See the entire conversation

Whoever at Apple wrote this — a few days before WWDC! — should never be allowed to communicate with developers again. Let’s be clear, Apple: in addition to the $100/year developer fees and any search ads we buy, we add value to your highly profitable hardware FAR beyond the 30%.
592 replies and sub-replies as of Jun 20 2020

Apple doesn’t follow their own guidelines. They aren’t exactly standing on the guideline rock of Gibraltar here.
Correct, Apple apps use private frameworks to gain better functionality.
They also spam ad-type notifications at you, which is a violation of App Store rules.
This is exactly what Microsoft was accused of doing with Windows 20 years ago...
If there’s anything they could have sent to reinforce the “mob boss” narrative, it was this.
Envelope’s a little light this month, fellas
Because Hey doesn’t wanna follow the rules? Lol.
I have no skin in this game but even I read that and said what did you just say???
This, exactly. I can't even code in any language or framework used for mobile apps, but I just stared in astonishment at the... the... sheer arrogance.
I never knew the App Review Board was staffed by passive-aggressive keyboard warriors.
Doesn’t change the fact that Apple is right and Hey is wrong.
Apple is always right 😂 😂 😂
The fact that developers are reacting so strongly to this issue doesn’t tell you that this is about Hey, it tells you that developers were already very frustrated with Apple.
Then they can F off and go to Android. Nobody’s forcing them to stay with Apple.
That is both stupid and naive. Congratulations.
It's absolute outrageous and the messaging could not be worse. They're essentially signalling a protection racket shakedown.
This smells like a bad middle manager who is trying to impress the boss.
Smells like a bad middle manager under pressure to raise revenue.
It doesn’t really matter who wrote it, Schiller signed off on it. The apathy and disdain for third party developers comes from the top.
So happy to see this building & blowing up. So hopeful for a better future for all of us.
Until Apple is forced to reduce 30% and therefore reduces R&D on developer tools and services and maybe they’ll keep more APIs private which means less features for the user. That future sucks.
None of those things need be true: keep 30% but allow apps to wkwebview to their own billing system: only some will use it. APIs kept private is asking Google to win - android would devour ios if apple did that, and Apple knows it. Apple still has huge silicon advantage.
if all apps are allowed bypassing of in app purchases, apple will get less money and therefore reduce spending like i said.
and like I said that logic makes no sense at all
so i guess money grows on trees? Apple earns revenue on the App Store in which they pay the bills for the datacenters to keep the lights on and reinvest into the developer tools so that developers can build better apps for the user. it’s very simple and straightforward logic.
It’s incorrect and straightforward. Apple makes money on their own software & services like Apple Music, Arcade, TV, iCloud Storage, and many other 1st-party apps. Plus loads of 💰 on hardware. They do not need 3rd-party revenue to “keep the lights on”, that’s ludicrously stupid.
No. Steve Jobs literally said “We keep 30% to pay for running the App Store”… If App Store was a money losing business, guaranteed we wouldn't have the great tools today which is one of the main reasons why it's far better to develop for iOS than Android.
Steve Jobs introduces the App store - iPhone SDK Keynote
Apple iPhone SDK announcement - Steve Jobs announces the iTunes App store for the iPhone and iPod touch. Coming in June 2008, and developers will get a 70-30...
You’ll be shocked to learn that even if your understanding had been correct in 2008 (which it isn’t - look at the actual numbers), it wouldn’t matter since a ton has changed since then. Im out - no more troll feeding for me today
wrong. SEC enforces whatever Steve says on stage. anyways see ya.
Yeah, Phil should stick to emailing Craig on the day of the keynote.
How is that last sentence even meant to be parsed? Are they implying they’d "support" Hey if its services were free (the point is they aren't), or that this “support" of Hey through its presence on the App Store is free (it isn’t)?
The point is Hey is selling a service, using Apple AppStore as a sales channel but are trying to bypass paying the fee, have been bypassing the fee and got caught. They need to pay, they had the option to not build an iOS app but they want access to the customers & platform.
I think that's a simplified version of the story. There are rules about when offering in-app purchase is required, which Hey was following; Apple's official position has arisen unpredictably from other relatively vague guidelines since then.
Meanwhile, developers do pay a yearly fee to keep their apps in the store – that's why there seems to be no satisfactory reading of that sentence available.
The fee is for the software tools to develop & manage your app. If you charge a fee you must pay a % for AppStore market access to 1.5B, if you dont charge your fee is $0. This is a normal business practice. Your mall, sporting events, book publishing all have the same model.
Apple provides Xcode for free, regardless of whether devs publish the App Store. Again, the letter seemed to claim either a) Hey's services were free, or b) Apple’s App Store hosting of Basecamp's apps is free. You and I seem to agree neither is true.
They pay a $99 fee every year PER DEVELOPER on team to distribute on the app store. What Apple is doing here is trying to force Hey to add In App Purchases via apple pay’s API. Which Apple then takes 30% of. Otherwise they won’t let Hey update. That’s called strong-arming.
this is akin to ISPs asking websites to pay for access to the ISPs' customers. "you're using our lines, you should pay us!" ignoring the fact that *end users* pay for those lines App Store ecosystem is why I bought a $1000+ phone. If Apple ruins it I might as well buy Android
The only things over the years that have almost pushed me to Android have been Apple’s petty treatment of the people that make apps - ironically starting with the Google Voice fiasco of 2009 and continuing to today.
The last straw for me was when the laptops were no longer upgradeable. It's good on the other side.
Yeah WSL is great too, windows did a good job.
Yeah, add in that most engineering software for EE/ME work is windows centric and done deal for me.
The people behind #Apple #AppStore are awful. I spent a full year of my life learning Swift and they rejected my app for no real reason. I appealed and demonstrated that it was in line with all guidelines, but they wouldn't budge. So I switched to Android and haven't looked back.
ISPs do ask content providers (and their CDNs) to pay for access to consumers!
i think that’s something they do try to do, and it‘s not ok
Yep. I wouldn't have an iPhone if my essential (free) apps weren't on there.
Pretty much this.
No, this is akin to a shop paying a shopping mall rent to have a shop in there so they can sell products to customers visiting the shopping mall.
That would be the annual $99 developer program subscription. On top of that you need to pay 30% of the total sales in your shop.
You know how much the dev program used to cost before? You really think that 99 dollars covers the costs of running an App Store and payment processing etc without data mining its users kinda of business model?
Apple is the most profitable company on the planet selling thousand dollar telephones. They are not losing money on the App Store
True. Not saying 30% is a fair value. But it's not so simple as saying 99dollars a year should cover it. OSs used to be paid, remember that? All these things need to be accounted for.
yes, OS updates used to be paid but they now cover that cost with revenue from the phone itself, which is how they've covered the cost of the App Store beyond the $99 until now. But, the iPhone is stable, not growing, so they need something to appease the stock market
What do you think the developer program cost actually covers? For free apps it is exactly what you describe - covering the cost of having them on the platform. I don’t need Apple to process payments, I can use a processor of my choosing (like on Google Play) and pay a lower rate.
Or at least the option to do so - you can pay the 30% if you want to use Apple’s payment infrastructure and easy access to customers.
I see positives with that but also negatives. Just thinking of scammy apps charging your card and disappearing. Then what? You complain to who? Apple?
That’s a good point. It’s definitely not black and white. But the scammy trial & subscription apps using Apple’s IAP don’t really help either.
I think they would open themselves to lawsuits, almost 100%. But yes, more options would be better for developers. Not so sure for users though.
What you get is here -… Comparing Google with Apple when they have two completely business models doesn't make sense.
Apple set the $99 fee. It’s on them to make sure it’s sufficient to cover their costs. That’s the price of entry to the store. Apple’s been paid. They get added value from the app ecosystem: it sells devices. Now they also want a cut of the dev’s rev from *outside* the store.
Yeah, I mean if the $99 isn't covering what Basecamp costs them to host there, then charge more for hosting. They could scale the base price based on downloads It's not just Apple wanting payment, it's the outrageous amount. Imagine Comcast charging $500 for home internet
It has costed $99 since the first day.
It used to be 500 dollars for a single dev and 3500 dollars for a team.
Do you have a source for those numbers?
Do you think Apple just started with the iMac/iPhone? :) just google it
Well we have been talking about iOS all along. WebObjects used to cost $50,000 but it's not relevant to the discussion either :P
How is not relevant? A developer account with Apple (to developt for Mac OS) used to cost 500 dollars up to 2006 at least. And that was with a smaller market share than today. You think $99 is expensive in today's day for a not even close bigger market?
I still think $99 is cheap. Doesn't change the fact that 30% cut form sales might be too high though.
