Google Now Lets Apps Use Third-Party Billing in EU, Apple Yet to Announce Plans

[JGIGS]

Take a look at history on how Epic is handling their store on the PC space. There will be exclusives. Also if you think apps like Facebook will remain you are not involved with how these companies operate. They will leave so they don’t need to disclose what they track.

Right so don't download them then? No one is making you keep these apps on your phone. Play another game get another social media app. Tell Apple to make better apps if you want to be locked into the app store. Or make your own apps.

I don't get why people think developers should have to cater to them. Epic should need to pay 30% of their transactions to Apple just because you want it that way and don't want to sideload? Nonsense. If they want to lose customers that way it should be there choice. Not Apples.

 

[JGIGS]

What if the developer chooses not to offer Apple as a payment option at all?

Then you have to choose between the app + new payment solution or not getting the app at all.

Today, you don't have to make that choice.

Oh well I guess you'd have to make the choice then right? Pointing out a nonsensical business decision for that developer but it's their product.

 

[ader42]

Try telling Sony that you want to sell PS5 games in your own store and pay them no commission. Dream on.

Practically nothing will change, the idiot developers (like Epic) that pushed for this didn’t see that Apple/Google are free to charge what they want for the services they provide as they are not monopolies and that they would simply deduct 3% for the payment processing - and nobody (except the likes of Amazon/FaceBook) would change from the superior Apple solution.

 

[hans1972]

Oh well I guess you'd have to make the choice then right?

Yes, and that's worse for me.

Now I don't have to make that choice. I know every app publicly available will be on the App Store.

 

[JGIGS]

Do you disagree with that developers should be treated like second class citizens in the Apple ecosystem?
Because it benefits many of us users that they are treated like that.

Not sure I'm totally understanding your question but yes I disagree that developers should be treated like 2nd class citizens for the benefits the users.

I'm simply saying that Apple shouldn't be allowed to dictate the only way to distribute their apps.

I also don't think they will all vanish from the app store either as many in here seem to think. Some might but most won't because users are so entrenched in it and won't go elsewhere.

I feel like most would just offer discounts via sideloading or third party app store and then ios users can choose if they rather get a discounted version that way or pay more to acquire them through the app store.

If they completely pull from the app store it will anger people but it should be their choice. Then grown ups have to behave like grown ups and decide if its worth going through sideloading or a third party apps store or do away with the app. Again I still think most app developers are very unlikely to completely pull support from the app store but only one way to find out.

 

[JGIGS]

Yes, and that's worse for me.

Now I don't have to make that choice. I know every app publicly available will be on the App Store.

Right and do you think most developers would not put there products on it at all? Just not discounted?

I think most developers are smart enough to know there is money to be made both in both the ios app store and non ios app stores.

They just want the ability to at least try to do so.

 

[Macative]

Umm developers that don't want to be locked into just that store front? You know the people that actually make the apps?

No developer is complaining about their app being available in the single store front where all 1 billion eyes are looking, with their every need for hosting and distribution taken care of with the highest level of quality and care.

The developers that complain and want other options are only the ones who complain about the 15-30%, and think they can do it cheaper.

 

[Macative]

You're speculating even harder than me there bud. Thinking every developer will march out of the app store. And even if they did it's not like ios users can't still get the apps.

If they did, it will be disaster for users. You aren't thinking clearly on this issue at all.

 

[icanhazmac]

Protections is very subjective. You're making an assumptions all these 3rd parties places are evil and out to destroy their customers. Sound pretty counter productive to me.

Please explain how my examples are subjective and be specific, I'll wait.

No one can argue that providing your CC and payment info to as few entities as possible isn't prudent advice.

No one can argue that Apple implementing the data collection cards was bad for consumers, it finally took an important step forward in consumer data protections and collection transparancy. Google would NEVER have done this if the press over Apple doing it wasn't so positive. Indie devs and PC/Mac(those not on the Mac store) devs hide all this behind impossible to understand EULAs.

I don't think all 3rd parties are evil in the strict definition but experience shows they will exploit you.

