Can someone explain why Apple is always the target for these complaints regarding fees? Is it just shorthand for both companies or a target people rally against? As Android has the same 30% fees for in-app billing, it's not like it's cheaper for Spotify on Google's platform. I get there's theoretically F-Droid and sideloading, but I don't see Spotify on fdroid so presumably there's not enough users to make it worth it.
Apple Music is their biggest competitor and they are very close in terms of userbase size. Apple Music is also (along with Tidal) one of the top places people go when they leave Spotify (for the various good reasons one might leave Spotify). Not much business point in trying to go after Google. The 30% cut IS a big deal but that's not the primary reason.
As for why so many companies target Apple's level of control over their ecosystem (even if they don't directly compete on a service) ... well ... there's the whole data privacy and anti-ad-tracking thing they have been doing. Nearly all SaaS businesses are also ad or surveillance businesses either primarily or on the side. Most of the press and legal challenges mounted against Apple are attempting to remove Apple's policy-level control over what is deployed on devices.
Good news, Apple is also becoming a tracking and data company.
The only reason Apple went after Google and Facebook with the new privacy feature is so they can swoop in and take some of that money for themselves. Hence why you are seeing them pushing ads left and right across their platforms.
It's complicated. Yes, Apple is creating an advertising monopoly for themselves (obviously only for folks within their ecosystem). No I don't like that personally.
Are they replicating the no-rules surveillance systems of the existing ad market? I have no evidence for that. I've been looking but I haven't seen it.
Saying "the only reason" Apple is countering Google and Facebook here is ad revenue completely ignores what horribly dishonest and harmful stewards of the ads ecosystem these two companies have been. Both companies have knowingly broken the rules of every platform they exist on (not just Apple platform) to work around device permissions to scoop up personal data they have been EXPLICITLY told by the user not to take. Google just had to pay several hundred million dollars for lying to customers about data capture opt-in. Facebook has settled many times as well, and has repeatedly used private APIs and exploits to gather contact info and messaging data. They have also shown no principle whatsoever about who can use that data and for what purpose. Facebook goes so far as to claim in public hearings (and in court) they don't even know how much data they gather or where it is or who can access it.
As tracking grows its access to more devices and more personal data, and as ads appear on more and more surfaces (Google and FB stated goal is every surface btw), the negative effects of this abusive behavior have become visible after decades of relative invisibility to consumers. "Why is my music app giving me podcasts about pregnancy while I'm in the car?", "Amazon shopping (which my partner can see) is showing pregnancy test promotions", etc. And still invisible, down the rabbit hole, very harmful uses of this information for individuals, businesses, and entire geopolitical regimes. I used the pregnancy example for a very pointed reason if you have been following tech concerns in USA related to political rights.
When you push the idea that Apple's product moves are just as bad as our current status quo, I cannot agree. I think you will be proven wrong about Apple's endgame (for at least the next decade, all corporate cultures change). At the very least we can be happy for a time spiting the existing tracking monopoly - who have been hurting us for a long time with no challenge. They are losing a ton of money. May it continue.
I am hopeful seeing an existential threat to healthy society being trimmed down, even if the people doing the cutting (Apple) refuse to pull it out at the root.
Isn't the fact that Google Play charges 30% even when Android allows 3rd party app stores an indication that the 30% fee is not caused by a lack of competition in app stores?
I think you could say the same thing with Steam. Developers are incentivized to publish on Steam because this is where they can reach the most players, even though they'll have to take a big cut for it.
It’s also apparently the same ballpark for video game consoles (which are also general-purpose computers that are similarly locked down to restrict third-party software).
Those numbers are global. In certain markets, like the U.S., that number is likely to be very much skewed towards iOS. Even if you look at the global numbers, iOS was responsible for 75% of app revenue once games are excluded, and 78% of subscription revenue in 2021.
Why does it matter? Spotify wants the freedom to set their own margins. Compensating artists fairly starts by kicking out useless middlemen, and Apple plays that role in this instance. Every developer deserves the right to distribute software on their own terms, that's not some extremist or abhorrent ideal to advocate for.
> Compensating artists fairly starts by kicking out useless middlemen, and Apple plays that role in this instance.
Spotify needs the cooperation of the major record labels to operate and they have no interest in compensating artists fairly or kicking middlemen out of the process.
Do they do it on Android or desktops? They’d have a much stronger moral case if they said that on every other platform they take the cut they’d give Apple and forward it to the artist instead.
Its only really in there to cover googles ass in a situation like this, it's not practical to get users to download your app elsewhere. Even fortnite couldn't really get people to do it.
For example, Google and Spotify have an arrangement termed User Choice Billing wherein users can choose whether to pay Spotify directly or through Google's payment rails.
That, and iPhone users may have higher average LTV.