MSDN basic per month is $45... just sayin’ ;)
But why not go to Android now? $1000 android devices exist. As a dev you won’t Bc the breadth & depth of the paying market is on IOS. If you are charging for an App pay the fee. I dont buy Apple devices bc of the Apps, I like the OS Apps are a bonus.
Yeah that person should leave it to pundits on twitter to write that opinion :)
This. @Apple is risking more then revenue if we get some bad regulation here. Platform security is WAY more valuable.
Yeah This is silly, how much would they have made from Hey? $10k?
Honestly they are lucky it’s just a virtual event this year. Imagine not being able to hide from people’s questions for an entire week.
I thought about this too.
If only @gruber was going to interview @pschiller this year - at least they’d have something to discuss
He wouldn’t ask him the questions everyone wants him to ask. So it wouldn’t matter.
Totally dodged any commentary on why outlook or gmail are different though.
My read on it is that you can use Outlook right out of the gate with any POP/IMAP/Exchange account. Gmail has a free offering, as well as paid (G Suite), and there’s little differentiation on the client-side. HEY drops you into a login screen with a “Need Help” button:
Plenty of apps just show a login screen if you don't have a login. Banking and trading apps, for example. I can download swiss bank apps all day but I'm not going to get any use out of them unless I give the bank a pile of money.
I’m on HEY’s side here — just trying to spitball the Gmail / Outlook / Spark / 3rd party email client reasoning why they’re allowed and HEY isn’t. My read is that, despite Schiller saying that they aren’t going to cave, that they’ll cave and say it was technically right, “but...”
What are those email apps allowed to do that Hey doesn’t? None of those bring you to a blank login screen, asking you to sign up through their website, not to mention they have free versions, unlike Hey. If they don’t wanna follow the rules, then they miss out.
Fastmail: exactly the same situation as Hey. The app cannot be used without logging in, you cannot sign up in the app, there is no free tier.
😂 😂 😂 People licking Apple's ass. Not surprised
In the previous paragraph, Apple explicitly suggested that Hey add free POP or IMAP capabilities just so that they could be in compliance with App Store guidelines and still handle all their own subscriptions.
(Possibly sensitive)
I bet that this would not be their response if they had a live audience of developers next week.
Meh, it probably would.
Steve would. Without hesitation
If Apple dropped their cut of store bookings to 10%, would that seem fair to you? Or is the objection about paying outright at all? (This is not a troll; I am a software product manager, interested in topic, respect you, real question).
It’s the arbitrary unequal ajudication. Not %
I've never seen a coherent justification for why Apple takes a percentage. It only punishes devss of high quality apps. Why should Apple get $9 of a $30 app, 30 cents for a $1 app, and nothing for a free app? The dev's hard work has no bearing on Apple's server cost etc.
It actually does. More subscribers, more load. Fetching products data, processing renewals, sending webhooks, processing billinh issues...
I suspect the majority of the load is by free apps that make them no money directly, eg Facebook etc.
No, those don’t have in-app purchases. I am talking only about IAP infra costs.
Obviously IAP costs Apple *something* for the backend infra. But how does this scale to a *percentage* of the *developer's* app/IAP cost, beyond the 2% processing fee to Visa/MC? It doesn't! Apple's fees should be a small transparent flat rate per transaction.
What about apps which are just a single one-time purchase? Other than the 2% payment processing fee for Visa or whatever, Apple incurs no other costs compared to apps for Facebook, Google Maps, etc which have a 0% fee. What's the other 28% for?
Huh? Again, how does this relate at all to the PERCENTAGE FEE that Apple takes from a developer? If I sell an app that does XYZ and I charge $1, Apple gets 30 cents. If I instead charge $1,000 for the same XYZ functionality, Apple gets $300. What changes on Apple's end? NOTHING.
It seems like you probably know this stuff better than me (I'm not an iOS dev) so please enlighten me if you can draw a direct connection to why Apple takes a fixed 30% based on the arbitrary app price, vs simply charging a flat rate that covers the infra costs. I don't see it.
The percentage is also a problem, because it just flat out makes a whole range of businesses unsustainable
So what is the proper percentage of fee to have access to ~1.5B devices for your App? Do you know the cost of acquiring a targeted market of 1.5B devices for the web? Trust me take the percentage.
To be honest, and I've said this before, it's *not* just the 30%. In fact when I started 30% was *cheap* for the "publishing" of things. It's the vague rules combined with *forced* inclusion. I've had Apple just yank APIs from public and Sherlock my products while doing it.
That had to be really rough and I'm sorry to hear that. Everybody who has responded so far seems adamant that this issue is more about the logistical and emotional consequences of the experience than about revenue per se.
IMHO there exists a % at which Netflix/Hulu/Amazon/etc would agree to use IAP. I would like to see those folk bring their volume to the app store’s revenue, to make up for Apple’s cut shrinking.
The whole thing doesn’t fit in a world of cloud based multi-platform services. If I buy and play a game on iOS only, then sure, paying the IAP cut to Apple makes sense, but if I mostly use the web, Android and PC, with just a little bit of iOS, why should I pay that?
Stripe charges 1.4% for payment processing, why Apples should cost 30%? Distribution? not that expensive. Visibility? Charge for it as an extra service. 30% is absolutely ridiculous, they are not offering anything that valuable
As @dhh has said on multiple occasions, it’s not so much about the percentage as it is the choice. If I believe Apple’s payment platform, integration, and other services are worth that, then sure I will use them. If I don’t, I should be able to chose another payment provider
I think the point is that this isn’t primarily a phone app and doesn’t *need* the App Store. But it does need to be cross-platform and so needs to support Android and iOS. They aren’t benefitting from Apple. They just need to support it as it happens to be popular.
There’s no possible way Phil didn’t write or approve that. It was released directly to CNBC at the same time it was emailed. That goes through the top.
Actually DHH said it was sent to news outlets before it was sent to Jason. Just saying.
Also, I love how Apple sent this to a bunch of journalists before this even landed in Jason's inbox. Nice.
Nah he is good
If you are asking me to choose between Apple and the whiners at Basecamp that is an easy call. 😆
Right. Incredibly arrogant.
#Apple turns heel. I didn't have that on my 2020 bingo card, but I guess nothing should surprise any more.
It was probably a lawyer who wrote it?
A lawyer wouldn't write like this lol
It is funny how apparently the developer fees don’t exist suddenly to Apple.
I wonder if it was the same person who said "We have lots of serious developers who don't want their quality Apps to be surrounded by amateur hour." all those years ago.
what the HELL
Feels like they couldnt resist a very deliberate f*** you to DHH for rattling his sabre
This so much! They are almost saying "We have been doing you a favor for the last eight years." That line is so out of place.
How much does Google or Amazon pay Apple?! 🙃
Reads nearly identical to the Phil Schiller comments from this morning. Money is on Phil but that he didn’t sign his name on it. (Which is strange considering things like “thoughts on flash” in the past.) If true, I’m guessing this is the end of his very, very long career.
I bet Tim and the gang are happy there won’t be an audience full of devs on Monday.
Banking apps are pretty useless unless you have an account, and you're paying for the account in some way.
It's a good thing Apple doesn't read twitter or any community forums, we don't want them getting any ideas ;-)
If they tried to enforce the "rule" against banks they might hit a painful brick wall.
Gmail doesn’t break the rules because they offer a free version of the app. That is why Hey was denied, which they deserve. If they don’t wanna follow the rules, then give them the boot.
Yep, I believe this is the specific case that Hey is violating, altho, it would suggest that Gmail is violating it as well since there is no in-app purchase option for GSuite. (Unless offering a free version overrides this section)
As long as they offer an “out of the box” experience, it’s fine. You can download Gmail and immediately use it, assuming that you have an email, of course. With Hey, when you opened the app, you were brought to a screen with instructions telling you to go to their website.
Makes sense, by not offering a free version the app has to imply that you need to go somewhere to purchase something, even if it's not linked. Still feels a bit heavy handed, mainly because consumers don't have a choice since the App Store is the sole gatekeeper for iOS.
How about Netflix, PrimeVideo or HBO Go? They don't offer In-App purchases as fas as I know, yet they are allowed in the App Store.
Netflix offers in app purchases. Certainly in the UK App Store anyway
Still show it as an option in the UK App Store. Interesting.
I pay for HBO through my iTunes account and already had Prime and Netflix. They aren’t using the AppStore for acquisition. Hey is using the AppStore to acquire customers, using their go pay here page to bypass paying the fee is cheating the system. They aren’t a victim.
Lol this is nothing but a de-facto monopoly fucking people over. The hell do you gain from defending it? It’s bad for developers and bad for consumers.
