• scorpionix@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Well, they do provide the AppStore and the whole underlying infrastructure. So a fee in and off itself is not unreasonable.

    However, since the AppStore is the only channel for selling/downloading apps it reeks of monopoly (which Apple is rightly being investigated for).

    • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Why does providing the App Store entitle them to a percentage of in app purchases instead of, say, a fee per download or something?

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        If you think about it, a fee per app download is a lot less flexible when it comes to monetising purchases. Means free apps either become paid or shove into you a lot more micro transactions. That exact model is what made devs get mad at unity (although unity doesn’t provide the download infrastructure and it was on top of a cut)

        • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Fair. I still don’t think that entitles Apple to a cut of purchases in the app, but you’re right that a download fee sucks.

    • Michal@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      It is unreasonable if they are not the one providing payment infra.

      They already charge developers 100$ pa for the app store account. If that doesn’t cover their costs, they can increase it, but going after 3rd party payments is pure greed.