Microsoft App Store Playbook Swipes at Apple, Google (axios.com) 39
In a not-so-subtle dig at Apple and Google, Microsoft today announced a series of "principles" for its Windows 10 App Store -- including letting users choose their own payment system for in-app purchases -- that it says should serve as a model for other app stores. From a report: The move comes as antitrust regulators in the U.S. and around the world are spotlighting how both Apple and Google manage their mobile platforms and as some developers charge them with running their app stores unfairly. In addition to offering developers the option to use an alternative payment mechanism for in-app purchases, Microsoft pledged that it will, among other things: allow competing app stores; hold its own apps to the same standards as those of other companies; allow app makers to decide what they do and don't want to sell within their app; and allow any developer in its store "as long as it meets objective standards and requirements, including those for security, privacy, quality, content, and digital safety."
The main differences (Score:3)
With the exception of the 1st point, is there any other difference? The point of contention for developers is not that Google and Apple doesn’t allow developers to decide on pricing. The point of contention is both take a 30% cut if the app is not free. Is MS going allow this cut to be variable with them?
Re: (Score:2)
So they get their cut thru Paypal or whoever instead?
Progress!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The main differences (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple currently forces many companies to make an option for purchasing their ongoing services through their iOS app and not letting the company inform the user that Apple is taking a 30% cut, and not allowing the company to price the service differently on iOS than on their own website.
And, if a company chooses not to enable purchasing through their iOS app Apple will shut them out of the App Store. It's a pretty big swipe at Apple. Honestly I'm not a huge MS fan these days, but some of their actions like this have really amused me. They have come a long ways since the 90's and early 2000's when they were truly the bad guys.
Re: (Score:2)
"They have come a long ways since the 90's and early 2000's when they were truly the bad guys."
Yeah, they got better at hiding it. Took long enough.
Re: (Score:2)
They have come a long ways since the 90's and early 2000's when they were truly the bad guys.
On this front their behaviour has always been to support developers and software creators.
It was key to building their monopoly: people use the platforms that have software they want to run.
Re:The main differences (Score:5, Informative)
If I set up some web marketplace and start selling widgets, I will of course need a payment processor. No payment processor on the planet would walk away from a 5% cut, until you start talking about these walled gardens, and then all of a sudden 30% is normal.
But, the argument goes, the higher fee is because they run the store too. Thats where the walled garden comes in. If its the only store, then the higher fee isnt because they run the store, it is because they run the only store.
I know people think that "alternatives to apple" exist, but consider that apples ecosystem has millions of developers and billions of users. Thats millions of suppliers and billions of customers. It is in itself a market, Apple does have a monopoly on it, and Apple has quite publicly leveraged that monopoly to enforce another monopoly, so the question of if Apple has done these things is not in question. The only question is should Apple be allowed to do so.
Re: (Score:3)
With the exception of the 1st point, is there any other difference?
Actually, there is. These points are all Microsoft making it clear they agree with the Coalition for App Fairness's 10 points [appfairness.org], in particular:
a) "offering developers the option to use an alternative payment mechanism for in-app purchases"
Agrees with point 1: "No developer should be required to use an app store exclusively, or to use ancillary services of the app store owner, including payment systems, or to accept other supplementary obligations in order to have access to the app store."
b) "allow competing a
Re: (Score:2)
Actually that have started showing a really good "open" freedom on their PC platform. Take the recent Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. From release they launch on both their own MS Store, AND Steam simulateously (in fact certain regions - america - were able to install via steam a few hours before the MS Store). And there is a DVD version.
Payments made in the game would go through the respective store it was purchased from. However, you are not limited to the market place either, as you can still install y
Re: (Score:2)
Actually that have started showing a really good "open" freedom on their PC platform.
That's nice to know, thanks!
But my reference was specifically to the store for games on the Xbox console. A widespread criticism of the CAF in general, and Epic Games in particular, is that they criticize Apple and Google for their mobile walled gardens, while simultaneously praising Microsoft and Sony for their console walled gardens, when all four companies apply the exact same policies to their four stores and the distinction between computers, consoles and mobile devices is pretty artificial. If the CAF
Re: (Score:1)
How business works (Score:3)
The biggest vendor always tries for lock-in. The remaining competitors always try to be open. IBM did this with the IBM PC. Apple did it with everything - from their OS to the Apple store music files; while Microsoft licensed their encrypted audio format so that there were multiple MP3 players and music stores that were interoperable. (Yes, encrypting he music was still really dumb and as is usual for Microsoft they stopped supporting that format, so I'm glad that era passed.) It's a time honored tradition to screw people by locking them in for as long as you can.
Re: (Score:2)
VHS and BETA
Re: (Score:1)
Apple was as open as practicable with their OS. If they just pushed out the source to everything, Microsoft and Google would have just had an easier job of copying their work and Apple would have been out of business. Music encryption was insisted on by the big 5 before they would allow the iTunes store to open, Apple pushed them to drop it, and did as soon as possible
I must have missed when any iteration of Windows went open source.
