Post #1275088
2026-01-29 08:14 UTC
Replies (14)
-
@Flagstaff@programming.dev 2026-01-29 08:27
It's just platform-milking, just like Meetup.com's latest antics; there isn't deep analysis needed to everything, haha. "Capitalism" is totally a legitimate answer despite being just one word.
-
@Kirp123@lemmy.world 2026-01-29 11:59
They were sued by Epic Games for the same shit and Epic won on one count which allows them to put links to alternative payment methods and go around Apple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games_v._Apple
-
@boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2026-01-29 08:37
They provide the payment system. They also mandate it. If you subscribe on the website you don't have to pay the extra. It's only for subscriptions initiated via the app
-
@hayvan@piefed.world 2026-01-29 11:00
Deserving is irrelevant under Capitalism. It's only whether they can get away with it or not?
-
@Passerby6497@lemmy.world 2026-01-29 12:44
Because apple is a "premium" product, so you have to pay a "premium" fee for normal stuff so it feels like you're using "premium" services
-
@vogi@piefed.social 2026-01-29 08:48
This sums the problem up fairly nicely I think. I do wonder with Apple being a gatekeeper by EUs own definition and unfair sales terms supposed to be history with the Digital Markets Act in place this can't go through, right?!?! at least not in the EU... assuming they do their job.
-
@cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 2026-01-29 12:22
gotta get the money to bribe trump somehow
-
@XLE@piefed.social 2026-01-29 12:59
Apple also gets money from developers who use their platform already. That should be it. Apple will already [bully small developers](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/08/iphone-keyboard-for-blind-to-shut-down-as-maker-cites-apple-abuse-of-developers/) off their platform while giving bigger companies first-class treatment.
-
@artyom@piefed.social 2026-01-29 13:06
It's not about what they deserve, it's about what they *want*.
-
@Gargantuan@piefed.social 2026-01-29 10:28
I suspect this has more to do with closing a loophole than going after Patreon and only Patreon. People don’t have to subscribe through the app. and Patreon don’t have to offer that functionality in the App. Apple don’t have Patreon locked in to their platform.
-
@scarabic@lemmy.world 2026-01-30 09:19
This is THE way that Apple gets any revenue from the enormous and highly successful app platform and ecosystem they created. They say “go nuts, make money on our platform, but share some with us in exchange for our maintaining that platform.” This is reasonable. Apple is providing a service to Patreon, and access to their tremendous user base. That ain’t nothing. I agree that subjecting creator donations to the 30% is about the shittiest use case for this and I wish they would make an exception. But your post about how Apple is doing absolutely nothing here is garbage.
-
@Taldan@lemmy.world 2026-01-30 20:34
Lack of competition. No other app store is allowed to operate on Apple devices. They have a monopoly, which is the only reason they can charge as much as they do > Sure, Apple are providing a payments platform, but why do they deserve 10x what Stripe charges? I don't believe that 30% cut includes payment processing. That's an additional fee Sad to think about how little creators actually get at the end of the day. Example of a $100 donation/subscription: * Apple takes 30% * Card companies take ~4% * Patreon takes 10% * Taxes take another big chunk After all that a the creator would have, what, $40?
-
@Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2026-01-29 17:14
Because greed.
-
@lofuw@sh.itjust.works 2026-01-31 02:13
> Why does Apple feel they deserve a 30% cut? Because they can. Time and time again, useful idiots have proven their dipshittery by sucking off the people taking them for a ride. A main tenant of business decisions is to fuck over your customers as hard as they're willing to be fucked. Since nobody has any standards these days, corporations make a killing.