The risk is developers pull or stop updating their App Store version and try to force you use their side loading version.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
App Store to Be 'Split in Two' Ahead of EU iPhone Sideloading Deadline
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
IT's not that simple. ...if the commission goes away the market will force the price down and the starving artists will get the same amount of money they were getting. After all the term "starving artists" wasn't coined after the iPhone gained market dominance.
Actually it is that simple. If the "starving artist" is selling his or her own creation directly, they can "control" the price for their offering. It won't get pressured down by many competitors selling their app if they are their own seller of their app. The only competition they could endure- which would be the same in the "as is" model- is other "artists" creating a very similar app and buyers opting for the other app instead.
So, app creator feels competitive pressure to be sure their app is the most desirable one among competitors. That's good for us app consumers.
But as controller of their app, they can charge whatever they want for their app, including- if they wished- MORE than it was previously offered in the App Store. Get too greedy and competitor "artists" will see an opportunity to offer similar functionality for less... so that threat of competition somewhat polices the "too greedy" scenario. Again, this is good for us consumers too.
However, no need to cut their own throat to "< 30% off the top" if they are in control of their own pricing. But they could opt for- say- keeping a chunk of what was going to Apple while still passing through a better price to consumers. Again, this would good for us consumers too... while greatly benefiting the "artist" as well.
The only scenario where we consumers lose in such an arrangement is the "get very greedy" for a highly desired app scenario. Again, competition seeing high demand but too-high pricing will clone the desired functionality and offer competitive pricing. So our short-term loss becomes a long-term gain.
The only scenario where the "artist" loses is in opportunity loss by perhaps pulling their app from the App Store and finding that even with the 30% cut, they made more money by being there than going their own way. If I'm this developer, I don't pull my app from the App Store to maintain those sales... but I probably do sell direct too for a lower price. Customers who buy direct from me will be more profitable sales while getting a lower price. Customers who will only buy my app from the App Store can still buy my app from the App Store.
Last edited:
There will be the typical unintended consequences that governments never think of. Prior to the third-party store the rules were clear cut for the developer as they knew about the 30% cut as it was readily available information. Claiming no knowledge is like not realizing you have to pay income tax. That is not to mention the same rules applied to every developer with some exceptions for the very big developers. This is to be expected as that is the way it works in retail stores. The biggest customers exert more control over the retailer.
Now that there is competition it will be easy for Apple to run it like a real store to the detriment of the third party store. No company will be able to quit the App Store because that is where the high value customers are and since it will morph into a real store developers will be in the position of having to negotiate with Apple in order to their app in the store. Apple can also arbitrarily undercut the 3rd party store going so far as to match the price or sell it for less than the other store even if it is at a loss (developer would still get their negotiated fee). It will be fun to watch the 3rd party store and developers bleed to death when this happens. If it is $10 in the App Store and $7 in the 3rd party store and Apple cuts the price to $6 the 3rd party store will have to as well. Now the developer will still get their $7 from Apple, but only $6 from the 3rd party meaning no one is going to buy from them. Once people come back to the App Store Apple can float the price upwards.
Another side effect could be having to pay Apple a licensing fee (just like Steam and other games systems/platforms) in order to access their API's to develop products that operate on iOS which Apple owns 100% and the consumer is only licensing like every other software product in the world. Keep in mind that nobody rides for free and the 3rd party stores and their developers will not either.
Yet another is adding a significant number Apple only API's or slowing down 3rd party apps or limiting their interoperability with certain aspects of the phone. After all it is their OS and they can do as they see fit. I am confident we will see Apple only features for those who stay within the walled garden.
There could also be extended warranties for those staying out of 3rd party stores.
The third party store is a pipe dream because they are only considering the upsides. I'll equate to everyone's first job when you find out that the $20/hour you are getting for 40 hours a week results in a check that is significantly less the $800 you earned.
Now that there is competition it will be easy for Apple to run it like a real store to the detriment of the third party store. No company will be able to quit the App Store because that is where the high value customers are and since it will morph into a real store developers will be in the position of having to negotiate with Apple in order to their app in the store. Apple can also arbitrarily undercut the 3rd party store going so far as to match the price or sell it for less than the other store even if it is at a loss (developer would still get their negotiated fee). It will be fun to watch the 3rd party store and developers bleed to death when this happens. If it is $10 in the App Store and $7 in the 3rd party store and Apple cuts the price to $6 the 3rd party store will have to as well. Now the developer will still get their $7 from Apple, but only $6 from the 3rd party meaning no one is going to buy from them. Once people come back to the App Store Apple can float the price upwards.
Another side effect could be having to pay Apple a licensing fee (just like Steam and other games systems/platforms) in order to access their API's to develop products that operate on iOS which Apple owns 100% and the consumer is only licensing like every other software product in the world. Keep in mind that nobody rides for free and the 3rd party stores and their developers will not either.
