[latexr]

> I believe for some categories like microtransaction based apps Apple should take maybe 5%.

And then every PAID app will switch to FREE and charge for PRO, to circumvent the 30%. Oh, Apple complained it’s not technically a microtransaction? Fine, just separate every feature into a new purchase.

> If the only function of the App Store (or Play Store) is to provide hosting and some quality control then I don't see why apps can't be hosted on a secure website from the vendor

If the vendor server is compromised or is down, a download from the App Store won’t work for a single app, leaving customers confused and complaining to Apple, who can’t fix the issue.

[Dylan16807]

> And then every PAID app will switch to FREE and charge for PRO, to circumvent the 30%.

Then make it 30% of the first 20 or 30 dollars, and 5% or less after. That more than pays for Apple's verification work without letting them gouge repeat payments.

[scarface74]

How many apps on the store sell for over $5 let alone $30?

[Dylan16807]

That's the point, yeah. For the vast majority of apps the 30% cut remains exactly the same, with no loopholes.

But if you're dealing with a $100+ per year subscription, the fee goes down to a modest processing cost.

[blowski]

That’s sort of true for the app itself - if the Trello API is down then the Trello app doesn’t work.

[threeseed]

Most people know the difference.

App doesn’t download - Apple’s fault.

App doesn’t work - App developer’s fault.