It’s not my fault that Hey doesn’t want to give Apple 30% of their revenue, because they think they’re better than everyone else. That’s like living in a rental, with a job, and not paying rent!
they want 30% ~$2 from games which they provide discovery for, and transfer hundreds of megabytes of graphics, and host leaderboard and connection services for ... and then they want %30 ~$30 of SaaS apps for a year, which they don't provide primary discovery or data services for
Where in this process is Hey asking for special treatment? They’re bringing the absurdity to light and speaking primarily for themselves - as only they can - but you’re being silly if you think this push is self-centered. Notice how few have sided with Apple? Maybe rethink...
I will never NOT side with Apple, when it comes to the App Store. Why should Hey not have to give them 30%? Apple provides the framework continuously for their apps, and they expect them to do that for free? They think they’re entitled.
Last time I checked, people paid Apple for iPhones, just like people buy computers. Maybe we should all pay 30% more for apps and services we use on Desktop and Laptops computers in addition to paying for the OS/hardware ... that would only be fair?
I get that it's "their" app store, they can do what they want, but also consumer and developers can (and in a society are expected to) communicate that they are not happy with the relationship when it becomes problematic.
Whether they can do what they want is debatable and the reason we’re here. Monopolies suck the life out of capitalism; there’s no societal value in them and historically they can’t do what they want — they get regulated. (Not being critical of your tweet, just springboarding)
The App Store would be a monopoly if Apple themselves picked the prices for things. Developers pick the prices, so I don’t see how it is a monopoly.
Here is a simple example: you publish a music subscription app, Apple takes 30% cut, so you either increase the price or lose out from income from iOS users. Now Apple publishes a music subscription app, they can offer a cheaper price coz they aren't losing income to anyone else.
That 30% is on top of 99$ that you pay to Apple every year to be able to publish apps. It screws small developers over.
I don't think anyone is complaining that they have to pay Apple a fee. People are complaining because it's 30% which is a lot.
The fee prevents people from making free apps with ads, and making free revenue. Apple can’t afford to run the App Store for free with as many free apps as there is right now.
Google takes cut from ad revenue in Android. Apple could do the same if that's really a concern. Apps aren't making money off of app store for free.
They do not take money from ad revenue, otherwise that issue would’ve been brought up a long time ago.
I mean they could if they wanted to, it's completely option them.
I understand that, but they don’t, so it’s not an issue.
Also developers pay 99$/year just to be able to publish the app, even to publish free apps. Apple isn't doing anything for FREE. It's ridiculous reasoning to side with a company which constantly screws developers over.
First off, Apple’s operating costs overall is $200 billion, so we can probably bet that the $100/year developer is not enough to cover the App Store’s upkeeping. Second, why would they not charge a yearly fee for free apps? All free apps have ads, so they’d be making free revenue
It doesn't cost 99$ to host a simple binary on their servers. Are you expecting a single developer to cover App store's costs? iPhones also cost money, a lot more than Android devices. They make a lot of money from that alone. Also, not all free apps have ads.
No, I’m not expecting one developer to pay for it, but it all adds up. And unless you work for Apple, you and I have no idea as to how much it costs them to run the App Store, if they split it into the cost per developer. iPhones and Androids are practically the same $ nowadays.
Let's take this for comparison, Google charges a one time fee (for lifetime) to publish apps for Play Store. And it's less than Apple's yearly fee. Let's be real, Apple can afford to run the App Store for less and still make a lot of profit.
Yes, but do you realize how much money Google makes from selling YOUR personal data?
And yet Apple makes more profit than Google.
No one expects free. You see anyone complaining about the developer fee? As pointed out, Apple provides little for an app like Hey compared to many other types of apps. Basically a glorified payment processor for an app like Hey, with an absurd 30% processing fee.
They provide the same stuff for all apps. None of this would’ve happened if Hey wasn’t greedy and just had a free version of the app.
They really don’t. The value-add of the App Store for an iOS game vs. a SaaS email platform is substantially different.
In the end, they provide a home for the app, along with being able to easily send out updates.
Really because @dhh himself stated they can’t survive as an email client without the AppStore. That’s a lot of value. This fee isn’t new, but they’ve been cheating and not paying it for awhile, breaking the agreement they signed. Apple should back charge.
None of this would have happened if Apple wasn't greedy and just published the Hey app for free. It works both ways 🤷‍♂️
Lol, Hey is the one not wanting to give a free tier option! That’s why they’re in this mess, and they somehow think they’re entitled!
It should be up to their customers to decide whether there business model and subscription cost is worth it, not up to Apple. If it's not, it will die.
This was all started because Hey, upon downloading the app, immediately brought the user to a screen telling them to go to their website to subscribe. Apple wants apps to be an “out of the box” experience. The App Store is a business, after all.
Still, should be up to their customers, shouldn't be into Apple about how other business have their pricing model. Otherwise it's a monopoly.
Hey is expecting free that is what this is about. They have been bypassing paying their fee and got caught. They are making money using the AppStore they need to pay. If I was Apple I would charge back rent lol.
So the Hey client will only be available to android users then? And I assume Hey will tell everyone, loudly, why..
"You haven't payed for protection in 8 years."
Cc @Echecrates I know you’d appreciate The Godfather gif
It’s more like you haven’t paid your rent for 8 years. You’re a squatter not it’s time for you pay or get evicted.
I don't get it. They're trying to strong-arm developers into setting up monetization streams through in-app purchases?
(Possibly sensitive)
They take their cut.
They’re trying to strong arm developers that *already have* working monetization streams into paying them 30% tax on those streams by forcing the stream to go through in app purchases or no app approval.
The comparison is Netflix. What if you couldn’t use Netflix on your phone/iPad with your existing subscription unless you changed it to go through in app purchases? They let Netflix through due to scale but force exactly that on smaller developers.
Not saying Apple is right, but there's many services that only offer a monthly subscription through IAP, but also offer subs directly with quarterly/yearly discounts as well. Apple seems to be fine with this as long as you only do IAP when signing up in the app.
Believe me, we dealt with this years ago because we had separate monetization streams. I’m still mad that I can’t purchase my kindldd Ed books through my kindle app.
I disagree with the interpretations here. Email apps are clearly not included in the list of apps that can not function Jon until you pay a subscription fee. If the app literally can’t work till you pay the monthly subscription and it’s not a business only app, include IAP.
Hey is a paid email *service*, not just a mail client that connects to third party email services.
Totally get that now. I didn’t realize that when I wrote it. But either way an app that literally can’t do anything until you pay a subscription fee is difficult to argue... but see newer tweets for how I recommended skirting the rule
Fits into the reader category that Apple legal terms clearly allow. I totally agree that email apps should be consider readers and therefor the legal terms should change... but as they stand Hey doesn’t fit it.
hey had no such stream
They are blocking an app from the App Store that sells a subscription on its website until they add the option to subscribe in the app via Apple’s purchase system which takes 30%.
"Nice monetization stream you got there. Would be a pity if anyone broke it."
I don’t get it either, where’s the context for this email?
There are really two problems.. Using a monopoly position to enforce their in app payments racket. And then, not enforcing those rules consistently against players they dont want to take on...Gmail and exchange/outlook being the prime examples here.
In-App purchases is how developers pay for access & the distribution to the 1.5B devices in the ecosystem, but only if you are charging $. Some try to bypass the fee & Apple is locking down. Devs want to make money on the platform but but don’t want to pay the fees of 10-30%.
Imagine curating an ecosystem of high quality applications that are a value add to your billion dollar hardware market and saying some shit like this
"..., we add value to your highly profitable hardware FAR beyond the 30%." I'd go further and say that developers add value even if they had COST Apple x% of iPhone revenue.
There are people (many colleagues)that get by happily on stock iOS apps. They buy the iPhone for its hardware and default features. Their installed apps? Social networking apps.
This is pretty bad @pschiller. Might be time to make some sweeping changes.
What you think Schiller didn't approve that?
"Your company hasn't made us any money, except by helping us sell hundreds of millions of devices for thousands of dollars to our customers, who buy our devices in large part because of the 3rd party apps available for them."
The problem here is not with the messenger but with the message. There is no doubt that Apple top brass approved it. This is what they believe.
I would actually doubt that anyone has approved the message. It's too straight to be corporate speech.
“Nice app you have there. Shame if something happened to it.” Apple 2020.
We have a specific felony in our jurisprudence here, it's called "Mafia".
When will Iphone12 be released
the jailBreak community has pushed  so hard they are where they are today. that includes hardware sales they would not have sold had it not been for jB #jailBreak
the beatings will continue until morale improves
Apple is literally sitting on a mountain of cash while 99.9% of developer never recoup their $100 per year fee via app revenue.
Ya, I never understood why they take a 30% cut starting from $1. Throw a bone to small devs just starting out and exempt the first $25k in sales or something. Won't cost AAPL much, but will help sustain early dev efforts.
