davidw
About
- Username
- davidw
- Joined
- Visits
- 163
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 4,322
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,050
Reactions
-
Apple's EU App Store changes are extortion, says Spotify
foregoneconclusion said:AppleInsider said:
Reality: Spotify has never had any problems competing with Apple under the prior App Store rules. 99% of their iOS subscribers paid outside the App Store (without any links or communications inside the app) and the remaining 1% were subject to the 15% commission for recurring subscriptions. Spotify's global market share is around 30% while Apple is basically tied with Tencent and Amazon at around 13%.There is also a thought that the fee structure puts Spotify and others in "an untenable situation." With the commission fee and annual fee per install and year, it "equates for us to being the same or worse as under the old rules."
As for Sweeney, Fortnite wasn't originally developed for iOS. It was developed for consoles and PC. That's where Epic made 85% of its revenue. Releasing the game for iOS/Android was to maximize revenues only. If iOS/Android didn't exist as sales platforms, Fortnite would have still been considered wildly successful. And the reality is that the vast majority of wildly successful games that are developed for console and PC are NEVER released on iOS/Android.No, reality is that Spotify pays Apple ZERO in commission as they no longer allow subscribers to pay with their Apple account since the middle of last year. ALL subscription payments must be done through their website now. Which they can now link to in their free iOS app.
And even when Spotify was paying Apple a commission (15% because they were all iOS subscriptions were reoccurring by then), Spotify jacked up their subscription price for iOS users paying with their Apple account by 30%, to cover the 15% commission. And still constantly cry to the media and every government, about how Spofity can't fairly compete with Apple Music because Apple don't have to pay the 30% commission.And now, how is this idiot of a CEO, complaining about being able use Apple IP for free, if he chooses to stay in the Apple App Store? What? He thinks Apple should be paying him, to keep Spotify free app in the Apple App Store? This because of what? He's offering iOS users a "choice" (of music streaming service) and having more choices is good for iOS consumers. Is he thinking Spotify free iOS app increases iPhone sales? Increases "foot traffic" for the Apple App Store, like an Apple Store in a shopping mall?From this article ....>In reference to a 50 cent Euro fee per download every year, the move "is extortion, plain and simple," the CEO believes. "If Apple's already charging a commission of 17% (and 10% for recurring payments) on digital goods purchased, why would they also need to charge an annual flat fee for every user?"<Plus, the choice is either to remain in the Apple App Store and pay a commission (10/13% or 17/20% depending on payment method) or leave the Apple App Store and pay the annual install fee (per user account after 1M). It is not both. If you leave the Apple App Store one only pays the install fee (after 1M) to cover the use of Apple IP to profit from. There is no commission on the sale or any IAP using the app. Does this idiot of a CEO also think that Spotify shouldn't have to pay the artist and songwriters any royalties, for the use of their IP, to profit from?
-
Firefox wants to level the browser playing field with Microsoft, Google, and Apple
>In a recent blog post, Mozilla expressed concerns about how tech companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft use tactics to ensure users pick their browsers instead of independent options like Firefox.<Mozilla claim loses a lot of credibility when they include Microsoft ...... for using tactics to ensure users pick their browsers instead of independent options like Firefox. Last i checked, MS Windows still have over 70% share of the World computer market and about 30% of the World OS market share (when including mobile OS ). But their Edge browser only have about 6% of the market share. That means over 50% of Microsoft Windows users are not using what should be Microsoft own browser. So unless Microsoft is picking Chrome to be their browser on Windows, they can't be accused of using tactics to ensure users pick their browsers instead of independent options like Firefox.
-
Apple asks UK to dismiss $1 billion App Store class action suit
>However, the claimants' lawyer Paul Stanley, has reportedly said in court filings that Apple "has come to the UK to offer services to UK businesses on a UK market and has abused its position by overcharging them." <That is so wrong. Apple is offering services to UK businesses on a world wide market. If the only market that UK businesses were able to sell their apps to when using the Apple App Store, was just the UK market, then nearly all of the UK businesses would be paying a 15% commission as hardly any of them would be making over the $1M in annual sales (post commission), to be subject to the 30% commission. There's a huge difference between only having access to the UK market with about 35M Apple device users and having access to the 2B Apple device users world wide.Even at 30% commission, that is not being overcharged when one is placing their products in a store, that is on 2B Apple devices worldwide. And it doesn't matter to Apple, where the developers (that are making money with their apps in the Apple App Store), are located around the World.
