The iPhone will support third-party payments in the US, but don't expect apps to get any cheaper - here's why.
    • kirklennon@kbin.social
      23·
      10 months ago

      If you are a developer, what right does Apple have to seeing your finances for all purchases made in the app that they sold on their store?

      It’s a commission for sales that came from the app, meaning from Apple’s platform, where they have roughly one billion above-average income users with a reputation for buying apps and subscriptions.

      It’s also worth keeping in mind that there are different ways of monetizing platforms, none of which are necessarily morally better or worse than the other. Microsoft’s IDE, Visual Studio, is $45 or $250 per user per month (so $4500 annually for a team of ten). Xcode, Apple’s IDE, is free. A business can offer its apps on the App Store, which also serves the files, for a grand total of $99/year.

      • Pennomi@lemmy.worldEnglish
        18·
        10 months ago

        XCode is also a steaming pile of shit. For example, it took them literal years to get syntax highlighting stable for Swift. You’d just be typing and poof, all the text would turn black.

        • kirklennon@kbin.social
          10·
          10 months ago

          I won’t shed any tears for Amazon etc having to give Apple a huge chunk of cash

          Amazon doesn’t have to give Apple a huge chunk of cash though. Apps don’t pay anything to Apple for real-world stuff being sold. Amazon pays nothing for the tens of billions of dollars purchased every year from iPhones. The only thing they pay Apple for is if someone uses the Prime Video app to buy or rent something or subscribe to Prime Video, but who does not already have an Amazon account (with saved card) that they’re signed into. We’re probably talking a number measured in the thousands of dollars. Uber, for example, pays Apple nothing other than their annual developer account fee (or fees, assuming they have multiple accounts).

          this sounds like a way to frustrate small developers who don’t have a whole team to devote to their finances.

          Nobody is going to actually use this program so there’s no real world extra accounting cost. Previously Apple charged 30% for a combined payment handling and commission. A court determined they had to let developers handle their own payments so Apple complied and said the commission is 27%. It’s invariably cheaper to just stick with Apple’s 30%.

          Everyone always wants more money. Developers would love to pay less; Apple would love to make more. The 30% max fee (in practice less for many developers) has been pretty successful for everyone involved. I think people can quibble over the “right” number, but I don’t think it’s wrong that there’s a sales commission for access to a profitable platform.

      • MonkderZweite@feddit.chEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        It’s a commission for sales that came from the app

        Now where are Apple’s detailed sales reports, poving that this isn’t paid with the device?

  • Eggyhead@kbin.social
    40·
    10 months ago

    Businesses don’t make themselves cheaper for consumers even if they get a chance to cut their overhead. I just don’t see businesses ever do that. Profits “rise” and they circle-jerk about how great they’re doing.

    I’m more interested in getting access to FOSS, indie apps, and apps that Apple is too afraid to be associated with, such as emulators and apps that feature adult content.

    • cooopsspace@infosec.pubEnglish
      3·
      10 months ago

      The whole point of this exercise was that a bigger cut of the app revenue goes to the developers though.

      You know, since the phone manufacturer and payment provider actually doesn’t do any of the development work on the app…

      • maxFapper@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
        2·
        10 months ago

        No, but they do gate keep what can/can’t be installed on their phone quite aggressively.

        That’s why there isn’t a single torrent client for iOS, for example.

  • MiDaBa@lemmy.mlEnglish
    40·
    10 months ago

    This article seems like Apple had to sign off on it before it was published. Having multiple stores from which to choose will certainly lead to lower prices. The best example of this is gaming. Closed systems of digital purchases like Xbox or Nintendo Switch stores almost always have higher prices than the exact same game on PC. Of course on PC I can buy from the ubiquitous Steam, the Microsoft store, Epic, GOG, UBI, EA, itch.io and others. If PC were like an iPhone I would only be able to buy from Microsoft and MS could demand a cut of every game sold outside of their walled garden.

    The fact this writer claims developers would be nothing without Apple is laughable. If Apple closed up shop tomorrow we’d still want and use apps. Apple is not the reason we use apps, they are only a platform that can run the apps we already use.

    • psud@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      10 months ago

      They mean the handset price will go up, since Apple will no longer be able to suck as much app store money from you

      Though I don’t expect many people to take advantage of their new freedom - look at the number of Android users who have ever side loaded apps, or used a store which didn’t come with their phone

    • squid_slime@lemmy.worldEnglish
      24·
      10 months ago

      The literal creation of the problem and making of a solution. I bought my PC, I install applications on my PC, I do not pay MSI, AMD, intel, nvidia, corsair, Linux, ms windows money after the fact. Same goes for android when side loading, its all a silly excuse to cover they’re greed

    • TORFdot0@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      There is no free lunch. Even if you aren’t paying for apps, you are still paying for them. Even FOSS apps, your share is just being paid for by the kindness of the developers or other community members who donate to fund development.