this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
429 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

58115 readers
3935 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dinckelman@lemmy.world 40 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I'm okay with paying 30% where the return on investment is worth it. Both the Appstore and Google Play do literally nothing for you, except distribution, and payment processing. These really don't deserve to take such a big cut, and I don't really want to hear any more excuses in their favor

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 40 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Both the Appstore and Google Play do literally nothing for you, except distribution.

I mean distribution is not "nothing". They have to maintain the app store, and process payments, and filter (most) malicious software.

It's just not worth anywhere near 30%, not to mention the flurry of ads all over the place.

At least with Android it's completely possible to have a third-party app or app store and charge using their own payment processes without ever touching the Google Play store.

Apple is a whole other level of control and anti-competitiveness, and they've been profiting off of it for decades with no intervention in sight.

[–] Savaran@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

It also is likely costs that are having to be done anyway because of web based sales or other distribution channels. So it’s even worse that Apple and Google act like they’re providing so much when they’re literally just preventing businesses from using their existing infrastructure.

[–] kirk781@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago

Dunno about Apple but Google does a very bad job of monitoring the Play Store. Outright malicious apps are one thing and deceiving apps are other. Latter is a very big problem. Low quality apps minced with in app purchases/subscriptions that are carbon copies of each other.

Google arguably does a worse job of curating the Play Store (sponsored results) and has a non existent support.

[–] balder1991@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I’ll still say that when it comes to developers, Apple is a much better experience than Google.

On the App Store you can appeal if your app is rejected and you have an actual human on the other side to explain you what are the issues.

On the Google Play, anything goes usually, but later if your account gets flagged by their automated system, you might 1) get a generic email with no explanation and a threat that you should fix it or the app will be taken down and your account get 1 out of 3 warnings; 2) get your account simply banned without explanation, losing all your services associated with Google forever with no appeal or anything you can do; 3) have your Google account simply disabled for supposedly being “associated” with some other account that was banned.

Many of these horror stories can be found on the Android development subreddits and I suspect this is the result of the Play Store being a big target of malicious or scam apps constantly.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 1 month ago

Well, on Google you have the choice to forego the app store altogether and distribute however you choose.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

30% is more or less the industry standard. Whether it's a physical store or an online store. They almost all take a 30% cut.

[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

30% is a reasonably cut for transactions that take place in your store, the main complaint I see about Apple and their store and the cut they take is that they want 30% of any money that goes through any of their devices at all, not just their app store. Relevant here, they are charging the 30% fee for people's memberships to creators on the platform, a process that is wholly separate from Apple's ecosystem unless the user is using apple pay to pay for it.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

30% is a reasonable cut for the distribution of software for which almost all revenue is marginal profit. When it's a transaction for services that cost money to provide (like Uber or online shopping) or a transfer of money on behalf of someone else (think Venmo or PayPal or just a regular banking app), a 30% cut of the whole transaction doesn't always make sense.

Apple recognizes this and doesn't take a 30% cut for those types of services. But they don't always categorize things correctly. Patreon is something like PayPal, whether the app owner takes a a small cut of each transaction, so paying 30% represents a huge cut, like 10x as much as they make.

Apple (and Google and Steam) are taking a software distribution cut for a service that more closely resembles payment processing, which is usually a 1-3% fee, not a 30% fee.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

and Steam

Exactly what is Steam doing now? AFAIK only charges fees sales of games through the Steam platform, from which developers get a LOT of value.

The fee will only apply to memberships purchased on Patreon’s iOS app starting November 4th, 2024.

This isn't about that, Apple hasn't fully committed to those plans. This is about their existing rules which have applied to a long ass time.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

from which developers get a LOT of value

What value are they getting, other than making use of Steam's market dominance? And having DRM added? And that's worth 30% of their income?

[–] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Unfortunately being listed on Steam is.

[–] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I mean that's obvious isn't it? What would be the point of a developer using Steam and having their game not listed on it? What are you trying to say?

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 0 points 1 month ago

It is obvious. That's the point. Steam dominates the market to the extent that you can't have a successful launch without paying them a 30% tax. This is how monopolies work.

[–] smeeps@lemmy.mtate.me.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Reminds me of the monty python sketch, "what have the romans ever done for us? except sanitation and roads and canals and public health" lol.

Steam gives devs a huge marketing presence that smaller devs simply wouldn't have otherwise, it gives countless high bandwidth distribution servers that automatically scale to demand, you can integrate the largest PC social community for matchmaking or other multiplayer features, you get a community page where people can post fan content or mods, etc.

That is worth way more than 30% to most devs. The only ones who it's not worth it for are huge companies like Blizzard and Epic who can manage all that themselves, hence why they're pretty much the only ones who don't sell games on Steam.

[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean, that's kinda exactly what I said, Apple taking a 30% cut of any transaction that occurs on their devices/on apps downloaded from their store makes no sense, though I will add that Patreon takes a 8 - 12% cut depending on how much support they give the creator. As far as Steam goes, to my knowledge they don't take a cut out of in game purchases, only purchases that occur strictly on their platform. (Also I don't think they charge everyone the 30%)

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

I mean, that's kinda exactly what I said

Yes, I'm agreeing with you and expanding on that, showing where the lines blur. Apple wants to get 30% of everything when it's only reasonable (and supported by historical practice) to get 30% of actual purchase of software. The history of the Apple App Store is an expansion beyond the original, relatively reasonable 30% cut on that narrow category, quietly spread out to a bunch of new categories that don't actually resemble the previous category.

Apple knows they can't take a 30% cut of every Uber fare or Doordash order or Amazon purchase of physical goods, and they don't try to. It's the categories in between where their policies start to look arbitrary.

And now Patreon in the crosshairs shows just how twisted it's gotten. Like I was saying, I see Patreon as something more like PayPal than, like, Netflix.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I know and I don't give a shit. It's absurd, I don't care who does it. Wanna take a guess at how many billions Apple has taken out of the pockets of developers for the privilege of writing and developing software for their hardware?

[–] proton_lynx@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

This is not about the App Store service's quality, this is about option. They could charge 50% for all I care, if we had the option to buy iOS apps from another store other than Apple's.