-
Apple's App Store anti-steering rules are gone, but the replacement isn't much better
Respite said:
You have a real talent for pushing into conversations and zeroing in with laser focus on the periphery of the point. Notwithstanding the fact that what you've said is largely incorrect, Fortnite currency is transferrable across all platforms except the Nintendo Switch (and iOS, obvs).davidw said:Respite said:
What do you mean eligible?ericthehalfbee said:The judge should have simply said anti-steering is not allowed for ELIGIBLE purchases. Meaning Spotify or Netflix can link to outside payments for their subscriptions, but normal IAP (like tokens in a game) still have to remain in-App.
You've always been able to buy Fortnite currency outside of iOS, Apple don't prohibit that.Not quite. The way it works with digital currency with nearly all IAP in games, is that the players (of certain games) can only spend the digital currency purchased on a certain platform, only when playing on that platform.In other words, when playing Fortnite on a PlayStation, the only Fortnite Bucks available are the ones you purchased using a PlayStation. If you also have an Xbox, any Fortnite Bucks you purchased on the Xbox platform, can not be spent while playing Fortnite on a PlayStation.This makes perfect sense for MS, Sony, Nintendo, Apple and Google For example, why should MS allow their Xbox players to use the free Xbox app to play Fortnite, while allowing them to spend Fortnite Bucks that were purchased on another platform, from which MS did not earn a commission from? Or even worse, discounted Fortnite Bucks on Epic own website. If this were the case, all Fortnite players would just purchase the discounted Fortnite Bucks from Epic, while not paying a commission to the platform owners on which they are playing Fortnite using a free app.Purchases that do transfer across platforms are the purchases paid with Fortnite Bucks. For example, if you purchased $20 in Fortnite Bucks ($10 in real dollars) on an Xbox and spent $10 in Fortnite Bucks for a cool outfit, MS got their 30% commission ($3 in real dollars) for the purchase of $20 in Fortnite Bucks and the cool outfit you purchase will be available on all the platforms you play Fortnite on (logged your account) but the $10 in Fortnite Bucks you have left over can only be spent while playing on the Xbox. It would be unfair for Sony if you were able use the left over $10 (in Fortnite Bucks) on a PlayStation as Sony did not get any commission for that $10 (in Fortnite Bucks).MS, Sony and Nintendo gets "paid" for hosting the free Fortnite app on their platform, from the commission they earn on the purchase of Fortnite Bucks using the free Fortnite app on their platform. Why shouldn't Apple and Google get "paid" for hosting the free Fortnite app on their platform?This is/was also true for mobile platforms (Android and iOS). But by offering iOS and Android Fortnite Bucks outside their app stores, it got Epic kicked out of the Apple and Google Play apps stores.So "always" wasn't too long and surely it wasn't before Epic violated apps stores policies. And if you were following the Epic vs Apple case, the Judge forced Epic to pay Apple the commission from the sale of Fortnite Bucks outside of the Apple App Store. It seems that iOS users that already had the Fortnite app downloaded were still able play Fortnite and continue to purchase Fortnite Bucks from Epic website. But the Fortnite app could not be updated to the latest game play.And if you followed closely on what was happening when Epic made discounted Fortnite Bucks available to iOS (that got them kicked out of the Apple App Store), Epic had to discount Fortnite Bucks on all platforms by the same 20%. This to be fair to players on platforms by MS, Sony and Nintendo. So not only did Epic have to pay back Apple their 30% commission on all the Fortnite Bucks sold on their own website, they loss 20% on the sale of Fortnite Bucks on all platforms, while this was going on.Add this to the Judge ruling that Epic must pay Apple legal fees (at least some of it), how can one not be a Nelson Muntz and yell out ..... Ha-Ha .... while pointing at Sweeney.
