苹果app store水军
In recent weeks, numerous companies have complained about Apple and its App Store practices. Microsoft, Facebook, the Wall Street Journal, Basecamp, and Epic games are all on the list. Beyond that, Apple is facing an investigation both from the European Union and the US House Judiciary Committee.
在最近几周，许多公司都在抱怨苹果及其App Store的做法。 微软 ， Facebook ， 华尔街日报 ， Basecamp和Epic游戏都在列表中。 除此之外，苹果还面临欧盟和美国众议院司法委员会的调查 。
对于苹果公司来说，这是一个紧要关头。 (For Apple, it’s a tight spot to be right now.)
问题 (The problem)
One of the problems these companies are highlighting that not all developers are treated equally in Apple’s ecosystem. Sometimes, Apple is making exclusive deals; other times, they’re favoring their own apps over direct competitors.
这些公司强调的问题之一是，在苹果的生态系统中，并非所有开发人员都受到同等对待。 有时， 苹果公司会进行独家交易 ； 其他时候， 他们更喜欢自己的应用，而不是直接竞争对手。
The second, maybe even more significant concern is how much money Apple keeps from every financial transaction that comes through the App Store. While the 30% cut became somewhat of an industry-standard over the years, it’s still being challenged as too high compared to the service developers receive for the price.
第二个，甚至更重要的问题是，苹果通过App Store进行的每笔金融交易都可以赚多少钱。 虽然这些年来30％的降价已成为某种行业标准，但与开发商以价格获得的服务相比，降价幅度仍然过高。
For the second point, Apple is arguing that the 30% cut is more than fair. Besides, they state that the vast amount of iOS apps are actually free, which means that they don’t collect any money from most creators.
对于第二点，苹果认为30％的削减是不公平的。 此外，他们指出，大量的iOS应用程序实际上是免费的，这意味着它们没有从大多数创作者那里收取任何钱。
“…when we entered the app store market, the cost of distributing software was 50% to 70%; so we took the rate in half to 30%, and held it over time…” — Apple CEO Tim Cook at a recent U.S. Congress hearing
“……当我们进入应用商店市场时，分发软件的成本为50％至70％； 因此我们将利率提高到30％的一半，并随着时间的推移一直保持下去……” –苹果首席执行官蒂姆·库克(Tim Cook)在美国国会最近的一次听证会上
Interestingly, the argument about how the minority contributes to everyone’s advantage is a critique also said about tax systems.
有趣的是，关于少数群体如何为每个人的利益做出贡献的争论也对税收制度提出了批评。
The general idea of a country’s tax system is to collect a percentage of the wealth from residents in order to provide essential services for all. For Apple, it’s a very similar problem: less than half of the developers pay the bill for everyone.
一个国家税收制度的总体思路是从居民那里收集一定比例的财富，以便为所有人提供基本服务。 对于苹果公司来说，这是一个非常相似的问题：不到一半的开发人员为所有人支付费用。
因此，如果这很像一种税收制度，为什么不能像一个税收制度那样固定呢？ (So if it’s a lot like a tax system, why cannot it be fixed like one?)
苹果与竞争 (Apple and the competition)
Countries usually don’t compete with the services of the free market. On the contrary, Apple lock horns with a lot of other companies. At the same time, those companies are forced to work with Apple for distribution.
国家通常不与自由市场的服务竞争。 相反，苹果与许多其他公司争吵。 同时，这些公司被迫与苹果合作进行发行。
It’s like from one day to another, your supplier would also become your competitor, but you would be forced to stay with the partner. On some level, it has to be the definition of ‘biased’.