Instead it's turning out to be the opposite: the most profitable companies can negotiate their way to a lower cut, while small and mid-tier devs prop up Apple's services revenue. Really gross. :-/
Sounds like how tax works in many countries (low wage people paying more relative tax than megacorps) 🤕
I'd question "most" in your statement. The US - yes, few others
Because a de-facto monopoly. And because they can. And in a company that reports to the shareholders, they are obligated to do so. Tighten the screws!
Ya, all those devs that are only capable of iOS projects only and nothing else at all.
Now this is a good idea. At least you not one of people complainting about paying any fee. A tiered approach is a great idea, especially for indie developers.
Some people give Adobe $50 a month to use their software, you get XCode for free and the $100 a year dev fee is something I'm happy to pay to gain access to the early beta even without ever publishing anything
Maybe those apps aren’t good enough to be noticed.
This protection racket is the inevitable outcome of the App Store being the only distribution channel for iOS apps. Apple has turned developers into serfs who must pay tribute to their lord.
I guess you don’t remember the days when software was purchased in boxes at Comp USA, Best Buy, Circuit City. You think they didn’t take a cut?
Your point? That sales distribution model died many many years ago. So the any argument referencing it against current market... is no longer relevant.
None of those store were sole gatekeepers to half the market. (And, obviously, the COGS side of the equation is way different.)
They’re gate keepers to their store, and Apple is only 14%.
46% in the US, which is what US regulators are principally concerned with. If there were only two grocery stores on the planet, you bet your ass the federal government would look a little closer at competition and fees.
No “Store” on the planet would, or should be forced to sell products without getting some money themselves. They have overhead and provide a service.
Cool! So developers should go to other avenues with less overhead to compete - different payment processors, installable web apps, alternative stores, etc. Ah. They can’t, because Apple has relentlessly suppressed any possible avenue for competition with the App Store.
Nobody would complain if Apple charged a fee for actual bandwidth/overhead costs incurred by an app like HEY (which are vanishingly close to zero). It’s forbidding HEY from owning their own revenue, which Apple doesn’t enable in any way except by fiat, that is a bridge too far.
Your "store" analogy doesn't apply. There's no competition in this sector, nor will Apple allow any. Meanwhile apps add value to iOS and Apple devices and how much does Apple compensate developers for that added value?
More like 90%. The total app revenue for android is vanishingly small compared to Apple.
Apple is part of duopoly and they control approximately ~2/3 of the mobile app market in the US.
Apps didn’t cost a few dollars back then.
1) Hey costs $99 a year, 2) retailers take bigger cut than Apple and the cheaper the merchandise the MORE they take 3) Apple wants Hey ADDS option to subscribe from within the app, they can set their own price (like 30% mor for example)
Looks at how many places you could go to get software onto your machine. The App Store is the only option for iOS without "compromising" your device.
It’s almost like ditching the web for a choice of two closed platforms was a bad idea….
Without Apple, there would not be AppStores at all.
Eh. Successful ones, anyway. But are they good? Do they need to change? Did the push for siloed, but more featured development environments and platforms limit expanding web functionality?
Would that necessarily be a bad thing?
The web is still there, so is Android.
Dude- that was the question. Tons of folks jumped onto the app model as primary, accepting the lack of control, it’s worth asking did that shift in focus limit the growth of a better web stack? Right now things are broken, either way.
I believe the word u are looking for is capitalism.
Hey Apple, what if I told you I don't develop software to make *you* money?
Yay for free apps!
This is sad. The iPhone is a success thanks to the apps made by developers of all class. I hope this attitude change in the near future.
Partially true. Developers have been around forever on every ecosystem. On no other ecosystem before, which has a (large) minority share, but drives many times the revenue to developers compared to other platforms. They do many things right which is what makes devs successful
If it wasn't for the apps, I don't believe Apple would hold their current share of the premium market segments that account for the concentration of app revenue. Creating apps worth buying is what makes devs successful.
Agreed. But is there a reason why all the successful apps are on the AppStore? Is there something Apple is doing right in terms of hard work and investment in what they’re getting right as far as UX and devX? Should they be able to charge for it?
Sure, but is it reasonable to absolutely demand 30% year 1 then 15% of a cross-platform SaaS product's revenue forever because a user happened to do the signup on an iPhone? That is an abusive tactic from a company in a dominant market position.
Signed up on an iPhone, and was not allowed to be made aware of any other options, I might add.
I see your point if we believe that the extra goodness Apple is doing going only in as far as enabling the conversion from free to paid for 3rd party developers. Reality is, that it’s probably far more and extends into enabling an experience that 3rd party devs can’t on Android
Case in point: Instagram and Snapchat, both first party apps from multi billion dollar companies still far inferior in 2020 on Android. To say that iOS + iPhone integrated experience doesn’t drastically deliver a better dev + customer experience doesn’t feel right
Wow reading this really made my blood boil.
The timing couldn’t have been worse. I hope developers stop being afraid and start asking for change. We should all condemn this kind of behavior very publicly to pressure Apple.
If Apple falls, then there’s only Android left. The Google and Amazon App Store are a PAIN to find any specific app easily. Don’t they also charge a 15% cut?
This is 90s Microsoft level arrogance. Jesus.
You may have not noticed but Microsoft is still same
Microsoft is still monolithic but they are FAR less arrogant than they used to be.
The melodramatic intro video celebrating all the developers they’ve graciously allowed on their platform will make up for it.
Logical endgame state of devrel as a revenue center. They’ve been laying this path for at 20 years, or at least since I worked in WWDR in ‘01-02
In a way Apple is lucky there is no in person audience at WWDC this year.
Good thing for Apple there’s no in-person keynote on Monday, or they might see a walk-out protest in the middle of it
Devs can still stay away in protest.
What was this in response of...?
I hear web apps are a sweet solution.
It isn’t yet, since mobile WebKit makes for a subpar user experience in supporting PWAs.
Seems like they want govement attention at this point
Without my goto apps on iOS I could use whatever other mobile os there is... I actually liked Windows Phone - it all went down because of third party apps were of questionable quality or not available at all
I’m still sad about Windows. It was a gorgeous system.
If you like unnecessarily massive text and unnecessarily tiny text at the same time.
Not sure why you wanted to come here and snidely attack someones opinion on a platform that is long long dead…..for far better reasons then changeable text sizes. But you do you.
maybe in 2009 when people were buying anything at 1.99$. now the os is so complete 99% people dint ever need to buy anything besides games or other original content. as long as android has50+1% market share Apple sill never loose that argument
Do devs not realize that Apple, like any retailer, has the right to pick and choose what products it wants to sell? And do they not realize that most retailers set their own prices? Retail is brutal. Apple devs have a sweetheart deal with Apple. For now.
We'll see whether the EU agrees with you
Apple forces them only to add option to buy sipscription from within the app. In other word Apple want MORE options for users, not less.
It’s not just the developer fees and search ads, it’s also the thousands spent on hardware just to develop and test the apps.
I’m not a developer but everything in that statement comes off as, “What have you contributed to Apple’s business?”
It’s kind of a true statement Apple is providing access for you to sell to ~1.5B devices, they don’t deserve to be paid?
These developers are giving people a reason to buy these Apple devices. If all 3rd party developers left I don’t see Apple picking up the slack there.
As a developer I’m not saying I don’t provide value but I know paying a fee to sell is normal marketplace business model. Vendors at sporting event pay a fee to sell & give a % of earnings. Amazon gets 35% on kindle books from authors. This isn’t new, you pay for access & distro
That has nothing to do with the above statement. Apple was referring to a lack of in-app purchases.
Worst part is: Apple does not give a fuck about this fuss and will not change shit.
a frustrated Apple employee, maybe. Wording is not the best, but i kind of understand it. It's not free to run an app store with all the services Apple offers. We only see the surface, there is a lot more in the background. A lot of problems with apps and payments for sure.
The development ecosystem is what makes it worth dealing with apples bs. At this point I’d probably switch to windows for wsl2 if the applications weren’t so horrible on that side of the fence
Especially since they seem to only collect a cut on less than 1/5th of the revenue generated by the App Store. They wouldn’t be happy with that if it didn’t represent a lot of value to them beyond the 15-30%:
Apple says the App Store created $519 billion in commerce last year
Apple says it only takes a cut of a small fraction of total sales
Does that marketing study not inflate the total dollars attributable to the App Store as a way of making Apple’s % seem lower?
Hard to know their reasons, but could well be. Pretty “soft” numbers with no way to really check their accuracy.
find out who wrote that @Apple @tim_cook - that's unacceptable. We paid $100 yearly, and make people want to buy iPhone indirectly!