You were always able to buy Fortnite currency outside of iOS and you can buy Fortnite game content outside of iOS. My question was what ericthehalfbee meant by eligible.Epic "share wallet" has only been around for about 3 years. In fact, Sony just joined the party about a year and a half ago (5/2022). Nintendo is still holding out.When Epic got kicked out for violating Apple App Store policies, what I posted was correct at the time. MS, Sony, Nintendo, Google and Apple did not allow their platform Fortnite Bucks, to be purchased outside their platforms. The commission they made from IAP of Fortnite Bucks was how they all got "paid", for hosting the free Fortnite app.So it has never been .... always. It's more like .... just recently ..... that Epic VBucks purchased on one platform, can be share with another platform, except Nintendo (for now).What ericthehalfbee was referring to was that Apple has never allowed the IAP of any digital currency that is to be spent in an iOS game, to be paid for outside of that game app. What were "eligible" IAP were payments for subscription for content services like Netflix, Spotify, WSJ, most video/audio streaming services and magazines. These are referred to as "reader apps" by Apple.But up until now, even these "reader apps" were not allowed to advertise that payment could be made on their websites or provide a link to their websites, inside their app. Now they will be allowed to, still with no condition of having to pay a commission.However, IAP for digital currency will still be subject to paying a commission, even if payments are made outside of the app, on the developers own websites and using the developer own payment systems.On a side note, MS was trying to (and probably still is), get their Steam like game streaming app, into the Apple App Store, claiming the app is a content streaming "reader app". No different than the likes of Netflix, Spotify and WSJ.
-
Apple's App Store anti-steering rules are gone, but the replacement isn't much better
Respite said:
What do you mean eligible?ericthehalfbee said:The judge should have simply said anti-steering is not allowed for ELIGIBLE purchases. Meaning Spotify or Netflix can link to outside payments for their subscriptions, but normal IAP (like tokens in a game) still have to remain in-App.
You've always been able to buy Fortnite currency outside of iOS, Apple don't prohibit that.Not quite. The way it works with digital currency with nearly all IAP in games, is that the players (of certain games) can only spend the digital currency purchased on a certain platform, only when playing on that platform.In other words, when playing Fortnite on a PlayStation, the only Fortnite Bucks available are the ones you purchased using a PlayStation. If you also have an Xbox, any Fortnite Bucks you purchased on the Xbox platform, can not be spent while playing Fortnite on a PlayStation.This makes perfect sense for MS, Sony, Nintendo, Apple and Google For example, why should MS allow their Xbox players to use the free Xbox app to play Fortnite, while allowing them to spend Fortnite Bucks that were purchased on another platform, from which MS did not earn a commission from? Or even worse, discounted Fortnite Bucks on Epic own website. If this were the case, all Fortnite players would just purchase the discounted Fortnite Bucks from Epic, while not paying a commission to the platform owners on which they are playing Fortnite using a free app.Purchases that do transfer across platforms are the purchases paid with Fortnite Bucks. For example, if you purchased $20 in Fortnite Bucks ($10 in real dollars) on an Xbox and spent $10 in Fortnite Bucks for a cool outfit, MS got their 30% commission ($3 in real dollars) for the purchase of $20 in Fortnite Bucks and the cool outfit you purchase will be available on all the platforms you play Fortnite on (logged your account) but the $10 in Fortnite Bucks you have left over can only be spent while playing on the Xbox. It would be unfair for Sony if you were able use the left over $10 (in Fortnite Bucks) on a PlayStation as Sony did not get any commission for that $10 (in Fortnite Bucks).MS, Sony and Nintendo gets "paid" for hosting the free Fortnite app on their platform, from the commission they earn on the purchase of Fortnite Bucks using the free Fortnite app on their platform. Why shouldn't Apple and Google get "paid" for hosting the free Fortnite app on their platform?This is/was also true for mobile platforms (Android and iOS). But by offering iOS and Android Fortnite Bucks outside their app stores, it got Epic kicked out of the Apple and Google Play apps stores.So "always" wasn't too long and surely it wasn't before Epic violated apps stores policies. And if you were following the Epic vs Apple case, the Judge forced Epic to pay Apple the commission from the sale of Fortnite Bucks outside of the Apple App Store. It seems that iOS users that already had the Fortnite app downloaded were still able play Fortnite and continue to purchase Fortnite Bucks from Epic website. But the Fortnite app could not be updated to the latest game play.And if you followed closely on what was happening when Epic made discounted Fortnite Bucks available to iOS (that got them kicked out of the Apple App Store), Epic had to discount Fortnite Bucks on all platforms by the same 20%. This to be fair to players on platforms by MS, Sony and Nintendo. So not only did Epic have to pay back Apple their 30% commission on all the Fortnite Bucks sold on their own website, they loss 20% on the sale of Fortnite Bucks on all platforms, while this was going on.Add this to the Judge ruling that Epic must pay Apple legal fees (at least some of it), how can one not be a Nelson Muntz and yell out ..... Ha-Ha .... while pointing at Sweeney.
