I'd personally use a palm tree or coffee icon for this kind of message. But it is kind of alarming that Apple allows external payments now!! That's like... hell freezing over, or Dracula donating blood.
But imagine mom or dad viewing this screenshot and getting creeped out because of the red icon.
I am pretty sure that mom would be upset that her “iPhone” keeps stealing her money
Edit: my fears may be overblown, but I am so happy that since getting my mom an iPhone and iPad many years ago, any need for my “computer guy” technical support has vanished.
I don't blame them for doing it, but as someone who spent years doing App Store Optimization (ASO), I can assure you this would tank your conversion rates.
I only ask because the judge took a bite out of them the first time they did exactly that.
Here's an article which does show what the warning looks like: https://www.theverge.com/news/667484/apple-eu-ios-app-store-...
It’s looking like Tim Cook should wrap up and let someone like Schiller take over
They achieve precisely the opposite of what they think. People will learn to associate that warning with "oh good this app is cheaper than the competition".
People are so accustomed to dismiss "warnings" ,especially when there are going to be so many of them
Additionally, because they control all of the payments on iOS they can provide much better targeting to advertisers for purchases, which open payment processes would reduce the value of.
But they've played this so badly that they are going to lose most of their app store revenue at this point. Sucks to be them I guess.
With random apps there's really no good indication that the system they use is okay. It's not like you can see a legit URL bar or anything in apps.
The same process is happening to macOS too, but at least Linux is an easy switch there.
Best backup plan is EU laws that basically target these monopoly players directly.
Best example is Apple, which got away with DMA by just doing the bare minimum and inflicting max damage anyway.
What are the frameworks of usage impossible to follow? People can't release stuff on the apple app store anymore?
Apple did not get away with their (un)implementation of DMA, they got spanked and will continue being spanked until they actually comply. What is the 'max damage' they inflicted?
akie•4h ago
pcardoso•3h ago
seviu•2h ago
A clear example is the Vision Pro. Developer relations were menacing app developers that they would regret not building for it.
One year later, half a million headsets sold, and nobody in my circle has even the slightest interest in developing apps for it. I should know because I am an iOS developer, now working for a bank, and enjoying it, but no longer pursuing the indie dream.
Crickets
Apple maximized its strategy for maximum profit extraction. They have all the rights to do it. It’s, after all, their product. And they keep on doing it by selling devices which are fully managed by them, disallowing the usage of APIs that would make their devices way more usable. All this with full disdain for app developers.
As I said, they have all their right to enforce that 30% rule and show scare banners all over the place.
But the damage is done. And the trust is lost.
rini17•2h ago
seviu•2h ago
That 30% is however ridiculous. But they can raise it to 90% if they want to find out. The user is not really hurt, just the developer. Eventually they won’t have developers.
No apps, no iPhone.
Not sure what the monopolistic take is. There is a lot of alternative smartphones with way more ram and great specs, that rival the best iPhone.
I live in Europe though, and over here Android dominates the market, and people use WhatsApp for messaging. A totally different world.
modo_mario•1h ago
I'd say it's fair to argue it's a duopoly
>The user is not really hurt, just the developer.
Both will likely pay part of that tax to varying degrees.
kruuuder•1h ago
Not at all trying to defend Apple's behavior here, but that statement is not true. There are many indie devs making a living from apps. Margins in indie apps are usually very high, as in most cases the expenses are fixed - just your own salary.
AStonesThrow•1h ago
It sounds like you are hiding costs of overhead. What about rent for your workplace (whether it is your home, a coffeehouse, or WeWork) and your utilities, especially electric power and Internet access, and your HW/SW tools, including your notebook, monitors, accessories.
Don’t hide your externalities naïvely like an Uber driver.
kruuuder•1h ago
Say you need 100k profit after Apple's cut.
Scenario A: Apple takes a third of the App Store revenue. You need to sell in-app purchases for 150k. Scenario B: Apple takes no cut. You need to sell in-app purchases for 100k.
So the claim is, scenario B would be the dream, but scenario A is "nearly impossible"? What is fundamentally different between 100k and 150k revenue, if your expenses are fixed? This doesn't make any sense.
The comparison to Uber doesn't make any sense either, their costs aren't fixed. If they want to double their income, they must double their work.
modo_mario•1h ago
Consider it similar to supermarkets or amazon. anticompetitive market practices and other dynamics make it so they are dominant. Now it's almost unfeasible to not sell your product in these places. They can now dictate you can not sell your product cheaper in your own store if you sell in theirs or the like. At any given time they might notice your success and decide to compete with you kick you to the curb with all advantages they can be expected to use.
OsrsNeedsf2P•1h ago
This doesn't even make sense, most provably by the fact you stopped being an indie dev long before Apple was forced to drop its 30%
JimDabell•1h ago
Almost all developers get charged 15%. Only the tiny minority earning more than a million dollars a year are charged 30%.