No one: I NEED to get an iPhone BECAUSE of that @dancelstory app
Just use a PWA? It sounds strange to try and bypass integration with iOS payments etc just to use the store. You can’t even sign in to the app which is not great UX, I wouldn’t want that on my platform either really, but 30% is still a bit crazy
Yeah it screams of marketing BS to me
iOS still does not support push notifications for PWAs so they’re probably not a full replacement for e-mail apps yet...
An email client needs push notifications which aren’t available with a PWA on iOS
Fair, but the end users experience shouldn’t suffer when it comes to payments etc, so I think it’s reasonable
Looks reasonable on the surface but it’s based on the fact that there’s no way to put up a capable app on iOS without paying a huge fee to Apple, which is unreasonable
The user experience doesn't have to suffer for SaaS products to do their own account management and billing. We could use Stripe across all platforms and have a super convenient one-tap Apple Pay button without using Apple's IAP system, but they won't allow it.
The bar is pretty high for payments nowadays, both from providers and from customers‘ expectations. It’s not like Apple‘s payment systems (iTunes, Apple Pay) are the only convenient ones.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too Either you use the APIs that are offered to interact with h/w & s/w and that are maintained, by agreeing to the terms of the App Store or you do it without depending on those APIs and be free from the terms you don’t agree with
You totally can get that cake, see Android.
And yet devs still rather develop for iOS Because devs know, 30% of something sold on iOS is more than 100% of nothing sold on Android Why buy it if you can side load a pirated apk?
Why side load a pirated version of an app for a premium privacy focused email service? So you can see that sweet login screen?
:). You know damn well too some dumbass will spend 18 hours doing just that just to realize that they still need an account.
Why pay for email service when my free email is why the service exists. Why should I pay them?
One would wonder why that would be ...
Apple has deliberetly made sure that PWAs are not a viable option.
Fair enough, but no one makes you support iOS, seems like regular old supply and demand
If people stopped building iOS apps they would have to adjust
I think that would be great, but cutting off all iPhone users is quite a big deal. A better option would be for the US to enforce their monopoly laws
Yeah that would be nice, unlikely with the power corporations have, but nice 😬
Well now that Biden is running for president maybe things are gonna cha... Aaaahh just kidding :)
It's not at all a supply and demand problem. The demand is there, but apple is using their monopoly to block supply.
For a free market economy to work it's quite important for the market to be somewhat free.
Capitalism is a hot mess at best haha I don’t know, I don’t see this sort of thing ever changing, Amazon has a stranglehold on all retail, Apple dominating this stuff, it goes on and on
People can always get androids, and stop building for Apple products though. It’s jarring when you install an app to find it requires signup and payment from elsewhere, but it does sound like they’re inconsistent
The reason why you can't sing up in the app is because apple blocks it... It's a shakedown so you will pay them 30%. And it's completely illegal.
Fair enough, yeah they should either deny all similar apps or permit them. In that scenario I think it’s fine to expect a certain level of integration
I think they already do that though? They reject a *ton* of apps (including massive companies) because they are bypassing their payments. I think the only exception when physical goods are involved. IIRC, even audible/kindle had to implement workarounds in order to support iOS.
Yeah nobody makes you support ios, just ignore 50+% of the US market.
I hope one day this comes to light in an antitrust investigation. Highly recommended:…
PWAs don’t cover all technical cases, don’t offer native performance and believe it or not, there are still devs out there who care about these things. Plus, you don’t kill someone who’s sick before trying to cure them.
Why not ask Apple to allow sideloading of apps if they feel their "service" is being used for "free"?
PWA without push is not the best option for an email client ☹️
Can I implement a PWA that has access to local files? That are under user control and not subject to eviction by the OS or Safari?
It’s probably Phil or a clone of Phil.
This is what happens when the "Head of Worldwide Marketing" is also leading the App Store, making them "Head of Developer Relations".
As a Windows Phone veteran, I sympathize with Apple’s position here. There’s absolutely no value to a rich ecosystem of high quality apps like Basecamp if they are not directly monetized. Who needs ‘em! (Apple does.)
Costco creates an entire business on a $120 yearly fee. Plus, who would buy an iPhone without thirst party apps? Apple is on the wrong side of this.
Everyone who bought the first iPhone comes to mind as people who would buy an iPhone without third party apps 👀
True, but times have changed. Many third party apps would be considered minimum requirements for a smart phone these days and iPhone sales have increased 200x since 2007.
Fair point but it kinda undercuts my attempt at a cheap shot there 😜
Really depends on the user though. Some colleagues only install Facebook and Instagram. All other apps are stock. Or those that only use free apps. Then of cos we have the power users who buy third party apps that do more or are more pleasing in aesthetics.
I don't know what to say, expect feeling disgusted inside. Nothing logically wrong, per se, but the passage feels like written by a spam-marketing company.
To be fair. Payment via Apple in apps is better than google. Feels much safer. Is that worth 30%?
Actions like this, along with Catalyst and Catalina seem to represent a lot of my concerns with Apple lately. It seems like they're not as focused on developers anymore. Meanwhile Microsoft under Nadella is embracing open source, GitHub, a new terminal, WSL2, PowerToys, etc.
I jumped to Windows just for a single C# project but (surprising even myself) I stayed after discovering WSL2 and their new terminal. Rest of the OS is rocky, but the newer parts are on point.
This, above anything, is why I won't consider the iPad as a laptop replacement.
Seriously, nobody had a thought to maybe delete that one sentence? Not that that is the only problematic sentence here, but, yeesh.
The fundamental problem is that Apple views their customers as Apple owned, and developers only as valuable insofar as it helps apple better monetize their assets. See IAP for childrens games.
There’s apps over in the UK AppStore that offer premium features that you don’t have to get via IAPs, I have youtube premium, Spotify, Disney plus, amazon TV to name a few, not one was got via in app purchase.
The apps available on macOS and iOS are about 80% of the value of Apple products.
You can almost picture them typing away with the Doogie Howser music playing faintly behind the tapping of their keystrokes, then a smug "job well done" grin appears as they hit send and log off for the night. Wild. What a load of self-important horseshit.
The person who wrote it goes by Greedy Hubris
Hot takes like this are why I’ve black-holed Marco.
Unsurprising given Apple’s recent track record of knowingly selling defective keyboards and not providing a viable recall/replacement program. Cultural problems in Cupertino.
That program isn’t a solution because it involves replacing one defective butterfly keyboard for another of the same ilk. Many people have been through multiple replacements and they keep failing.
It is a replacement so you can’t say they weren’t doing anything. In fact even the new models with a different keyboard have keyboard warranty.
The new magic scissor switch keyboard is awesome, the problem was 4 years of defective butterfly keyboards. Anyone who bought one should be given a magic keyboard. But that’s not what Apple is doing. Swapping a butterfly for another butterfly that will fail again is no solution.
The people behind #Apple #AppStore are awful. I spent a full year of my life learning Swift and they rejected my app for no real reason. I appealed and demonstrated that it was in line with all guidelines, but they wouldn't budge. So I switched to Android and haven't looked back.
Aren’t they supposed to give a reason for rejecting it? Show the responses.
What Apple considers a "reason" and what a developer/business owner considers a "reason" doesn't have to align. "Did not comply with guidelines" is a valid reason to them, just not a helpful one.
"Did not comply with guidelines" obviously isn't one of their guidelines, Dad. (There were more specifics but I only had only 280 characters to explain 😅)
Yeah, the main reason was: "4.2 Design: Minimum Functionality. We still found that the usefulness of your app is limited by the minimal amount of content or features it includes."
It was a complete app, full featured app but Apple didn't agree. I showed several examples of apps on their store with similar levels of complexity, but they didn't want to talk about other apps.
Anyway, Apple is free to do what they want and I'm free to complain about it and switch to Android 👍
(I wish I hadn't wasted a year studying Swift though 😅)
I’m about to start on an app and am trying to decide which platform/program to develop it in. This helps me make my decision!
Could you tell me a bit more about what their reasons were? I’m also getting close to releasing my first app after a full year of work and I’m getting pretty nervous. I always thought it should be fine, but now I’m not so sure anymore.
money money money and mo money
You ungrateful affiliates, App Store pays you 70%~85% as the commission, and you are still complaining????
We, Apple developers, figured that the ‘review board’ is made of faceless folks who are paper pushers. When Apple moved to approval-within-a-day, it started having paper-pushers ONLY in that cadre. This is the language exepected. (Sadly, this is ‘specific’ letter).
Genuinely asking. What’s your proposed solution?
Crystal clear review guidelines, not open to creative interpretations.
