I’ve definitely noticed that basic tools on iOS and Mac OS tend to cost money compared to their Android / Windows / Linux counterparts. But still, just because they can, doesn’t mean they should… Or at least, that they should be legally allowed to.
I won’t shed any tears for Amazon etc having to give Apple a huge chunk of cash, but this sounds like a way to frustrate small developers who don’t have a whole team to devote to their finances.
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.
I’ve definitely noticed that basic tools on iOS and Mac OS tend to cost money compared to their Android / Windows / Linux counterparts. But still, just because they can, doesn’t mean they should… Or at least, that they should be legally allowed to.
I won’t shed any tears for Amazon etc having to give Apple a huge chunk of cash, but this sounds like a way to frustrate small developers who don’t have a whole team to devote to their finances.
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).
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.