6 ms·

This is simply savvy maneuvering by apple. Frequently these cases are appealed and new terms introduced to the judgement. Apple doesn’t want to give away any n

by wetjen 5y ago

This is simply savvy maneuvering by apple. Frequently these cases are appealed and new terms introduced to the judgement. Apple doesn’t want to give away any negotiating position until this is fully resolved.

lwansbrough 5y ago
Savvy is one way to put it. As an app developer it simply makes me not want to work with Apple at all, but of course I'm forced to for some reason.
- verytrivial 5y ago
  As a user I don't buy Apple due to how it preys upon developers.
- mdoms 5y ago
  No one is forced to work with apple. I've been developing software for 15 years and never once touched xcode or iOS. Working with apple is a choice you make.
  - MikeDelta 5y ago
    If you want to sell mobile apps that you cannot run from a browser, then choosing not to enter Apple's ecosystem will keep you from a very large user base. It is a choice you make, but with significant business consequences.
  - lwansbrough 5y ago
    Yes well good for you. I'm not sure what kind of software you're developing but it obviously isn't consumer facing mobile apps. So perhaps your anecdata is irrelevant in this case, yes? Apple is a gatekeeper that no one who is buying their phones cares about. People buy iPhones because their friends have iPhones, that's it. But Apple treats developing for Apple as a special privilege and locks down their massive ecosystem. It should be illegal at the scale Apple has, but it isn't. So yes, we are forced to work with Apple in order to be competitive in industries that Apple has no business controlling. You don't have that problem with whatever you develop because (presumably) Microsoft doesn't exploit Windows' market advantage in the way Apple does.
    - dolni 5y ago
      > Apple is a gatekeeper that no one who is buying their phones cares about. I don't buy Apple devices primarily due to the way they administrate the app store and how they treat developers. I would consider buying an iPhone otherwise. So yes, there are people who care.
    - mdoms 5y ago
      I write consumer facing software among many other things. I do not and will not write iPhone software. Apple users can access a (single, Apple-provided) web browser.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  Why? I'm excited that a billon dollar company is not treated differently than an indie. I would have hated to negotiate specific terms with Apple and get a bad deal like the way it happens with cloud providers, for example. IMHO, if the commission of Apple or any other rule is to be changed, it should change for everyone(a regulation maybe?). I hated it when Epic simply steamrolled the external payment rule. I don't like others getting away with stuff simply because they can, I find it unfair. Apple could have let it happen, then maybe a few more giants like Netflix, Google and Amazon would have done and as a result we would end up with 2 tier business environment, like the way it is for most of the stuff outside of the AppStore.
  - spywaregorilla 5y ago
    Feels like a weird cognizant dissonance to me. You should antagonize apple for abusing its position against all developers, not celebrate them for not doing it only against the little guy.
    - mrtksn 5y ago
      I don’t think it’s an abuse, it’s simply a business. Apple holds the minority share of smartphones WW. It’s perfectly possible not to do work on their platform if the terms are not good. I’m annoyed when they sherlock someone but not when they stick to the agreement they made with the developers.
      - ApolloFortyNine 5y ago
        In the vast majority of markets where having apps is simply secondary to the core business, it's rather impossible to succeed without both an android and an apple app. In the US its practically 50/50, and being forced to write off 50% of the US, who have no other way to install your app, is ridiculous. And a 30% cut is absolutely massive, for comparison, Walmarts profit margin in 2020 was 3%. That it has been allowed to continue this long is simply a failure of government.
        5y ago
- redwall_hp 5y ago
  Don't forget the long history of "Sherlocking." If you make a utility that enhances the experience enough, they'll simply imitate it and give you the middle finger. Or a $99/year fee to give away FOSS projects...
  - m-p-3 5y ago
    Apple would at least get some goodwill of the FOSS community if they offered free publishing when an app is linked to an open-source code repository.
jlmorton 5y ago
Is it really that savvy? The golden goose is the iPhone itself, and the network effects of things like iMessage that keep people there. Services have a high margin, and make up a substantial chunk of Apple's profits, but they are dependent on a big iOS ecosystem. Fortnite has 116 million iOS users, and a lot of them are pretty into the game. I don't think keeping Fortnite off iOS is going to have an immediate impact on people's buying decisions, but each time a dispute like this happens, more and more people are going to take notice of the fact that they can't play Fortnite on an iPhone, they can't buy a Kindle book on an iPhone, etc. I doubt any of these individually amount to a purchasing decision, but over time Android might be seen as more broadly useful.
- barelysapient 5y ago
  I bet you're right--Apple would prefer to have Fortnite and and corresponding revenue and userbase back on their platform. But this case isn't over. There's almost certain to be an appealed. Apple wants to maximize their position in the event the next judgement is less favorable. And the short-term cost of users and revenue is worthwhile hedge against the unknown.

