[cas8]

It’s not entirely about the %. The problem is that there’s no alternative. I have no real problem with someone like Google with the Play Store or Valve with Steam giving developers the option of shipping on their platforms for a commission like 30%, because you don’t need the Play Store to install apps nor Steam to install video games. In those cases it can actually be a decision about whether or not the hosting/visibility/platform is _worth_ the cut. But in Apple’s case there is no decision to be made. You can’t opt out. That’s why you see so much more flak thrown at Apple for this commission than you do other platform providers.

[bdcravens]

The question I've asked others is if they open it up, then 30% is fair? It seems to me that is what you're suggesting.

[nanidin]

If they open it up, market forces (via competition) will determine what is fair. That equilibrium would probably be below 30% if serious competition occurs.

But yes, it would be fair for Apple to ask for 30% because others are free to offer the same service for less, and you as a consumer of that service have a choice between them - which will eventually force Apple to bring its commission down.

[bdcravens]

That hasn't been the case with Android.

Of course, I think most money comes from IAPs, not app downloads. The issue then is whether Apple would be forced to open the payment APIs, or if apps would need to implement a separate solution.

[aaomidi]

An alternative would be to open up the payment provider api to different processors.

For example if my bank implements the payment provider API, then let me use that. All the other apps need to care about is a payment request method which can be satisfied with whatever payment provider I have picked.

Apps would be able to ask the provider how much they’re gonna get after the payment processes etc, and decide if they want to reject it or not.

[_scr00bius_]

That's not how corporate commercial agreements work.. apple would better immediately bogged down in multiple, endless negotiations and trial periods. As a developer, I don't think you should want apple involved in your processor choice at all

[aaomidi]

Apple acts as the API provider, they don't need to "bless" anything here.

[Gigachad]

I think so. If apps could do their own payment processing and still decide to use the apple one, it means it was a fair deal. Rather than it being forced on them.

The problem is large companies bundle too much market power together. If you want to avoid paying App Store fees currently you have to pull off a Herculean effort no company in existence is capable of.