That's just asking for more problems. It also assumes Apple makes guidelines that are in evergone's best interest (spoiler: they don't). They randomly removed all vaping apps from the App Store last year. They don't allow emulators. Etc. 👎🏼
I don't care in which interest the rules are made, I want them to be applied fairly for everyone. You should know the outcome of the review process before you start working on an app. Then you can choose platform.
We all want that. I don't think Apple can be trusted to do that though unless they have some competition. Competition is the only thing that will keep them honest.
You should listen to the latest ATP episode where they talk about this. Starts at around 1:40:00
Certainly! But wouldn’t the whole controversy of the Hey app rejection could be solved if they just implemented an In-App Subscription option? Why don’t they just do that? Is it the principal?
Because 30% is too fucking much. Apple can't have their cake and eat it too. DHH is privileged enough to be able to stand up to Apple, and I think he knows this, so he's taking a stand for a good cause.
Prior to the App Store, carriers controlled which apps would make it onto phones, and often took 50% + If you watch when Apple announced revenue share of 30%, room full of developers cheered! Now that iOS has a wider and broader reach, what’s changed? Why is it now too much?
Back in 2008, Apple's 30% cut seemed like an incredible deal in return for a place in the App Store. Indie Mac developers who had struggled for years became overnight millionaires thanks to that deal. But the value of that deal deteriorates year on year as the App Store grows.
My immediate thought was that if devs don’t want to use Apple’s payment option, stuff like push notifications could be paid services for devs. Feels fair to me. Fully free or ad-supported apps could still use them for free like now
Listen to the latest ATP episode where they talk about it.
Gonna be honest: I did the Apple app store thing for a year, but the costs just to distribute even a free app are not something I can tolerate. Cost of a Mac + sub fee vs any existing computer + one-time £25 fee for Android.
If their ToS allowed me to build on Windows or Linux, I could tolerate the yearly fee. As it stands though, their approach to capitalism is not something I can support or approve of.
And so the very low barriers to entry get those stores filled with terrible apps.
I definitely recall a time when the Apple app store had several thousand 'fake fingerprint scanner' apps... And yet Apple still had the same ToS requirements. Just goes to prove that the barrier to entry didn't stop mountains of trash.
If they don't care about developers let's not waste you time, knowledge and energy in enhancing their app ecosystem. Today iOS devices are on top just because of apps ecosystem.
Many of the apps are cross platform nowadays.
Be thankful Apple made this platform and you’re not selling in brick and mortar where the 30% used to be 50%.
The brick and mortar model is irrelevant here. The valid comparison is Apple's 30% against browser-based SaaS, or Windows and Mac apps delivered via web download, which cost the developer well under 5%.
So move to the competition. Isn’t this why we have choice? I’m sure people will pay $99 a year for an email client on Android.
A duopoly doesn’t leave much of a choice, and your sarcasm is helping make the point. If you want to successfully sell a mobile app, you have to be on Apple’s platform.
You mean Google’s Play Store doesn’t make money? And if duopolies are a problem I’m sure helping Huawei will be a good place to start.
Not to side with apple here (at all) but you kinda defeated your own argument, "If you want to successfully sell a mobile app, you have to be on Apple’s platform." It seems like YOU need, not THEY need you to be there, hence free market and all, Apple can charge their 30%. WDYT?
...hence dominant market position that is ripe for abusive practices. Do you think it's a coincidence that the arbitrary exceptions to their otherwise strict rules carve out space for direct competitors to Apple Music, iBooks, Apple TV, iCloud, etc.? Obvious antitrust dodge.
As far as who needs whom, they are now in a dominant market position with incredible leverage over devs, but I don't believe they could've gotten there without those same devs. The abusive subscription shakedown situation developed after they achieved that position.
Imagine an iPhone with only a Weather and Stock market app readers, pretty expensive brick you wouldn't buy isn't it ?
I’m sure Netflix and Spotify will do well on only the Google Play Store.
But they don’t need an App Store. They don’t need a channel. They sell direct. That’s the point. It’s like Apple taking a cut when you sell something using Safari...
That’s fine. I’m sure you can do just as well on Android where you don’t need an App Store to download apps. That’s why there’s competition.
Currently there are more than 100 million iPhone users in the United States, accounting for about 45 percent of all smartphone users in the United States.
And that’s only 20% of the market share worldwide. Google also pays out billions to devs.
You are making absolutely no sense unfortunately. I am well aware of the mobile marketplace and I restate any business that doesn’t offer an iPhone app for a consumer/business email subscription service is utterly doomed to failure.
I think this is just the answer to what hey said. And Apple is correct here.
Apple hates developers - must be a Thursday.
That's a nice free app you've got there not making us money. Shame if something happened to it.
Everyone who has supported their platform for the past decade+, when they knew this-is-who-they-are, deserves this shit imho. Reap what you sow/abet.
I...don’t know that I disagree with Apple’s word use. Contributing value and contributing revenue are two different things. Arguably all apps add value to the App Store, but they don’t all contribute revenue — the developer fee wouldn’t be part of the App Store revenue.
They still charge $100/year fee and force developers to overpay for their laptops to publish apps.
Developers have to pay a higher price for laptops than regular customers?
The developer fee easily covers their cost involved for said apps, and guess what - without the apps, they don't have a store anyway.
Apple on the loosing side of history. The app store makes the iPhone, not Apple and the fees are too damn high
Not sure why you didn't @Apple - just in case they aren't noticing this
No one reads the mentions to that account.
I let my developer account expire last week. Active since 2013. My few apps in the App Store were only made for fun not my real job. Too many updates to my Apps were required to keep apps valid in the App Store.
From a user point of view, it’s good that those unmaintained or unupdated apps disappear.
What if there was an open source phone OS? And the ones that govern it is the community? Maybe it’s just a Dream.
“we add value to your highly profitable hardware FAR beyond the 30%." True. And develop for Apple add value to our curriculum, of course gain money and maybe our ego, because we can create apps for Apple. We can do it only for Android, but some of us choose do it for Apple.
Apple don't put a gun in our faces to create apps for them. I have an app for iOS that can not publish because in this moment I can afford pay 100USD, but I created this app because I want to do it, nobody force me to do it.
That just makes it worse, Juan Carlos. When you make a good app, it is a labor of love and craft and passion. Arbitrary review policies that nuke your app's business model at release 1.2 amounts to extortion. What then? Walk away? Launch at a loss? How do you justify 1.3 or 2.0?
apple takes a cut, it means it doesn’t nuke anything, since it doesn’t charge anything upfront (except 100 usd which is nothin’). for that they provide malware protection for their users.
Finally a lot of users in both Apple and Android put bad reviews because the app have a price or subscription. Why we don't listen and make all apps for free? Maybe because many of us make apps for get money. So, Why Apple could not charge us for publish our apps?
Hamfisted for sure… Try developing for Nintendo. Isn’t the real problem that users expect apps to be insanely cheap? It’s not the 30%, it’s the 70%. Apple is partially responsible for that too.
Not sure cheapness is the issue in this case. Isn't the subscription Apple wants a 30% cut of a $99 yearly subscription? That's a $29.70 fee where a normal payment provider would ask for ~$3.
Does Comcast charge HBO 3%? How valuable is cable without TV stations?
Wouldn't know, cable isn't even worth it with channels.
Hey charges $99 where a regular email provider will charge $10 a year. That ‘s $89 more... what a difference.
This is the first thing I’ve seen that’s made me consider not buying apple for my next phone.
Apple is the new Microsoft... how the tables have turned :(
The entire “there’s an app for that” campaign was about transferring the value of our often free software into Apple’s bajillion dollar iPhone business.
Absolutely correct.
heres an idea.. just get an iap but never trigger it. if no one sees it, no one buys it, and app store thinks its monetized but not making money! EASY.. 😅 apart from all this apple has the guts to talk about user experience!
Well that current app really is useless without any purchase..
Cant believe this is real..
Infinite growth is a dangerous illusion.
Software sells hardware. Apps really sell hardware. It has been that way for over 60 years.
Also: If you consider the amount of hardware developers buy, the App Store makes Apple way more money than the developers.
The author of that little number is taking about the most arrogant and myopic view towards the situation one could possibly conceive of. Really, really, stunning they seem to be losing sight of how important the independent developer's role is in making the iPhone what it is.
One of the major tenets of monopolistic behavior seems to be that it never even occurs to the monopolist that what they are doing is wrong.
The entitled tone of that whole response is astounding...
Smh. Stuff like this is why I stay away from Apple, things they stand for as a company. Themselves. Treat their customers like sheep, developers like shit, they believe we all just lease their products versus own, etc etc. Rabbit hole goes too deep.
Spotify: $7.44bn Netflix: $20.15bn Amazon Prime: $19.21bn That’s how much revenue provided by “reader” apps that Apple don’t care about contributing to App Store income (admittedly not all acquired through Apple platforms). Absolutely nonsensical.