 

[Macative]

They are free not to develop for iOS if they find Apple too restrictive. If enough devs follow suit Apple will change their practices.

THIS is the choice they pretend that they don't have. When did distributing apps on iOS become an inherent right? LMAO.

 

[Macative]

Right so don't download them then? No one is making you keep these apps on your phone. Play another game get another social media app. Tell Apple to make better apps if you want to be locked into the app store. Or make your own apps.

I don't get why people think developers should have to cater to them. Epic should need to pay 30% of their transactions to Apple just because you want it that way and don't want to sideload? Nonsense. If they want to lose customers that way it should be there choice. Not Apples.

Because people are the customers. That's where the money comes from.

And stop lumping all developers together. By ruining the App Store experience like this, you're not just ruining it for 1 billion users, you're ruining for the millions of small developers who are thankful for the way it is...all so larger devs can save a couple points and pretend that's for freedom.

 

[Macative]

I also think it's hilarious how you keep changing the conversation to suit your cherry picked opinion points. If this is a important thing that has to happen, how can you simultaneously claim that nothing will change and apps won't leave the app store? LMAO. It's one or the other. Either this is a big deal, or it isn't. If nothing would change, then it doesn't have to happen in the first place.

 

[JGIGS]

Because people are the customers. That's where the money comes from.

And stop lumping all developers together. By ruining the App Store experience like this, you're not just ruining it for 1 billion users, you're ruining for the millions of small developers who are thankful for the way it is...all so larger devs can save a couple points and pretend that's for freedom.

Who's making any developers leave the app store? You're acting like they can't co exist? You think every developer is going to run out and do their own thing? Stop making assumptions.

 

[DeanL]

Not for small amounts like most app purchases would be.

Please read the parent post. I doubt someone hacking a database will want to make small amounts. And it might be required even for small amounts if it has passed the threshold of suspiciousness.

 

[webkit]

The Mac App Store is a waste land. It was introduced long, long after the "alternate" (primary) method existed, and it has never gained traction. At all. It's a perfect example of what could happen to the iOS App Store, and that would be a terrible result for users.

Are you trying to suggest that the iOS App Store is so useless that if it had to face outside competition, hardly anyone would continue to use it and it would become a waste land? The only reason it exists (and is so profitable for Apple) is because it's protected from competition on iOS?

 

[Abazigal]

Guessed as much. Call for allowing third party payments without expressly calling for the 15/30% cut to be waived and developers will get precisely that.

I have little doubt that Apple will be able to navigate the EU legislation with minimal cost to themselves in the long term.

 

[webkit]

So your on record for dev distribution freedom trumps consumer convenience and protections.

Via the Apple store:

• All apps are in one place, easy to view competing apps :: consumer convenience
• All apps are required to report data collection practices :: consumer protection
• All app purchases and IAP run through a single payment processor :: consumer convenience and protection
• App updates happen through a single app store experience :: consumer convenience

So, monopolies can be good because they potentially provide one source/location for products, payments, etc. which is convenient for consumers? You'd therefore be ok if a company like Amazon was the only place consumers could buy products online since it would be much more convenient than having to go to apple.com., bestbuy.com, target.com, costco.com, homedepot.com, ebay.com, etc.? Amazon could determine what products were sold, the payment methods allowed, etc.

Why not take consumer convenience even further and, for example, have DoorDash handle all food delivery services instead of having to go to grubhub.com, ubereats.com, postmates.com, etc. or individual restaurant sites?

It doesn't sound good to me. Convenience is nice but I think competition and choice can be more beneficial not only for consumers but manufacturers, vendors, etc.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Stop making this about you and how inconvenient it is for you. It's not about me either. I love the convenience as well but that's not the point. It's about developers actually allowed to have control over the distribution of their apps period. Let the market decide what works not anti competitive practices forced by Apple.

If Apple and other tech companies were charging a smaller fee this probably wouldn't be an issue. I'm not saying they aren't doing anything for that fee but developers shouldn't have to be locked into it.

See… like, the market has already decided, though. In fact, the biggest problem may be that there’s a lot of folks that simply don’t like what the market decided.

