For example, Spotify makes money from people streaming music to iOS devices, but they do not allow you to upgrade from a free account to a Premium account through their iOS app.
Since Spotify handles subscription purchases outside of their iOS app and their app is free, they pay nothing to Apple under the current system.
Afaik, pointing users to subscriptions and payments outside of the app is explicitly not allowed. Telling the user it's cheaper to buy outside the app is not allowed, etc. Such blatantly predatory rules, I'm surprised it's taken this long for a wider discussion to start about it.
I guess it's because whenever you ask people that buy Apple gear they're all "That's fine! Don't you shit talk Apple, they can do what they want! They do what's best for us!" Stockholm syndrome lmao.
Nope. Under the old rules any company with a free app used to access subscription content didn't have to pay anything unless they took payments through their app.
Netflix would be another example.
> pointing users to subscriptions and payments outside of the app is explicitly not allowed
It's definitely allowed now, since that's the only point on which Epic won their case vs. Apple.
They used to report this number as sales they "facilitated". A far more accurate descriptor. But now that they are engaged in a PR battle with various governments they have taken to embellishment.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apples-app-store-ecos...
> Apple also said iOS app developers have earned more than $320 billion on the App Store from 2008 to 2022, a jump from the $260 billion reported in 2021.
> Apple says its App Store ecosystem generated $1.1 trillion in developer billings and sales in 2022
I'm having a hard time reconciling these two statements. It's been a long day, but what am I missing to make sense of this?