realize this,, but it used to cost a lot more to be a just a Mac app developer. I think it was around $250 per year and your revenue options were much limited due to much fewer OSes and users to build for.
Obviously that can only be achieved if those same tools are generating revenues elsewhere.
Where those revenues are generated is through commissions and Apple has had monopoly control over those and only modified them under regulatory threat or obligations.
That is not word salad. It's fact based context.
That is enough to demonstrate consumer harm and is undeniable IMO. Apple does not allow consumer choice in App Stores unless a law obliges them to do so. It matters not that multiple Apple stores exist.
As the world has moved into a digital era, a platform 'duopoly' has emerged which needs new laws to regulate. That is why the DMA/DSA were created.
To look at things from a different perspective, if ten independent platforms existed and mergers and takeovers were proposed to reduce those to two in 2024, it would never ever get regulatory approval. Too much influence in two few hands leads to abuse of dominant position. That is what we are seeing.
While I don't support the idea of platform break ups I can see why some people think it's a reasonable proposal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiOUojVd6xQ
-
EU's antitrust head is ignoring Spotify's dominance and wants to punish Apple instead
avon b7 said:Xed said:avon b7 said:dewme said:jimh2 said:VictorMortimer said:Apple's 30% is highway robbery.Once Apple is forced to allow normal software installation on iDevices, I won't care what they charge. As far as I'm concerned, they can charge 99% on their app store, and I wish they would, it would encourage developers to pull their apps off of it and distribute from their own websites.But since Apple still doesn't let us install software normally, I'm looking forward to the EU punishing them.
Apple will win as the software tools to create an App are not free and $99 is a token amount that assumes they will make money off of the App Store.
It is safe to assume if Apple added a setting to block 3rd party app stores the vast majority of users would select it. The EU is catering to a bunch of grifters with Spotify being the largest. Were I Apple I would drop the price of Apple Music to $0 and choke Spotify out of business.I’ve always felt that Apple priced its developer plans and App Store fees to allow individual and small independent software d
We know, from the billions it has paid out to those developers who charge for their apps, that it's a profitable business.
It's definitely a good deal from a software development perspective but charging for the actual cost of development would definitely deter developers from writing apps for the platform.
This is similar to major OS upgrades that used to be around $129 but then it made more sense for them to be offered for free and increase the amount of people moving up to the latest OS release which developers can then target more easily.
It makes business sense to keep the fees low although I suppose they could even be offered free and still be 'profitable' as a revenue driver and through commissions of the final product.
You may not realize this,, but it used to cost a lot more to be a just a Mac app developer. I think it was around $250 per year and your revenue options were much limited due to much fewer OSes and users to build for.
Obviously that can only be achieved if those same tools are generating revenues elsewhere.
Where those revenues are generated is through commissions and Apple has had monopoly control over those and only modified them under regulatory threat or obligations.
That is not word salad. It's fact based context. -
EU's antitrust head is ignoring Spotify's dominance and wants to punish Apple instead
avon b7 said:dewme said:jimh2 said:VictorMortimer said:Apple's 30% is highway robbery.Once Apple is forced to allow normal software installation on iDevices, I won't care what they charge. As far as I'm concerned, they can charge 99% on their app store, and I wish they would, it would encourage developers to pull their apps off of it and distribute from their own websites.But since Apple still doesn't let us install software normally, I'm looking forward to the EU punishing them.
Apple will win as the software tools to create an App are not free and $99 is a token amount that assumes they will make money off of the App Store.
It is safe to assume if Apple added a setting to block 3rd party app stores the vast majority of users would select it. The EU is catering to a bunch of grifters with Spotify being the largest. Were I Apple I would drop the price of Apple Music to $0 and choke Spotify out of business.I’ve always felt that Apple priced its developer plans and App Store fees to allow individual and small independent software d
We know, from the billions it has paid out to those developers who charge for their apps, that it's a profitable business.
It's definitely a good deal from a software development perspective but charging for the actual cost of development would definitely deter developers from writing apps for the platform.
This is similar to major OS upgrades that used to be around $129 but then it made more sense for them to be offered for free and increase the amount of people moving up to the latest OS release which developers can then target more easily.
It makes business sense to keep the fees low although I suppose they could even be offered free and still be 'profitable' as a revenue driver and through commissions of the final product.
You may not realize this,, but it used to cost a lot more to be a just a Mac app developer. I think it was around $250 per year and your revenue options were much limited due to much fewer OSes and users to build for. -
Senator Warren doesn't have a plan to break up Apple, but still wants to pretty badly
tomasulu said:I am all for taking down Apple’s monopolistic powers and leveling the playing field for the rest. Apple iPhone should exist as a separate and standalone bu. It’s fine when apples innovation was industry leading. But now it’s just holding on to past glories.