I had mentioned about a week ago how some pundits are gaslighting the public by claiming that Apple’s AppStore policies are against consumer choice. When in fact, the truth is the opposite, Apple’s system is the one that gives the consumer the greatest voice. Well, Myke Hurley of the Connected podcast repeatedly makes a similar claim. He asserts that Apple’s current system is hurting “the customer experience”. Here’s where he is wrong.
When Apple announced that they were going to revoke Epic’s developer account, there was another aspect to the consequences that not a lot of people reported on. It was this. Apple was going to immediately cease working on iOS development focused on making the Unreal Engine a smoother experience for the customer. Did you catch that? For years now, Apple has been working behind the scenes to make iOS more amenable to Epic.
Why does Apple assign any of it’s army of developers to make sure that the Unreal Engine works seamlessly in iOS in the first place? That is the inconvenient question that many Apple pundits don’t want to answer. Well, here’s the answer. It’s because customers have voted with their dollars on which types of apps they find value in. Apparently, apps with the Unreal Engine bring in enough dollars that Apple is willing to spend some of their iOS development budget to ensure that these customers get a delightful experience.
But this relationship between Epic and Apple is based on Apple’s current system of splitting the cost of iOS development between hardware and software. The apps that bring in the most revenue will naturally get the most attention from Apple. This is where the app consumers get a voice. This leads to a BETTER consumer experience for app consumers, not worse as Myke claims.
What Myke and Epic are arguing for is short-circuiting this system. They want to frontload iOS development either more, or 100%, to hardware buyers. iOS development costs aren’t going to change. Apple isn’t going to lay off developers just to lower their 30% fee to 15%. They will allocate costs over to iPhone and iPad buyers. Now it wouldn’t be the end of the world if Apple did this. From an income statement perspective, Apple probably wouldn’t change much.
The negative side is that app consumers no longer get to vote with their dollars. The pressing need for Apple to focus on certain types of apps is gone. Of course, Apple still wants iOS to be the best it can be. But without the loss of revenue, the urgency is gone to respond to large developers. I wonder if there would even be game controller support on the iPad if it wasn’t for the 30% fee that Apple collects.
This is a negative for consumers and developers. Unless you’re Netflix or Facebook, you don’t get much attention from Apple unless you are hurting their pocketbook. Netflix and Facebook have leverage over Apple because they are cultural behemoths. Apple needs them on the AppStore. But Epic is another story. Outside of some AppStore revenue, Epic is a fly on an elephant’s butt. Regardless of how they’re held in the gaming community, culturally, Epic and the Unreal Engine are relatively insignificant. EXCEPT for the AppStore revenue that they bring into Apple.
The fact that Apple literally shapes and molds it’s software platform to accommodate Epic illustrates how their current system works. Not how it’s broken. Customers voted with their dollars, and Apple rewarded them with a better consumer experience. Moving to a more hardware focused method of paying for iOS development effectively subsidizes all apps. The good and the bad. This will lead to a worse consumer experience, not better.
Why does Apple assign any of it’s army of developers to make sure that the Unreal Engine works seamlessly in iOS in the first place? That is the inconvenient question that many Apple pundits don’t want to answer. Well, here’s the answer. It’s because customers have voted with their dollars on which types of apps they find value in. Apparently, apps with the Unreal Engine bring in enough dollars that Apple is willing to spend some of their iOS development budget to ensure that these customers get a delightful experience.
But this relationship between Epic and Apple is based on Apple’s current system of splitting the cost of iOS development between hardware and software. The apps that bring in the most revenue will naturally get the most attention from Apple. This is where the app consumers get a voice. This leads to a BETTER consumer experience for app consumers, not worse as Myke claims.
What Myke and Epic are arguing for is short-circuiting this system. They want to frontload iOS development either more, or 100%, to hardware buyers. iOS development costs aren’t going to change. Apple isn’t going to lay off developers just to lower their 30% fee to 15%. They will allocate costs over to iPhone and iPad buyers. Now it wouldn’t be the end of the world if Apple did this. From an income statement perspective, Apple probably wouldn’t change much.
The negative side is that app consumers no longer get to vote with their dollars. The pressing need for Apple to focus on certain types of apps is gone. Of course, Apple still wants iOS to be the best it can be. But without the loss of revenue, the urgency is gone to respond to large developers. I wonder if there would even be game controller support on the iPad if it wasn’t for the 30% fee that Apple collects.
This is a negative for consumers and developers. Unless you’re Netflix or Facebook, you don’t get much attention from Apple unless you are hurting their pocketbook. Netflix and Facebook have leverage over Apple because they are cultural behemoths. Apple needs them on the AppStore. But Epic is another story. Outside of some AppStore revenue, Epic is a fly on an elephant’s butt. Regardless of how they’re held in the gaming community, culturally, Epic and the Unreal Engine are relatively insignificant. EXCEPT for the AppStore revenue that they bring into Apple.
The fact that Apple literally shapes and molds it’s software platform to accommodate Epic illustrates how their current system works. Not how it’s broken. Customers voted with their dollars, and Apple rewarded them with a better consumer experience. Moving to a more hardware focused method of paying for iOS development effectively subsidizes all apps. The good and the bad. This will lead to a worse consumer experience, not better.
RSS Feed