So true, btw we just got banned from China today - no reason given!
Happened to another podcast app recently. Something about the Chinese government being unhappy? What would you as a CEO do? Exit the country altogether?
Looks like the first 15 minutes of Monday's Keynote will be focused on a shitload of positive PR, how developers profit from the App Store.
But they won’t be able to hide their true feelings, which is that all the money is Apple’s and they’re giving it to app developers. The reality is that all the money comes from users. Users trade that money with developers in exchange for apps. Apple just taxes the transaction.
It’s a real dick move by Apple. Totally devalues what we do as platform developers.
I’m guessing this was in response to someone writing in and if so without the context of the what was being replied to commenting on it with out it isn’t fair.
Everyone knows what this is regarding: Hey.
While some are fighting the injustice of police brutality and systematic racism, it’s just rich to see privileged people complain about having to pay ANY fees to a marketplace that allowed them to get to where they are in the first place 😒
This is just shameful. People buy into their hardware because of the App Store!
The new mob boss beats you with an aluminum, rounded-edge pipe. (Case sold separately.)
I thought Phil Schiller made an interesting point in that interview that I hadn’t seen made elsewhere: without a purchase the app is useless & there’s no way to make a purchase from the app. This one sentence though is actually worse than the controversy it’s trying to calm.
Netflix does the same thing though, and they get a pass, which is entirely dumb.
It still would be interesting to hear what the request was
AFAIK it’s about HEY not wanting to use IAP for their subscription, which lead to apple blocking all updates
Read the Story now, thanks
They should be glad that there is no in-person attendance this year for WWDC... =D
H5 development for the win! No constraints. Your App, your code, your business, your rules. 100% yours and it can run on Apple devices too :)
I reread this 4 times because I was sure Apple couldn't have possibly written such an overtly rent-seeking and borderline threatening letter. This isn't a PR person problem though, it comes right from Phil, so this is as endorsed as it gets from Apple VP leadership.
From what someone said earlier in reply, it seems that this isn’t the entire statement?
In fact most of people choose not to download an app as soon as they see “In App Purchase” next to it.
Is that anecdotal or based on studies?
Absolute rubbish
Do your study on in app purchase first mate, your comment sounds cheaper than rubbish.
We greedy developers are only taking from #Apple without contributing to its revenue. Not even respecting the rules and terms … sad
Like what? Maybe make the point with some numbers? Do you folks want average people who are not in the business to be sympathetic? Or limit it to folks in this industry? If it’s the former you folks need to improve your messaging-find someone around you outside bubble to assist
I think we can translate this to mean APPLE SALES ARE F**KED RIGHT NOW
Agreed. Didnt the free apps build the whole platform!
There’s a lot of talk of this, I’m curious if Google Play store also takes a similar 30% cut? How about Amazon App Store?
Remember when once upon a time Nokia was the market leader? Remeber when it fell apart... fast? They also seriously underestimated the value of custom apps and user experience.
Java apps were available from a multitude of places.
Yeah, but the built-in ”app-store” was terrible. To find decent apps you needed to search the whole web. All the cool apps were not even available for Nokia/microsoft. And then they disappeared from the market altogether.
Sounds ominous. Like Mafia, and the overlords aren't mincing words.
take them up on it. Demand your developers fee back. They said they're happy to offer it for free :) Technically that could be held up in court.
I know someone who mantains an app for a mobile phone company, where users can see their credit, update their plans, buy minutes/data credit, etc. He got a similar rejection some time ago. They wanted to frame it as 'in-app purchase'. They worked it out after all, but still.
“we add value to your highly profitable hardware FAR beyond the 30%” No you don’t: because growth in @Apple hardware sales is dead, and has been for years. That’s on @tim_cook, which is why he’s eating his existing markets to maintain the profit growth that keeps him in his job.
Two serious issues for authorities to dig: 1) Why can’t a user download an app from a developer’s website and install it on his/her iOS device, like they can do on MacOS? 2) Why Apple blocks a company of creating a competitor App Store on iOS, that could provide competition?
True, their rules but org's value goes beyond economic value, it includes customers/employee satisfaction, protection of reputation/brands, contribution to the community, integrity of the org's product/services. Devs are stakeholders, Apple should meet their expectations too
more reasons as to why I should be the cto of apple @Abbaskumaili
Fed up with lagy and buggy Apple Music for years I did my part and killed my sub for another provider today - my own small protest over this garbage.
Problem is: Apple has no competition. Where would we take our awesome-value apps? Android? No chance in hell. 😂
I don't know, I take a more pragmatic view of this situation. Samuel Axon has a good opinion piece on it at Ars Technica that's interesting.
Why one email app went to war with Apple—and why neither one is right
Op-ed: As antitrust probes and WWDC loom, one developer sparks a firestorm.
This is an excellent, balanced review of the situation. I don’t have a strong opinion whether I agree with the author or not, but informative and shows both sides.
Maybe they should simply charge $5 for the App that gives people iPhone access to their separately purchased mail account? If you're spending $99/yr it's surely not so bad. (Users are effectively paying for the App as part of the $99 currently.) Or $94+$5/yr in-App purchase.
In response to suggestions it adds value to the iPhone maybe Apple should have tried a comparison to Creative people asked to work for free as they will get a credit and "exposure". I think 30% of $5 seems fair to all...
Cash 💴 Is what Apple is worry. When do they realise that without developers there is no Appstore?
If i’m wrong, my bad. But the message seems to show Basecamp were not following dev guidelines and are being “slapped on the wrist” for it. I dont see the problem here. Noone is above the law.
Acting like they’re some sort of charity is pretty crappy. If developer fees don’t cover the cost of hosting free apps, that’s your problem, but don’t act like they don’t “generate revenue.”
Shocking that Apple is treating developers as their salespersons. One step closer to assigning revenue targets to developers.
Apple de hoy es Microsoft de los 90, pura arrogancia.
Nailed it. I didn’t buy into iOS (or iPhone OS as it was back then 🧓🏻) as a consumer until the App Store launched. Early iPhones were cool and all, but it was third-party apps—thanks to developers’ ingenuity—that made it feel like living in the future.
Seems to me. Cup. Tea. storm.
The price of giving up control
And the fact that people want the app before it hit the appstore is proof that apple is a gatekeeper in this case and not a userbase provider
This is just one of those things you all will forget about by September when the new products come out. You might as well just stop crying and get over it now. Nothing will come of this. For every dev that complains there’s another dev waiting to take your spot gracefully. Cheers
People complains of App Store cut but not other store cut
Just add "Thank You" in app purchase so people can support you. This is in app purchase and is optional to users. Apple can't do anything about that. Btw, I want 30% cut for that idea.
Only way to know if the App Store actually does any good is to allow competition. If App Store really good, worth 30% tax, then consumers will choose it over alternatives. Jailbreak or install AltStore now folks.
I’m with Apple on this one. Your app wouldn’t reach ANYONE without the App Store and you’re contributing nothing back to support the ecosystem.
Eh. I’m not sure the whole “15-30% is outrageous!” is the right argument; every retail business charges you for being in the window. I think it’s more the business and consumer hostile nature of how IAP subs work 🤷🏻‍♂️…
On the Hey debacle. The issue with IAP subs isn’t so much that Apple take 15-30%. They develop and support each iOS version for years as well as operating an editorially driven storefront (much like old school retail storefronts there’s a markup). Neither are cheap endeavors.
Oh wow hosting thirty megabytes on a server how could apple possibly afford that without taking a 30pc cut of your business
Yup. The $99/year fee just to be able to put MY OWN APP on MY OWN PHONE is why I stopped learning iOS dev and continued with web, desktop, command-line, server, and, well, pretty much *anything* else. I'm sorely tempted to just ditch Apple and switch back to Linux.
I don’t think that’s quite right. I only need to join the Apple developer program if I am going to publish an app to the store. If I want to write an app for my own phone I can do so without paying $, download Xcode for free and target my phone for the output.
Maybe they’ve changed it, but that’s how it was about six or so years ago, when I was trying to put on my phone, an app I had made with RubyMotion, as my first foray into iOS dev. Everything I found said you had to pony up.
That’s not how it was 6 years ago. You’ve always been able to load your own app from the moment iOS 2.0 launched with the ability to create your own apps.
Personal use for free changed eight or nine years ago.
I had to join the developer program to be able to use Apple Pay on my website. I own an iPhone but don’t do any development beyond Apple Pay JS.
Ok did not know that!
Yea. Misperception, that… the fee is only required for those who seek to publish into the App Store. Still, if you feel like a Linux rig gives you enough of the value you get from macOS, definitely do make the switch.
