- Cannot also support IAP
- Website links are all to a single URL specified in Info.plist with no parameters <-- !!!
- Must submit monthly report to Apple listing EVERY external transaction
All for measly 27% of the sales proceeds. A total steal.
Apple's really jerking on the regulators' chain. I sure hope they continue in the same vein, because the fallout will be spectacular.
[1] https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489599440667168768
Stuff like this is in the interests of the company. The only way to prevent it is for regulators to make it no longer in their best interests.
A new view controller would require a new version of iOS to provide that view controller, which would lock out all the people on older versions of iOS from the alternative payment methods.
Any iOS developer can put together a screen like that in no time, it’s not a meaningful hurdle and it means more people can get the alternative payment method.
It feels like a US management decision to win a court case in the US, not someone who knows European anti-trust regulators. Really bizarre.
That's like charging mechanics for repairing cars or charging road workers for the privilege of repairing roads.
When a company goes to war with the government, the company always loses. It is time for Cook to learn it. He is under a delusion that he is god.
So, they can stop _selling_ in the Netherlands, but given how close is any Dutch to another EU state, I don't see it as a problem for purchasing a phone.
Apple will sustain that, given the phone wasn't bought in the Netherlands, they are not subject to their laws. Good luck with that.
>Except they cannot[...]
>[...] they can stop _selling_ in the Netherlands
I don't get it. Aren't you agreeing with the parent poster?
How are the Dutch going to come after Apple if they don’t have a presence in the country?
> How are the Dutch going to come after Apple if they don’t have a presence in the country?
The EU is a single market, for good or for ill.
If I only sold a physical product in GA and someone from Texas bought it and took it home. They could only sue me in GA under GA laws.
The US is also a “single market”. But each state has its own laws.
Okay, so they'll have iPhones brick themselves (or disable all third party purchases) if location services detect they're within the netherlands.
- not all are buying iPhones
- roughly 3 million of the population are under 15.
Growth at all costs regardless of margin is what money losing unicorns do. Not what companies do that are worth 3 trillion dollars.
And Apple is not a money losing unicorn. They don’t sell anything at a loss, and they wouldn’t be selling at a loss even if they made a good faith effort to comply with these regulations.
The question is what their margins look like: reasonable, or obscene? Apple is fighting to maintain the latter. Pulling out of the country would make them less money than complying.
For example, here’s a question I can’t answer from this tweet or from this entire HN discussion:
“In what way do each of these four facts conflict with one country’s regulators’ decisions, characteristics, or historical tendencies?”
(However, if your goal is simply to preach to the choir, then your comment is certainly sufficient for that purpose — so long as it’s acceptable that it won’t persuade anyone that doesn’t already agree with whatever viewpoint is left unexplained here.)