Your Thoughts on the App Store: Apple Should Change, but Voluntarily

I suspect it’s because App Store games are a totally different type of streaming service than apps like that just deliver subscription content like periodicals, book purchases or downloads, or a streaming TV or movie service where end users just watch, listen to, or read whatever content they choose. There are usually no other, or fewer, in-app sales opportunities other than for the subscription itself. Usually there are fewer tracking or ad sales opportunities than cloud based gaming offers. I think these are biggest reasons why Google, Microsoft, and other gaming services have their nickers in a twist.

I also think the new rule will enable Apple to more easily review every app that is locked up within a service. It also creates an option for people who just want to play one or just a few games rather than shell out bigger bucks for the full service with many games they will never want to play.

Marco Arment has a funny (as in, it hurts when I laugh) summary of the changes:

https://marco.org/2020/09/11/app-review-changes

So Apple is granting Facebook a temporary reprieve. I’m curious how they came to this decision in light of the fact that it will equip their various opponents with proof that Apple does not treat all devs equally and indeed does make special exceptions for some.

It looks like Apple is being hammered by bad publicity. As I mentioned before, Facebook anticipates loosing roughly 50% of its total revenue once Apple unleashes its Identifier For Advertisers in Safari. And if they are currently admitting to 50%, it’s likely that the reality could be worse:

“While it’s difficult to quantify the impact to publishers and developers at this point with so many unknowns, in testing we’ve seen more than a 50% drop in Audience Network publisher revenue when personalization was removed from mobile app ad install campaigns. In reality, the impact to Audience Network on iOS 14 may be much more, so we are working on short-and long-term strategies to support publishers through these changes.”

This a one time exception to the rule, not a policy change. It’s a brilliant PR move by Facebook, whose bottom line will benefit greatly from the wealth of information they will gather on each participant to sell advertising, both during and forever after the event. Whatever revenue they collect from this event will be microscopic from the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ they will accumulate during and after. If their motives were benevolent, they would at least donate the ad revenue rather than the cost of the tickets. If they were truly benevolent, they would donate the total revenue throughout the year. Facebook can afford it without making a dent in their current bank.

Apple is getting unfairly clobbered in the press about the 30%. Nobody is whining about what Facebook charges for ad rates, or is insisting on limits on what they can charge. Nobody is whining about the cut Amazon, Etsy, eBay, etc. takes on their third party sales. But this is distracting the press and the reading public away from coverage about all the daily disinformation, hate and bullying that’s a 24/7 issue on Facebook.

Except for the trade press, Apple is not getting much, if any, coverage about how the IDFA ban will protect the privacy of Apple device owners.

1 Like

I have no sympathy for a company whose entire business model is based on spying on their customers and selling information about their browsing habits without their knowledge or consent.

Any company that answers “yes” to the question “would we lose all our revenue if our customers knew the truth about what we’re doing?” doesn’t deserve to exist.

Google and Facebook: I’m looking at you right now.

1 Like

Seconded.

But you know, it’s not like people would be powerless against Facebook shenanigans. Facebook would adopt their policies in a heartbeat if people actually voted with their feet. But can you imagine the amount of excuses I’ve heard why people can’t close their FB accounts? Apparently the only possible way to stay in touch with Uncle Al in Topeka is thanks to FB. That must be worth sacrificing your privacy and your freedom over. /sigh

Facebook gets away with it because they can. The current administration won’t change that. And it’s unlikely the next one will either. Consumers could change that. But so far they have caved. And so Facebook just keeps on doing whatever they want and get rich doing so. IMHO people need to finally take responsibility and stop waiting for a solution to drop into their laps from the heavens.

[Apologies, just realized we’re straying quite off topic now.]

2 Likes

If you want to take responsibility for what you see on FB you can do so on Mac OS by downloading the free Social Fixer. It is a multifaceted blocker and display modification.

If you use it, please send the developer a donation of whatever you can afford and think it is worth. Social Fixer makes Facebook actually enjoyable to use.

Read more on their website: https://socialfixer.com/

Uh, okay. Getting away with it is not the same as it being right, right?

1 Like

What bothers me even more is that Facebook is tracking me even though I have never been, and never will be, a participant. Their third party Audience Network probably includes just about everyone on the planet who uses the WWW:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-privacy-tracking/facebook-fuels-broad-privacy-debate-by-tracking-non-users-idUSKBN1HM0DR

And Facebook’s Audience Network is going to be hamstrung in a particularly deadly manner by Apple’s IDFA. They have already announced they are shutting down the mobile arm of the program, probably because the IDFA has been only iOS to date. Facebook has even been making noises about having to shut the Audience Network down entirely, most probably because of Apple:

But Facebook has accumulated a rap sheet many millions of miles long that includes about just about everyone who has never been a member. Via their third party ad network, they serve ads to just about everyone on the planet who serfs the Web.

And regarding the upcoming concert, it can be streamed, both live and afterwards, by anyone who is not a member:

I’ll bet a huge majority of non members who sign up for this don’t realize they are also signing their lives away, including their credit card numbers. The moral of the story, I think, is that Facebook is getting away with positioning itself as Red Riding Hood with this concert, and casting Apple as the Big Bad Wolf over the 30%.

2 Likes

Alright, I’m no fan of Facebook, but let’s keep this specific to issues with Apple App Store.

And the saga continues…

Yeah, I will admit that I’ve shied away from this whole Epic versus Apple battle because it’s so involved and changing so fast, and of course, it’s all inside baseball. The likelihood of it having a significant effect on everyday users is, in my opinion, fairly small. And already we’re looking at a July 2021 trial date, so nothing will change for a year at the most.

A new chapter in the never ending saga:

1 Like

It was voted down in the ND senate: North Dakota senate votes down anti-App Store bill first given to lawmaker by Coalition for App Fairness lobbyist - 9to5Mac

1 Like