They are are rewriting their opening WWDC lines from: 'HEY welcome to WWDC', 'HEY welcome to this session', 'HEY Craig tell us about iOS'.
That’s a bad look for Apple. But what is the right percentage to charge? You know it’s going to remain a percentage. No way Apple goes to a flat fee. I hope Apple creates a compromise that appeases us developers but allows them to maintain control of curation.
Based on the comments, I’m guessing devs feel as though Apple is entitled to a zero % cut?
Does Basecamp also contribute to users saving more on @iCloud whose gross margins r likely > 90%? Or does @basecamp not use @cloudkit?
Apple needs all app developers but not a single developer in particular. All developers need Apple.
Yeah this Hey email thing is a real shit show. Apple is really showing how they can bend the rules for “big” companies like Netflix and then crack down on smaller ones. They put Netflix in some bullshit catergory to make sure they can avoid in app subscription purchasing.
Everybody knows this, iOS apps add real value to Apple products. Without them their hardware would be exhibition industrial design. And it’s been like this since iPhone OS 2.0.
Wow, that's really just one step away from "it'd be a shame if something happened to your other app"
Hmm so all those e-commerce apps should be paying 30% for every transaction that happens in the app?
Interesting how Apple and the Italian mafia share the same concern about "respect".
Thanks for that. You pretty much nailed it. I have a feeling Apple would be singing an even slightly different tone if WWDC were in-person this year. Or at least, they’d be getting a crapload of feedback in-person.
What value has Apple, and their developer fee and 30%, added to YOUR business?
Why didn’t you ‘at’ them? @Apple
It doesn’t really sound that bad or unfair. Maybe a bit business-y but Apple is a massive business after all.
Apple saying the quiet part out loud. If you don’t bring in revenue or a huge number of users to their platform (see Uber, Facebook, etc), then you are expandable in their eyes.
And publishers no longer get any affiliate revenue for referrals to the App Stores from our own sites from the results of our own marketing efforts. While it was only 7% it helped to soften the blow of 30%.
Have you read Panzarino’s interview with Schiller? I assume so. What’s your reaction to that?
Apple's hardware has always been top notch and "it just works". However as software is concerned, the apps I use the most are not Apple's. Not a single one. iOS developers have always gotten Apple's short end of the stick but that should stop.
I think there's a problem when zero percent of Apple‘s leadership has not been filthy-rich for the majority of their lives. It's impossible to not lose perspective on what's like living in the real world.
likewise. The built-in Apple apps are just inferior. They are banking on the power of defaults, but everyone who knows better uses a third-party one. I'm not one to question Apple's strategy, I just note that I keep buying their products.
makes me cringe when I see these abuse of power. I always had a dilemma about which service to use for music and backing up photos. Not its super clear and switching right away from @AppleMusic and icloud — less @Apple products from here on!
The content is on point. Apple invented a new distribution model and created tens of millions of jobs in the process. They do not charge a dime (ok, $99 a year) to develop and distribute nearly anything to anyone. Barring stupid shit that dilutes and degrades the marketplace.
How many employees at Apple are asking the age old question “shit, are we the bad guys?”
Did this email just make the case for side loading apps if Apple gets testy about hosting free apps on its platform?
I stopped using Safari for Mac when they knocked out all the indie extension developers last year. Extension support had never been great but I could make do. Now I’m on Brave despite Safaris many advantages.
Stupidest thing if rumours are true, Apple will announce their arm MacBook and be like Hey, devs! now you need to update your soft ASAP or it will be another windows RT ;D stay cool we have you covered! Just perfect timing for this
And this is when Microsoft rejoins the mobile business... apple is doing exactly what Microsoft did 10 years ago... an ecosystem is nothing without apps.
I get you’re all friends with this developer, hence the circle jerk, but this rule has been there for years. The argument that “Apple has billions so why are they doing this?” is baseless. The rule applies to everyone.
While I have some sympathy for Basecamp and I also don't like the 30% cut Apples takes on my app MapOut - If HEY mail succeeds and gets an exemption, I might as well consider putting my app in a similar lock-down state and require users to sign-up and pay on my website. 1/3
Why should HEY be different than all the other apps out there? So I'm a bit baffled: Basecamp only compares itself to Netflix, etc. and not to the 1 million+ other apps out there that offer normal pricing/in-app-purchase/subscription. 2/3
The only reason HEY differs from other apps right now is because Apple has been using that same tactics on smaller indie devs, and therefore the outcry has been less noticed. Spotify have made the same complaints for years. These services don’t need IAP so shouldn’t be forced in.
All could consider the same thing: lock-down, sign-up and selling licenses on the web... 3/3
And to all MapOut users out there: No, I don’t really consider this for my app 😅
Thems the rules!! (Said in a Kyle Dunnigan impersonating Michael Jackson voice)
I have to buy apple hardware (MBP, phone, tablet, whatever), I have to pay $100/year for a license. If I have a larger dev team, then they all need hardware. So I and every other developer is part of the walled garden. We're all contributing revenue to Apple.
Read the letter in full. Apple explains ways to provide the App without IAP that will make it better for users and meet the App Store guidelines. I would like Hey to do that- then I might actually bother to check out the app.
Yeah, that's messed up. Reason enough to not develop on iOS for me
Apple has a looooong history of kneecapping the very people that help it succeed. I used to be a big Apple supporter & Apple support tech. Then they opened the Apple stores and put me out that gig. It also ahot the feet out of long time Apple stores.
Apple and the Devs will be just fine. Certainly seems to come off insensitive but damn, it’s a mutual needed relationship. As a consumer, I am watching while biting nails that this may lead to regulation that keeps me away from 3P software. Unintentional consequences...
I pay $100 per year for the privilege of running my OWN app on my OWN device which I never intend to publish. #appletax
I mean really, the only thing that is keeping down PWAs from being 1st class citizens on iOS is Apple. I am a huge fan of Apple products, but their position on native apps over PWAs is outdated and ridiculous.
"....that all developers must follow." is one of the biggest problems with App Store review. They have _never_ been good at consistent application of the guidelines.
No-one forces Apple to run the AppStore for "free"! Instead maybe they could start adding Progressive Web App support to Safari. But, hey, that doesn't generate a profit through other people's work like the AppStore does...
Agree with @Apple, THEY CREATED the ecosystem to begin with and the Google Play Store BUILDS ON the success of the AppStore. Developers have NEVER BEFORE been in this comfortable position before to be able to reach so many people so easily. Shelf space should not just be free.
VisiCalc sold computers, not DOS.
Just bad interpretation going around. I think whoever wrote that, they just mean app store rules are designed to take more revenue from few to have the ability to host free ones, so please follow them.
Imagine you want shelf space at @Walmart. You would have to play by their rules and pay a commission, probably on top of renting the space.
Not like all dev must take place on a macos machine either. And wanna test on a real device, hope you like an expensive real life simulator to ~break~ install iOS betas on
oh my goodness. what did i just read. Apple with these shenanigans
So is it now implied that unless your app generates revenue for Apple, they don’t want it in the store anymore? So if I desire to develop a free app for my user base because of my engagement with them, it is now punishable?
Add that you have to buy their hardware to develop for it which is a significant outlay for small devs as well unless that's changed since I last looked.
It is time to create Swift Android SDK
That particular paragraph feels like counter-arguing contents in previous correspondence between those 2 parties.
Devs also add most of the value to 'services' revenue, the only subcategory with exponential growth is App Store:…
Yuppp. This won't stop while the App Store is almost half of the 'services' revenue, Apple's most important growth category. Only one growing exponentially.
Personally if I were Apple I would flat out say either pay the 30% or make their app exclusive to Android. But since Android isn’t as profitable as iOS and Google takes the same 30%. The developers will complain but end up paying either way and Apple knows it.
What irks me when Apple talks about the AppStore rules is they refer to them like the Ten Commandments. As if they didn’t make them! When they’re actually more akin to the US constitution, wherein you can create an amendment as society and context changes. It SHOULD be like that.
If Tim Cook personally signed off of this, should he never be allowed to communicate with developers again? Including on Stage at WWDC? personally, I think YES.
Looks like the author hasn’t discovered the Grammarly app yet.
I have an alibi.
Ha, the proofreader in me is cringing. 😱
They gain ad revenue from free apps mostly, and revenue from IAP & developers get their product in front of millions of customers, who trust the reputation of the store, without paying for distribution channels. I’m not happy about the #hey debacle, but there’s 2 sides to this.
I’m not trying to be an asshole. But. What does Apple risk by opening their software platform? Would viruses be more rampant? Because as a casual user. I’ll take less apps for more security.
App store developers kept Microsoft out of the phone business. That wasn't Apples doing, it was the developer community that would not supply an MS app store.