And, no, the ONLY people that have a problem with this fee are those that want the fee to be zero, so a smaller fee would not affect anything. Remember, the VAST majority understand this as the cost of doing business and factor it into their business plans AND are still pulling in a profit.

 

[_Spinn_]

So how does this work if someone wants to get a refund? How are in app purchases saved so you can get them back again?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

So, monopolies can be good because they potentially provide one source/location for products, payments, etc. which is convenient for consumers?

It doesn't sound good to me. Convenience is nice but I think competition and choice can be more beneficial not only for consumers but manufacturers, vendors, etc.

More like “companies provide hardware with certain features and services that, if customers/developers LIKE those features and services, they will invest in the products that allow those features and services”.

And you’re right, there absolutely SHOULD be more smartphone competition, more app store competition, more OS competition. However, the way to foster more competition is by continuing to make it beneficial for companies, say, like Apple, to create new platform experiences. Mildly tweaking one platform experience does not bring a single new smartphone or smartphone OS to life. It just solidifies the preeminence of the platform that’s being tweaked.

There are some Apple fans that would LOVE for the iPhone to be the #1 phone worldwide. It is quite the strange world we live in that those people that claim to NOT be Apple fans are pretty much advocating for the same…

 

[Vjosullivan]

Cool. But you didn't answer my question.

What difference does it make to me if an app uses one payment processor versus another?

Other payment systems will be either cheaper or have more functions (otherwise they'd be pointless).

It is a rerun of the 1990s when Microsoft tried to prevent users from uninstalling Internet Explorer and running third party web browsers under Windows.

 

[JGIGS]

See… like, the market has already decided, though. In fact, the biggest problem may be that there’s a lot of folks that simply don’t like what the market decided.

And, no, the ONLY people that have a problem with this fee are those that want the fee to be zero, so a smaller fee would not affect anything. Remember, the VAST majority understand this as the cost of doing business and factor it into their business plans AND are still pulling in a profit.

See.... like, there has never been a market, there hasn't been a market to decide anything. There never was an ios app market, it's always been a monopoly there are no other choices than the app store to get apps from without a JB.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Other payment systems will be either cheaper or have more functions (otherwise they'd be pointless).

It sounds like this plan is already pointless.

Google is reducing their commission by 3%... hooray!

But the developer now has to find some other payment processer who will charge them... guess what... 3%

Who thought this was a good idea?

It's funny... all this time developers were begging for alternative payment processors. And they're finally getting it.

But what they should have been fighting for is lower commissions.

Whoops... 🤣

 

[icanhazmac]

You'd therefore be ok if a company like Amazon was the only place consumers could buy products online since it would be much more convenient than having to go to apple.com., bestbuy.com, target.com, costco.com, homedepot.com, ebay.com, etc.? Amazon could determine what products were sold, the payment methods allowed, etc.

Seriously? This is your attempt to debate in good faith? There is a massive difference between the iOS app store being a single source for iOS apps and Amazon being the only retailer for any and all goods. Try harder and be better.

Apple does not have a monopoly on mobile apps, there are others.

It doesn't sound good to me. Convenience is nice but I think competition and choice can be more beneficial not only for consumers but manufacturers, vendors, etc.

Please explain to me the consumer benefits of alt-stores and alt-payment processors? Be specific. Will it be cost of apps? Will it be better data harvesting and tracking protections? Will it be better protection for our payment information? Or will it be none of the above and just massive exploitation by the likes of Amazon, Meta, Epic, Microsoft and others?

I'll wait but not hold my breath for you to provide anything of substance.

The truth is no one will benefit from alt-stores except the likes of Epic, do you enjoy cheerleading for the likes of top 20 developers? They are the only winners here.

 

[coolfactor]

I hope Apple follows suit and just "keeps it simple".

Developers do need to pay, and now Google will be faced with chasing down developers that refuse to pay the reduced-by-3% commission to Google after a sale is made elsewhere. Apple knows that this will be an expensive endeavour and has been hoping to avoid it, but ultimately, that's going to be the case.