[yreg]

> So this is essentially Apple making the alternative so unappealing that no-one will switch and status quo is preserved.

The new terms are very appealing to the vast majority of developers. Most of us don't have 1M+ installs a year.

They are unappealing to the likes of Facebook or YouTube.

[mthoms]

Apparently, once you sell in a non-Apple app store - you can't go back. Not just for the app in question; You, as a developer, can never sell in an Apple EU App Store ever again. Not even unrelated apps.

Still appealing?

"Developers who adopt the new business terms at any time will not be able to switch back to Apple’s existing business terms for their EU apps."

See "Why is Apple giving developers two options for business terms in the EU?" https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/#...

[yreg]

It is a bit strange and I don't understand how they mean it. What are "EU apps"?

What's the motivation for this rule? One can "just" create a new company, no?

[mthoms]

EU apps are apps sold in the EU by EU developers.

The motivation seems to be to make it less appealing to the vast majority of developers :-)

I’m not sure if that’s a viable work around or not.

[lozenge]

The new business terms still allow access to list apps on the Apple EU App Store. But they allow other app stores as well.

[rvba]

Someone can run a botfarm that will download your APP 1M times and you need to pay 45k? Sounds unappealing to me.

[mil22]

$45K per month.

[oblio]

Someone was saying that updates count as installs.

[bhelkey]

From the comments, updates count as installs.

[yreg]

It says "First annual install, the app may be installed any number of times by the same account for the next 12 months with no additional charge."

Apple claims over 99% of developers would pay less than on the old plan.