Yet another is adding a significant number Apple only API's or slowing down 3rd party apps or limiting their interoperability with certain aspects of the phone. After all it is their OS and they can do as they see fit. I am confident we will see Apple only features for those who stay within the walled garden.
There could also be extended warranties for those staying out of 3rd party stores.
The third party store is a pipe dream because they are only considering the upsides. I'll equate to everyone's first job when you find out that the $20/hour you are getting for 40 hours a week results in a check that is significantly less the $800 you earned.
What's funny is, you are also calling Apple's Mac to be 'balkanized nonsense'
Not in the way you think. Why do you think that EU e.g. laughs at those sticker over screw holes in electronics that says "warranty void if removed"? Because those kind of absurd rules does not and never will apply within the EU.
EU is not perfect, but it sure is better (and safer) than anything the oligarchy we call USA can come up with.
Sure. Now remind us, where are all those apps that force you to go outside of the Google Play store on Android?
Oh right, there aren’t any.
Well there is fortnight but it left iOS as well.
That will not happen as the only way to be discovered will be the 1st party store. With the exception of a few zealots and cheapskates very few people will venture outside of the store because it is too easy to use.
In the end the developers are going to pay Apple either by being in the store or a licensing fee for accessing iOS. I expect per download just like all of the game platforms. No one rides for free.
It should be technically feasible to disable or safeguard the private APIs for side-loaded apps. Whatever automated checks Apple is performing in their app review process regarding API usage, they can also perform on-device for side-loaded apps.
Valid point. But the end consumer and company will have to both agree on two things:
1. The company would rather prefer to do all the work themselves (hosting, billing, updating etc) to maintain the app.
2. The consumer has to think that side-loading the app is worth it to keep using the app.
I think seeing any fleeing from the app store has to be proven first.
It’s why we can’t have nice things; someone always wants to spoil it for everyone else. Lowest common denominator and all that.
Yes, some bad apps may have infiltrated, but were quickly disabled by Apple once discovered, protecting all users.
True, Macs and PCs can download from everywhere, reason why they may need an antivirus. I don’t want that to happen to my phone too, because it will slow it down and also reduce battery life.
I understand and you want your medicine for free. I understand fulfilling short term desires leads to long term problems. I support paying for research by voting with my wallet. I dont like a companies product, I don't buy it. I dont try to force them to sell it to me under my business plan.
I'm talking buying apps as in paying for them in response to the part of your post that talked about now being able to avoid commision etc. The customer already can buy apps direct from other sources. Matter of fact you have to in many cases. You can't buy some exclusively from the app store today even if you wanted to. Try buying NEtflix and Spotify from the app store for example. Good luck. Even some small players bypass the app store commission by not allowing the customer to make their purchase on the app store.
And the one example I know of off the top of my head that combats the app store commission in a different way is Google which charges an extra ~30% for Youtube Premium in the app store.
You can jailbreak your phone now and develop any OS you want. There is no one forcing you to use iOS except that no complete loser living in their mothers basement has been willing to dedicate their life to an impossible task that even if created would still only be downloaded by a few zealots.
Except that Meta and everyone else would still have to observe the very strict EU regulations regarding tracking…
As opposed to now?
I think you are focusing on all of the worst parts, but ignoring the best parts.
Without a $99/year fee, I no longer need to sell my app. I can host it on AWS instead and give it away for free. I can remove all of the subscription BS from it, because I don't need $200 in yearly sales to make $99 every year.
I can make small utilities, like that exist on other platforms, without needing to charge for them.
You see doom and gloom. I see a glorious revolution in small utilities.
I always like it will never happen comments; a good example is cable when people were trying to force it to be à la carte, and people like myself said it would cost more, and look how that is working out for streaming, which is à la carte cable.
You act like like you get nothing for that $99 a year.
The only problem with your argument is while you do own the phone you do not own iOS. You have a license and that is it. I know of no useful software that is not entangled into some type of licensing.
oh the irony. so a country can set rules for who can sell there and how, but a company can't have rules on how it runs its business model?
too funny.
sure. they are different. sure.
If the software on the alternative App Store enforces native, public APIs from Apple's SDK (which it should), then why the hell would an app void the warranty of your hardware !? That would be a real middle finger from Apple to the customers.
Last edited:
As I said earlier, true competition doesn't exist without a referee (government). Apple isn't playing fair, and they are not the authority. I didn't elect Apple, or Google, I elected my government to represent me, a voter. They don't (shouldn't) represent companies. We the people, not we the corporations.
...lest you end up like the field I work in, medicine. No competition and high prices.
the EU becomes a monster, they want to regulate everything and everyone.
This App Store thing or the USBC thing is the tip of an iceberg, Peanuts.
I live in the EU
This App Store thing or the USBC thing is the tip of an iceberg, Peanuts.
I live in the EU