@daringfireball I don’t know why anyone thought EU mandating alternative stores would mean free access to Apple’s APIs.
If the EU mandates open access to Apple API it’d amount to imminent domain of copyright IP.
Now tell me how you apply that logic to MacOS.
Also, people have already paid for that API: iPhones are not free.
@dmitriid @daringfireball Hi Dimitri!
We’ve been over this before and I don’t see the point in arguing with you again.
I’d discuss this again if you can review our prior conversation and can articulate my position back to me.
Have a great day.
We may have, but I'll reiterate:
- Apple needs developers as much as, if not more than, developers need Apple. iPhone is nothing without the millions of apps Apple keeps boasting about.
- iPhones are not free. Every person that buys an iPhone pays for the development and access to the APIs that power it. It's no different from Apple giving "free access" to the APIs in MacOS
1/
- Apple has literally no right to insert itself into every single transaction between the user and the developer.
- And on top of that we have Apple's own executives saying that they don't care if AppStore is profitable or not and thay yhey don't even track how much loney it brings. So according to Apple *themselves* they don't have to do what they do
2/2
@delric @pixelscience @daringfireball
Ah yes. How could I forget that for every transaction I have with Nike, for example, they have to pay a percentage to every single mall where they have a presence.
Also: why doesn't the retail analogy work with MacOS?
@delric @pixelscience @daringfireball
The "obvious choice" for people who don't remember history, at all. The original iPhone especially was a far from obvious choice.
And to deny the fact that apps made iPhone what it is today is to deny reality.
@pixelscience @daringfireball because Apple has been giving away APIs for free for decades and withholding that under the DMA would be blatantly anticompetitive. I have no problem with charging for APIs. Lots APIs are commercially priced. But exclusively charging developers who don’t use an Apple service? That’s not OK.
The price for APIs should be the same for all developers no matter what store.
@abhibeckert @daringfireball When I say “APIs” I mean Apple-owned closed-source frameworks like UIKit, Core Graphics, hardware drivers, the bootloader, etc.
Things one could describe as the “core technologies” of Apple’s platforms needed by developers to make apps.
If you ever build a platform, or even just write an app, then I hope for all our sake that the government doesn’t come and demand everyone else have free access to your work without letting you decide what fair compensation is.
@pixelscience @abhibeckert @daringfireball You continue to ignore the last sentence. The price should be the same regardless of the store. It isn't.
If I develop a Mac app using UIKit and release it on the web I pay only $99. If I develop a music streaming iOS app and distribute it exclusively under the existing App Store terms I pay only $99. If I develop the same music streaming app and want to distribute it both in the App Store and an Alt Store now I have to pay 0.5/download.
@amonduin @abhibeckert @daringfireball Yes. Apple sets its own pricing for licensing its IP. That includes a 15%~30% commission for one store and a flat per-download rate for alternative distribution.
If it makes you feel better, Apple, Xbox, Steam, and PlayStation didn’t consult me ahead of time for what I think fair store licensing model should be, either.
@amonduin @abhibeckert @daringfireball If I understand you:
- Apple doesn’t charge a flat per-download core technology fee for App Store downloads
- Apple charges for access to their IP is through App Store terms. Ex: 15%~30% retail margin for purchases
- But charging anything for access to Apple IP is steering
If I got that wrong, let me know.
@pixelscience @abhibeckert @daringfireball
If an App dev chooses to use the old terms then:
- Apple charges 0% to Reader apps if they are using the old terms
- Apple charges Walmart/McDonalds 0% for third party IAP
If you choose to accept the option (even if you don't use it) to put your app in third party stores then you are charged 0.5 per download (with Apple's asterisks)
This is steering to the old terms because the same App can be charged 0% or 0.5/download...
@amonduin I think your point about ‘steering’ relates to the DMA’s provisions to prevent gatekeepers from “treat services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself more favourably in ranking than similar services or products offered by third parties on the gatekeeper's platform”.
But why would anyone assume a third party would be treated *more* favorably than first party?
Even if EC decides core technology fee is unfair developers won’t get free access to Apple API.
@pixelscience the difference is a game business can be successful without deploying on Xbox, Steam, or PlayStation - and many are.
That’s not the case with iPhone. There are major industries, including many direct competitors to Apple (such as Spotify) which have to agree to whatever terms Apple comes up with. That’s why Apple is being held to a higher standard than game consoles.
Ultimately it’s up to government to make these decisions.
@abhibeckert Are there are any third-party AAA studios that don’t publish to multiple platforms? It’s been 7 years since I worked at PlayStation DTG. I could be out of touch.
Either way, it’s a courts game for Apple at this point. They have to justify to the EC courts that their behavior is legal.
For us developers that choose to use Apple frameworks I doubt publishing is going to get meaningfully better — different, perhaps — but not better.
It’s worth reading this https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/
Daring Fireball
Michael Critz
amonduin
Sean
Abhi Beckert 🇺🇦
dmitriid
Delric