就像从一天到一天，您的供应商也将成为您的竞争对手，但是您将不得不与合作伙伴呆在一起。 在某种程度上，它必须是“偏见”的定义。
This situation comes from the fact that in recent years, Apple has started to put more focus on its services business. At the time of writing, the iPhone company makes the following digital products available for its users:
这种情况来自这样一个事实，即近年来，苹果公司已开始更加关注其服务业务。 在撰写本文时，iPhone公司为用户提供了以下数字产品：
On-demand music and radio streaming: Apple Music
点播音乐和广播流： Apple Music
TV-show and movie streaming: Apple TV+
电视节目和电影流： Apple TV +
Gaming subscription: Apple Arcade
游戏订阅： Apple Arcade
Magazine and newspaper subscriptions: Apple News+
杂志和报纸订阅： Apple News +
Cloud storage and backup: iCloud
云存储和备份： iCloud
In addition, Apple is rumored to launch virtual fitness classes soon, entering the competitive game with Nike, Peloton, and others.
此外，有传言称苹果将很快推出虚拟健身课程 ，并与耐克，佩洛顿和其他公司一起进入竞争性游戏。
The complication with Apple’s practices that they force developers to loop their transactions through the company’s own payment system. That means they take a cut from all app purchases, in-app purchases, and subscriptions.
与苹果公司的做法复杂的是，他们强迫开发人员通过公司自己的支付系统进行交易。 这意味着他们减少了所有应用程序购买，应用程序内购买和订阅的费用。
This cut is 30%, and developers don’t get to negotiate. For some apps, there are workarounds, but it doesn’t work for everybody, and on top, results in a suboptimal user experience.
削减幅度为30％，开发人员无需谈判。 对于某些应用程序，有一些变通办法 ，但并非所有人都可以使用，最重要的是，这会导致次优的用户体验。
The approach and the 30% cut would still be justifiable if Apple would prove that this revenue is needed to operate the App Store. But it’s not the case. In 2019, the company profited around $15 billion, just for curating and distributing apps in the App Store. On top of that, Apple’s apps are not subject to the same revenue tax as others.
如果苹果公司证明运营App Store需要此收入，那么该方法和30％的削减仍然是合理的。 但事实并非如此。 2019年， 该公司仅在App Store中策划和分发应用程序便获利约150亿美元 。 最重要的是，Apple的应用与其他应用无需缴纳相同的所得税。
So that sad truth, that companies competing with Apple’s existing services has 30% less chance to be financially successful. And that would plainly put the competing company at a permanent disadvantage, if they would like to distribute their apps on iOS. It’s a biased game.
因此，与苹果现有服务竞争的公司获得财务成功的机会要少30％。 如果他们想在iOS上发布其应用程序，那么这无疑将使该竞争公司处于永久劣势。 这是一个有偏见的游戏。
对于开发人员而言，App Store税制已被打破。 (For developers, the App Store tax system is broken.)
为什么坏了？ (Why is it broken?)
For Apple, the App Store business model is working flawlessly. The company makes well enough to keep up the servers, pay people for vetting apps, and curate the content. Moreover, last year proved again that they also get to keep a hefty profit.
对于苹果公司而言，App Store商业模式运行良好。 该公司做得足够好，可以保持服务器的正常运行，为审核应用程序而付钱给人并策划内容。 此外，去年再次证明，他们也获得了丰厚的利润。
For developers, the system is broken. Less than half of all apps contain any paid features, and there are close to 1.9 million apps in the App Store. The minority is paying the bill to Apple for everyone, and they’re paying a big chunk of their revenue.
对于开发人员来说，系统已损坏。 不到一半的应用程序包含任何付费功能，并且App Store中有将近190万个应用程序。 少数派为所有人支付了账单，而他们却付出了很大一部分收入。
Beyond paid features, there is another part of the financial equation that people often forget. Free apps usually come preloaded with advertisements, which also generates money for developers. These ads are coming from one of the mobile ad networks, from which Google’s AdMob is the most famous.
除了付费功能外，人们经常会忘记财务方程式的另一部分。 免费应用程序通常预装有广告，这也为开发人员带来了收益。 这些广告都来自移动广告网络，从其中一个未来谷歌的AdMob广告是最有名的。
The money earned this way stays with the ad network operator and the developer, so Apple, as a marketplace owner, does not benefit from it.
通过这种方式获得的收入将留给广告网络运营商和开发人员，因此作为市场所有者的苹果无法从中受益。
如果是这种情况，前进的方向是什么？ (If that’s the situation, what is the way forward?)
