I think that you should always talk about average users. There is no point in talking about technical users that make up a small slice of the market pie.
I’m an Apple customer. I’ve an iPhone but I’m still horrified from needing to buy a developer account (which is like 99$) to install (my) apps on my iPhone (only). It would be probably possible for Apple to enable checks for personal apps, executing apps that are signed with the same iCloud account or something like that (doing all the checks on the device, no servers involved).
Never mind that macOS is a hot mess for (some) developers, right now. So, yeah, I have some issues with Apple too.
On compensation
I see a certain similarity between Hey, Spotify, Restocks. They all are (paid) apps trying to take advantage of Apple user base, without compensating Apple for it.
Meanwhile, Apple is expected to keep paying for the App Store servers, its curation team and its app approval team.
Obviously smartphones are getting better hence (average) users will buy a new phone less often and Apple is expected to keep supporting old devices for 5/6 years and it has to pay the engineers who work on the OSes and the APIs, and the non-engineers that keep the show running.
You could argue that Android and Google are better.
But Android is not Google’s main business, ads are. Google has built (mostly free) services that generate data about its users, which is then used a bait for advertisers.
No one cares if you’re using F-droid instead of the Play Store, Google is still getting its checks from you and your org using Gmail, Analytics, AdSense, YouTube, etc...
On side loading
Side loading apps (for the average user) is risky and it’s mostly done for three reasons IMO:
- cracking apps
- accessing apps that are not allowed on the Play Store
- escape Google
I don’t really have much to say about side loading. I’m too biased against it, so maybe someone else could convince me that it’s a good thing.
Conclusion
What would happen if Apple allowed apps to use external payment options (like Stripe)?
Well, the obvious, no one would use IAP because there would be much cheaper services that are not compensating Apple.
Apple is far from perfect:
- the App Store approval process is a mess
- the communication process is broken (removing old message exchanges, come on...)
- they really don’t seem to care about indie developers
However, although Apple needs developers to keep running the show, without no Apple there is no iOS, no App Store. It’s a tricky problem to solve.
They could force IAP on iOS because it's better for users (track subscription, cancel) - without forcing profit sharing/rent seeking.
They could charge some reasonable fee for initially distributing the app or for a dev account (which they already do).
Taking a cut of all profits on the platform whether you compete directly (spotify vs. apple music) or not, is greedy. It's also lazy, you're taking money without providing equivalent value.
I'd argue companies that focus on doing this kind of thing end up fat, lazy, and hated. (Steve Ballmer's Microsoft).
All of your points are valid. I'd say this is purely about the relative price.
Apple charging 30% for access to an almost fully automated system is anticompetitive. Apple charging 1% to cover technical costs is fair and reasonable.
I think that you should always talk about average users. There is no point in talking about technical users that make up a small slice of the market pie.
I’m an Apple customer. I’ve an iPhone but I’m still horrified from needing to buy a developer account (which is like 99$) to install (my) apps on my iPhone (only). It would be probably possible for Apple to enable checks for personal apps, executing apps that are signed with the same iCloud account or something like that (doing all the checks on the device, no servers involved).
Never mind that macOS is a hot mess for (some) developers, right now. So, yeah, I have some issues with Apple too.
On compensation
I see a certain similarity between Hey, Spotify, Restocks. They all are (paid) apps trying to take advantage of Apple user base, without compensating Apple for it.
Meanwhile, Apple is expected to keep paying for the App Store servers, its curation team and its app approval team.
Obviously smartphones are getting better hence (average) users will buy a new phone less often and Apple is expected to keep supporting old devices for 5/6 years and it has to pay the engineers who work on the OSes and the APIs, and the non-engineers that keep the show running.
You could argue that Android and Google are better.
But Android is not Google’s main business, ads are. Google has built (mostly free) services that generate data about its users, which is then used a bait for advertisers.
No one cares if you’re using F-droid instead of the Play Store, Google is still getting its checks from you and your org using Gmail, Analytics, AdSense, YouTube, etc...
On side loading
Side loading apps (for the average user) is risky and it’s mostly done for three reasons IMO:
- cracking apps - accessing apps that are not allowed on the Play Store - escape Google
I don’t really have much to say about side loading. I’m too biased against it, so maybe someone else could convince me that it’s a good thing.
Conclusion
What would happen if Apple allowed apps to use external payment options (like Stripe)?
Well, the obvious, no one would use IAP because there would be much cheaper services that are not compensating Apple.
Apple is far from perfect:
- the App Store approval process is a mess - the communication process is broken (removing old message exchanges, come on...) - they really don’t seem to care about indie developers
However, although Apple needs developers to keep running the show, without no Apple there is no iOS, no App Store. It’s a tricky problem to solve.