←back to thread

447 points hemant6488 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
nancyminusone ◴[] No.44312819[source]
>I’m saving approximately $84-120 CAD annually.

I suppose most of this is eaten up by the need to pay apple $99 per year just to run your own app on your own phone for longer than a week.

replies(8): >>44313113 #>>44313215 #>>44313586 #>>44313614 #>>44313718 #>>44314240 #>>44314560 #>>44315930 #
behnamoh ◴[] No.44313215[source]
This Apple fee is one of the most absurd things they do. Like, how is it even justified—does Apple really spend $99 on infra maintenance and server costs to host your app?

When I buy a device I want to know that I own it, but Apple keeps pushing the narrative that "we LET you use this device in ways we see fit". So basically the customer is just borrowing a device from Apple while paying the full price.

I'm a longtime Apple user but can't shake off this love-hate relationship with the company.

replies(10): >>44313272 #>>44313280 #>>44314081 #>>44314098 #>>44314944 #>>44315377 #>>44315748 #>>44317717 #>>44320005 #>>44320589 #
cortesoft ◴[] No.44315377[source]
> Like, how is it even justified—does Apple really spend $99 on infra maintenance and server costs to host your app?

How much something costs is not what determines how much a company charges for something.

A company sets prices based on what will make it the most money. A company only lowers prices if they think doing so will generate higher total profits in the long run.

Apple seems to think charging $99 a year for developers will help its long term bottom line the most.

There are probably many reasons for that, some of them already mentioned in sibling comments - keeping low effort apps out, preventing spammers from constantly buying new accounts to bypass bans, reducing the workload for approvers, generating revenue from the fees, etc.

Prices aren't justified or not, you choose to pay them or not.

replies(5): >>44315868 #>>44315880 #>>44315891 #>>44316128 #>>44321946 #
irrational ◴[] No.44315891[source]
There can’t be that many iOS developers that the $99 really affects their bottom line. I always assumed it was a barrier to entry to help discourage low effort apps.
replies(4): >>44317543 #>>44317733 #>>44319301 #>>44319731 #
KeplerBoy ◴[] No.44317543{3}[source]
Keeping low effort apps out of the store helps their bottom line. It's a second order effect.
replies(1): >>44320215 #
kccqzy ◴[] No.44320215{4}[source]
Yes but the $99 fee doesn't just allow selling apps on the App Store. It is also required for testing the app such as on TestFlight.

Apple should long ago make the $99 an App Store fee, not tied to any provisioning certificates or code signing.

replies(1): >>44320757 #
1. engcoach ◴[] No.44320757{5}[source]
Without a fee, people would make new accounts and circumvent distribution restrictions.
replies(1): >>44321810 #
2. leakycap ◴[] No.44321810[source]
The fee could be less and have a similar deterrent on the type of activity you describe. The real question isn't what Apple is gaining from this fee, but what they are losing.

Apple's $99 fee is annoying and feels like a waste of time and one more thing to manage.

The paid ADC program has kept me from sharing projects with other developers who would have otherwise been able to contribute (but they aren't paid devs because they'd rather have a year of Costco hotdogs than pay Apple to help me with my app for a week)