Apple Announces Major App Store Changes on iOS in Brazil (macrumors.com) 10
Apple is allowing iPhone developers in Brazil to distribute apps through authorized alternative marketplaces and use third-party payment systems following action by the country's competition regulator. "In other words, developers in Brazil will be able to circumvent the App Store and Apple's in-app purchase system, but there are still fees," reports MacRumors. Apple will collect commissions ranging from 5% on externally distributed apps to as much as 26% for some App Store transactions using its payment system. From the report: Alternative app marketplaces will have to be authorized by Apple and will need to meet ongoing requirements. For apps that are still distributed through the App Store, developers will be able to include an alternative payment processing method in their app and/or link users to a website to complete a transaction. These changes are available on iOS 26.5 and later, and they are the result of regulatory action from Brazil's competition regulator. Apple has added a new page on its website with additional details for developers in Brazil.
Apple said these changes introduce privacy and security risks for users, including children. The company has introduced safeguards to mitigate these risks, including a notarization process for iOS apps, an authorization process for app marketplaces, and limitations on external links and alternative payments for users under the age of 18. Apple has already allowed alternative app stores and/or third-party payment systems on iOS in the EU, Japan, and South Korea, and it will likely be forced to do so in the UK and Australia too, due to similar regulations in those countries.
Apple said these changes introduce privacy and security risks for users, including children. The company has introduced safeguards to mitigate these risks, including a notarization process for iOS apps, an authorization process for app marketplaces, and limitations on external links and alternative payments for users under the age of 18. Apple has already allowed alternative app stores and/or third-party payment systems on iOS in the EU, Japan, and South Korea, and it will likely be forced to do so in the UK and Australia too, due to similar regulations in those countries.
No, but you see, I don't want any commission... (Score:4, Insightful)
No, but you see, I don't want any commission on apps that aren't sold by Apple, for which Apple has no role in the creation or distribution of the app. They're not doing anything to earn that money.
The cost of developing the OS is paid for by the people buying hardware. After all, you can't sell hardware without the OS.
And while you could argue that the cost of developing the developer tools should be borne by developers (including Apple, who use those tools to building the OS, of course), Apple's rules mandating the use of their tools makes doing so problematic from an antitrust perspective. And either way, a software license that effectively takes a cut of sales on anything developed with that software is problematic at multiple levels. Nobody in their right minds would choose a product under those terms, absent some sort of monopolistic restrictions that compel such a choice.
The correct percentage is zero, with, at absolute most, some small fixed annual fee for program participation to compensate Apple for the limited overhead incurred in signing developers' keys. Any higher cost is effectively holding users' devices hostage, and is fundamentally unjust from a consumer protection perspective.
The only question is how long it takes for various countries' governments to come to the same conclusion and demand that mobile devices be liberated from compulsory profit-sharing done under the guise of "security".
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is hosting the app store. There are *some* costs with this.
So, some commissions are appropriate here.
10% sounds good.
If end-users could use multiple stores, and there was actual competition there, the commissions there would drop a LOT. But Apple has a monopoly.
Note that Google is planning on locking down Google Play, so they're little better.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is hosting the app store. There are *some* costs with this.
This is for apps distributed outside the App Store. Apple's cost is limited to signing the developer's cert every couple of years and having their timestamping server provide attestation exactly once each time that a new version of the app gets released. I'm pretty sure I could literally handle that much network traffic and crypto processing for every iOS app developer company in all of Brazil Brazil on a single 2007 Mac Mini on my lowly 50/10 Comcast Business cable modem connection at my house and still
Re: (Score:2)
And let's not forget, "the guise of "security"" is the reason behind Apple's vindictively going after jail breakers.
These same jail breakers who added functionality in iOS4 (2010) which only finally started becoming available to regular uses these past two years. (Yeah, I'm including you in this, Liquid Glass!)
Re: (Score:1)
Playing Devil's advocate for a minute, I suppose Apple does also provide on-going monitoring of apps for security issues. They do find apps stealing data or doing other malicious stuff from time to time.
5% is way too much though. Maybe 0.5%.
"Circumvent the system" (Score:2)
That's a similar bullshit term as "sideloading".
No, they are not circumventing the system. They are only no longer dictated what payment provider to use.
Typical Apple being Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
Imagine if Toyota tried to charge 5% fee on all gas purchases not even sold by Toyota.
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine if Toyota tried to charge 5% fee on all gas purchases not even sold by Toyota.
Imagine if Toyota required all gas pumps to have a connector specific to Toyota with an authentication chip. :-D
Re: Typical Apple being Apple (Score:1)
Would they if they could? Are they envious?