back to article Get ready for $10,000 apps in Apple's software souk

Apple on Tuesday announced the "biggest upgrade to App Store pricing," where "upgrade" means concession agreed to as part of a legal settlement. Last August, Apple settled a lawsuit that software developers filed in 2019 alleging the company abused its dominant market position. Among the settlement terms was a commitment to " …

  1. Czrly

    Cheaper and safer...

    ... than many in-vogue NFT, for sure.

    Safer because buying "I am Rich" MK (n+1) will actually add something to one's Apple ID – albeit something fatuous – and at least that has some precident for being somewhat secure as a token of "ownership" of digital "properties".

    The 30% cut remains iniquitous.

    1. TVU Silver badge

      Re: Cheaper and safer...

      "The 30% cut remains iniquitous"

      ^ I fully agree and Google is just as bad in that respect. I think a take of 15% should be maximum permitted given the dominance of these two already very wealthy corporations.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: Cheaper and safer...

        "I think a take of 15% should be maximum permitted given the dominance of these two already very wealthy corporations."

        If it were a minimum fee plus 15%, it might work. Apple has certain fixed costs to process a transaction and likely has calculated a figure to provide the store environment divided amongst the number of vendors there are. The percentage could also be on a sliding scale so much higher priced purchases have a lower percentage commission.

        At some lower price point the cost to the stores doesn't cover the percentage take that Apple and Google require to break even.

        Some vendors have no problem with 30%. If they didn't have those stores to categorize, advertise and facilitate the transactions, they'd make zero. It's one thing to have a product for sale and quite another to have customers find you. I suck at marketing, but I have to slog through as best I can or nobody would know I exist. I'd love to have someplace where I could list my services so customers find me. 30% commission would be painful for the sort of work I do, but I could build in a 10% fee with no problem. Most of my work is from repeat business so I'd only pay the 10% for a new customer. I might go as high as 30% if it brought in good long term clients.

  2. trevorde Silver badge

    [Tim Cook] Hey, Jony! Look at my new app.

    [-- shows Jony Ive his phone --]

    [Jony Ive] It's just a glowing red ruby above the words 'I am rich'

    [TC] Yes, isn't it amazing! And it's *only* available for iOS!

    [JI] How much was it?

    [TC] Only $10000

    {JI] You're an idiot!

    [-- TC ignores him and continues to stare lovingly at his phone]

  3. Czrly

    This content was not generated by a robot.

    Enthroned upon the porcelain, a thought occurred to me: that new twenty-nine-American-cent tier makes no sense in today's inflation-driven economy but it absolutely DOES when one goes and re-reads that Reg. article on the Internet of Shite[1].

    That's fairly clairvoyant of Apple – neigh Jobs-esque! They've seen Stable Diffusion and ChatGTP and GitHub Co-Pilot on the horizon (neigh: already bloody here too soon) and they know the flood is coming. They do not want bucks from it – cents on volume will do.

    I follow Deep Learning Twitter[2] and they are not off the money, here. That flood *is* coming and, if you're a small developer with small dollar-apps on the Store, it is coming for *your* lunch. However innovative you may be, if you are small and independent, shere grunt-work can replace your efforts. Perhaps the quality and flair and spark might be lost but the new A.I. Store Barons will have essentially limitless grunt power at their hands and that power will be optimised for marketability and store appeal and click-through rate. Most notably, this will all come sans-scruple and independent devs and creative-types tend to carry those and even occasionally hold Morals.

    In this flood, pearls will be lost long before they can even present before the swine; diamonds will be irrelevant in the exponentially-scaled rough.

    [1] IoS is definitely Internet of Shite-with-an-E. Of a good dram of Whisk{e}y, one might say, "there's the shit" but, were one to say, "that's properly shite," one's judgement would be conclusively the contrary.

    [2] The Bird Site is bad. But, if you're in "tech" and do not follow Deep Learning Twitter – at least lurkingly-passively – you are not doing due diligence. Just note that many of the pioneers and visionaries in the field do rather tend to re-tweet a lot of shite so supressing their re-tweets is advisable.

    1. that one in the corner Silver badge

      Re: This content was not generated by a robot

      I don't want to be seen as whinnying too much, but there is horseplay in that post:

      > neigh Jobs-esque

      Nigh (on) Jobsian

      > (neigh: already bloody here too soon)

      Nay, already bloody here to soon

      I'll rein myself in and trot along to the next story now, don't want to make you lot canterankerous (sorry, oatso sorry for that one).

      1. Lil Endian Silver badge

        oatso sorry


        Why did you saddle us with that!

  4. elsergiovolador Silver badge


    So 30% tax can fund healthcare, police, army and other public sector organisations, infrastructure, social safety nets.

    Apple 30% tax funds convenience of not having to deal with sales taxes across different markets and gate keepers.

    30% is excessive and should be no more than 1%. Anything above is profiteering.

    1. that one in the corner Silver badge

      Re: 30%

      > profiteering

      Well, yes, isn't the entire point of the App Store? USA, USA, Big Capitalism etc etc.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: 30%

        "Well, yes, isn't the entire point of the App Store?"

        Making money is nice, but Apple would have a problem if it were difficult for people to find apps to do something. The overall value of the iOS hardware is enhanced through having a one-stop location to find time-wasting games and useless "productivity enhancers". I'd still rather buy directly from the developers since app stores get too much information on a person by being an only source for device software.

  5. Mike 137 Silver badge

    Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

    Armin Heinrich released "I Am Rich" for $999.99 [...] The app did nothing and described itself as a work of art.

    As Felix the Cat said (c. 1950) "a fool and his fish are soon parted".

  6. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Lil Endian Silver badge

      Re: Why have a $10,000 limit at all?

      I think if software had been bespoke, making it generally available (via app stores) would then make it OTS. Probably hair-splitting as I don't think that's your main point.

      I write bespoke software. If a client wants mobile device functionality I provide that directly. I'm not about to cut $Corp in for any percentage, thank you very much!

    2. doublelayer Silver badge

      Re: Why have a $10,000 limit at all?

      If such software is made, it won't be sold in the App Store. One of three things will happen:

      1. It's sideloaded through a corporate certificate requiring a profile to be installed, based on a corporate license. It won't be listed on the store at all. Any price can be charged for the company to set up the profiles.

      2. A free client app will be listed on the store, and it won't do anything unless it verifies that the user is licensed through an external mechanism. Any price can be charged for that external license as long as the user can't buy a license inside the app. If they're paying over $10k for it, they can buy a license with a browser or likely something even more complex and activate it inside the app.

      3. The app is actually free because it's only useful with the purchase of some expensive equipment, desktop or server software, or continuing service, for which the developer charges whatever they want.

    3. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: Why have a $10,000 limit at all?

      $10k is excessive. Maybe it's in place for some planned expansions such as buying investment grade art or precious metals. For apps, something surpassing $1,000 is likely going to be bespoke or take much more configuration and support than can be handled through an online store. When you look at operations such as eBay, they work damn hard to make sure that vendors and customers have little chance to communicate before money has been handed over and, more importantly, fees paid.

  7. mark l 2 Silver badge

    "Someone will seek Apple's blessing to ask $10,000 for an app – Twitter Burnt Gold Free Speech Edition, perhaps?"

    Give it another 6 months of Musk ownership and you can probably buy the whole of Twitter for not much more

  8. Bruce Ordway

    sideloading iOS apps will cause security problems

    I remember Ma Bell claiming the same at one time.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like