by wetjen 5y ago

lwansbrough 5y ago

Savvy is one way to put it. As an app developer it simply makes me not want to work with Apple at all, but of course I'm forced to for some reason.

verytrivial 5y ago
As a user I don't buy Apple due to how it preys upon developers.
mdoms 5y ago
No one is forced to work with apple. I've been developing software for 15 years and never once touched xcode or iOS. Working with apple is a choice you make.
- MikeDelta 5y ago
  If you want to sell mobile apps that you cannot run from a browser, then choosing not to enter Apple's ecosystem will keep you from a very large user base. It is a choice you make, but with significant business consequences.
- lwansbrough 5y ago
  Yes well good for you. I'm not sure what kind of software you're developing but it obviously isn't consumer facing mobile apps. So perhaps your anecdata is irrelevant in this case, yes? Apple is a gatekeeper that no one who is buying their phones cares about. People buy iPhones because their friends have iPhones, that's it. But Apple treats developing for Apple as a special privilege and locks down their massive ecosystem. It should be illegal at the scale Apple has, but it isn't. So yes, we are forced to work with Apple in order to be competitive in industries that Apple has no business controlling. You don't have that problem with whatever you develop because (presumably) Microsoft doesn't exploit Windows' market advantage in the way Apple does.
  - dolni 5y ago
    > Apple is a gatekeeper that no one who is buying their phones cares about. I don't buy Apple devices primarily due to the way they administrate the app store and how they treat developers. I would consider buying an iPhone otherwise. So yes, there are people who care.
  - mdoms 5y ago
    I write consumer facing software among many other things. I do not and will not write iPhone software. Apple users can access a (single, Apple-provided) web browser.
mrtksn 5y ago
Why? I'm excited that a billon dollar company is not treated differently than an indie. I would have hated to negotiate specific terms with Apple and get a bad deal like the way it happens with cloud providers, for example. IMHO, if the commission of Apple or any other rule is to be changed, it should change for everyone(a regulation maybe?). I hated it when Epic simply steamrolled the external payment rule. I don't like others getting away with stuff simply because they can, I find it unfair. Apple could have let it happen, then maybe a few more giants like Netflix, Google and Amazon would have done and as a result we would end up with 2 tier business environment, like the way it is for most of the stuff outside of the AppStore.
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  Feels like a weird cognizant dissonance to me. You should antagonize apple for abusing its position against all developers, not celebrate them for not doing it only against the little guy.
  - mrtksn 5y ago
    I don’t think it’s an abuse, it’s simply a business. Apple holds the minority share of smartphones WW. It’s perfectly possible not to do work on their platform if the terms are not good. I’m annoyed when they sherlock someone but not when they stick to the agreement they made with the developers.
    - ApolloFortyNine 5y ago
      In the vast majority of markets where having apps is simply secondary to the core business, it's rather impossible to succeed without both an android and an apple app. In the US its practically 50/50, and being forced to write off 50% of the US, who have no other way to install your app, is ridiculous. And a 30% cut is absolutely massive, for comparison, Walmarts profit margin in 2020 was 3%. That it has been allowed to continue this long is simply a failure of government.
      - 5y ago
redwall_hp 5y ago
Don't forget the long history of "Sherlocking." If you make a utility that enhances the experience enough, they'll simply imitate it and give you the middle finger. Or a $99/year fee to give away FOSS projects...
- m-p-3 5y ago
  Apple would at least get some goodwill of the FOSS community if they offered free publishing when an app is linked to an open-source code repository.

jlmorton 5y ago

Is it really that savvy? The golden goose is the iPhone itself, and the network effects of things like iMessage that keep people there. Services have a high margin, and make up a substantial chunk of Apple's profits, but they are dependent on a big iOS ecosystem. Fortnite has 116 million iOS users, and a lot of them are pretty into the game. I don't think keeping Fortnite off iOS is going to have an immediate impact on people's buying decisions, but each time a dispute like this happens, more and more people are going to take notice of the fact that they can't play Fortnite on an iPhone, they can't buy a Kindle book on an iPhone, etc. I doubt any of these individually amount to a purchasing decision, but over time Android might be seen as more broadly useful.

barelysapient 5y ago
I bet you're right--Apple would prefer to have Fortnite and and corresponding revenue and userbase back on their platform. But this case isn't over. There's almost certain to be an appealed. Apple wants to maximize their position in the event the next judgement is less favorable. And the short-term cost of users and revenue is worthwhile hedge against the unknown.