this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
61 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37724 readers
745 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Probably because the prices are too high? This point from Apple to defend the price, is actually against in my opinion. Probably only those rich companies have the money to pay. If the prices were lower, then more indie devs could pay.
I’m confused. Isn’t the commission that is paid just a cut of the profits from sales? The 85% not paying commission would be because their app is free. Apple’s argument is that they are providing a huge platform and infrastructure for app developers; many of which are utilizing it for zero cost (except the annual $99 developer fee).
If someone then uses that infrastructure to make money then Apple takes a cut of either 15% or 30% to help sustain the whole thing. Those numbers are argued to be too high although they are basically in-line with the mark-up of most goods and services.
The real complaint is that Apple doesn’t allow alternate app stores that would compete, and theoretically push down the commission to whatever the free market determines is reasonable (and presumably below 15%). Apple, of course, argues that they do it for safety purposes. One way to offer lower commissions is to have less strict screening processes to save money. This could end up being a race to the bottom of quality which may not really benefit users.
Are you of the belief that devs get to say, “I’m poor, I can’t pay”. Can’t really understand what your comment is implying.
@muddybulldog Apple provides a number of 85% of developers not paying commission and defends the price is not high. On the other hand I believe the price is high and therefore less people will pay. It's a simple math; make it cheaper, and more developers are willing to pay. Otherwise it probably doesn't make financial sense.
That’s what I’m not understanding. Willing to pay what? They’re not paying commission because they don’t owe anything. It’s not a matter of price being high or low. Why would they pay for something that they don’t have to pay for? Their cost is zero.