Whatever openness Android has/had, it wasn't out of altruism.
You have very
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely correct, and in fact even when they did finally go drm free, it was a kludge called itunes plus, with a limited library and 30% more expensive over the DRM versions, justifying it by saying they were "higher quality", upon which Amazon simply increased their own bitrate.
But the real clincher was that if you had already purchased the DRM version, you would have to "repurchase" the non drm version AT FULL COST!
Amazon made mockery of that by shortly afterwards allowing their users to even download H
Re: (Score:2)
You completely misunderstood the point: this isn't about open source, nor about operating systems. This is about open standards and protocols. Apple has closed the payment options since they have the biggest app store market. The Microsoft and Google app stores are open to other payment systems since they need to attract app developers to their store. The guy who replied VHS and BETA gets it.
Never would have thought it... (Score:2)
Even with the "quotes".
Are they "air quotes"?
2020 is still a weird year.
Go with #3! (Score:3)
I have found that you usually get an optimal experience with the 3rd most popular product/service.
#1 goal is to just keep its business going. Little innovation or new ideas, it is just playing on what works.
#2 goal is to be #1, They mostly copy and slightly improve on the same ideas that #1 has, but for the most part they are the same.
#3 which is usually a distant third. Is trying to find something different, and using all the reasons why people hate #1 and #2 against them. So they will often innovate a bit more to stay in the game. But still being #3 they are big enough to invest into innovation, however they know they cannot do what #1 and #2 are doing, because they would just eat them for lunch.
Microsoft isn't being noble or suddenly having a conscious. It is the fact that they are #3 software store. And they see the pushback that Apple and Google have with their payment methods, so they figure they can be a bit more lax, because they can afford it, and it may attract more people over.
Who'd thunk? (Score:2)
That a former monopolist would be taking jabs at a former underdog for the latter's monopolistic practices?
Re: (Score:2)
That a former monopolist would be taking jabs at a former underdog for the latter's monopolistic practices?
Microsoft is still the monopolist even though Apple is no longer an underdog. No one says, "We have no choice but to buy Apple." Most businesses and governments believe, "We have no choice but to buy Microsoft."
I think what gets lost, especially in places like /. where there are a lot of developers, is that Apple may not be as developer friendly but that's because they're more consumer friendly. The type of people who want a phone to be "open" tend to be developers (or, at least, tinkering geeks). For most
This will actually help Apple and Google's cases (Score:1)
By offering a competing app store, Apple and Google can point to MS and show that they are not monopolies and not anti-competitive. Developers who don't like Apple or Google can just develop for MS.
Re: (Score:3)
By offering a competing app store, Apple and Google can point to MS and show that they are not monopolies and not anti-competitive. Developers who don't like Apple or Google can just develop for MS.
You are joking i hope. Consumers with an android or iphone can't choose to shop at the microsoft store. Apple users may only shop at the apple store.
Android users actually do have some choices.
Suggesting the microsoft store means there is competition is like living in a country (lets call that country "Apple" that only has "AppleStore", and saying that fact that there is another store in another country means that AppleStore doesn't have a monopoly.
I mean, sure the other store exists, but it can't open its
Re: (Score:1)
The dispute is with developers, not consumers. MS is offering an ecosystem for developers to build apps that would attract consumers. Apple and Google will use it to show that developers are not "locked in" they have the option to develop for MS if they choose, therefore no monopoly.
Re: (Score:2)
"The dispute is with developers, not consumers"
Monolopies are about markets. Consumers are an essential component. If the consumers are segmented into different non-overlapping groups... then guess what... they're probably in different markets.
"MS is offering an ecosystem for developers to build apps that would attract consumers."
It doesn't really matter what MS does because the consumers who have apple devices can't shop there. It doesn't give vendors a way to reach those consumers.
"Apple and Google will u
Re: (Score:1)
"Android users actually do have some choices."
They do. Malware, spyware, shitware...
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is the only market with a single marketplace. Millions of Developers and Billions of Users is a market all by itself, and Apple stands between them and makes sure nobody else does.
Google??? (Score:3)
Google is mentioned in this headline, but AFAK Google does not have the same draconian policy as Apple.
Apps can be in the Play store and accept payment from any provider, they do not have to run the payment through Google.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, was going to mod you informative but decided I better DuckDuckGo that first. See:
https://fossbytes.com/google-m... [fossbytes.com]
Apples to...Windows? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the worst part is that people are comparing Windows 10 to Android and iOS, rather than Linux and OS X. Yeah, Apple still has some App Store restrictions for OS X, but developers don't have to use it to reach consumers.
It's only a token swipe (Score:2)
If they were serious they'd announce they'd only be taking a 10% cut of IAP ("10% for Windows 10") instead of Apple's and Google's outrageous 30% cut.
Microsoft "almost" all in with this piffle... (Score:1)