一种建议的解决方案 (One proposed solution)
Understandably, as every for-profit company, Apple also wants to keep its cash cow going on without drastic changes. That’s why they opposed the request of many developers in the past months who were seeking to challenge the App Store practices. Now, more prominent corporations are starting to join forces, and Apple needs to handle the situation somehow.
可以理解，作为每家营利性公司，苹果公司还希望保持其摇钱树，而无需进行大幅度改变。 这就是为什么他们在过去的几个月中拒绝了许多寻求挑战App Store做法的开发人员的要求。 现在，越来越多的知名公司开始联合起来，苹果需要以某种方式应对这种情况。
There are multiple choices the iPhone company could take. Anything it does will likely have repercussions on other marketplace owners. An ideal solution has at least two requirements:
iPhone公司可以选择多种选择。 它所做的任何事情都可能会对其他市场所有者产生影响。 理想的解决方案至少具有两个要求：
- First, it needs to satisfy the developers who are rebelling against the App Store tax system and provide an alternative to the current practices. 首先，它需要满足那些反对App Store税制的开发人员的需求，并提供一种替代当前做法的方法。
- Second, it needs to offer standard conditions for everyone that do not favor any company over the other. 其次，它需要为每个不赞成任何一家公司的所有人提供标准条件。
Although it’s just one idea from the possible many, here is my proposal.
虽然这只是可能的一个主意，但这是我的建议。
1.将所有付费交易的30％降价幅度降低到10％ (1. Reduce the 30% cut to 10% for all paid transactions)
Reduce the current commission to 10% for all transactions, including paid apps, in-app purchases, and subscriptions. For subscriptions, continue to take the same 10% after the second year.
将所有交易(包括付费应用，应用内购买和订阅)的当前佣金降低到10％。 对于订阅，第二年后继续保持相同的10％。
For comparison, credit card issuers, card networks, and payment processors together take between 2.87–4.35% for all financial transactions. Of course, it’s all built-in to the consumer prices, but this is the tax they take for operating a global payment network.
相比之下，信用卡发卡行，卡网络和付款处理商在所有金融交易中的费用总计为2.87-4.35％ 。 当然，它们全都内置在消费者价格中，但这是他们运营全球支付网络所要缴纳的税款。
Also, since 2008, when Apple introduced the App Store, the cost of technology has decreased. Today, it’s cheaper to host applications, provide bandwidth, or build a reliable digital service.
另外，自2008年苹果公司推出App Store以来，技术成本已经下降。 如今，托管应用程序，提供带宽或构建可靠的数字服务变得更加便宜。
Lastly, if in 2008, a developer paid $3 contribution to Apple for an app that cost $10, then its inflation-adjusted commission would be $3.7 today. That means that the price of distribution not just stagnated but increased.
最后，如果在2008年，开发人员向Apple支付了3美元，购买了一款价格为10美元的应用，那么今天经通货膨胀因素调整后的佣金为3.7美元。 这意味着分销价格不仅停滞不前，而且上涨了。
2.让苹果自己缴税 (2. Make Apple pay its own taxes)
As discussed before, Apple’s services are not subject to the same App Store commission as others. If the company were forced to waive the same percentage as the rest, it would create a fair, competitive environment.
如前所述，Apple的服务不受其他App Store的委托。 如果公司被迫放弃与其他公司相同的百分比，则将创造一个公平，竞争性的环境。
As one idea, Apple could re-distribute their own 10% among all creators. This move would guarantee that any competing service would have the same capability for success as Apple itself, at least financially.
作为一个想法，苹果公司可以在所有创作者中重新分配自己的10％。 此举将确保任何竞争性服务至少在财务上具有与Apple本身相同的成功能力。
3.如果需要，请所有开发人员做出贡献 (3. If needed, make all developers contribute)
Operating a marketplace has its costs, like hosting and curating applications. By making every app pay for its listing in the App Store (even if it’s a free app), Apple could more proportionally distribute its operation costs.
经营市场有其成本，例如托管和管理应用程序。 通过让每个应用程序支付其在App Store中的上市费用(即使它是免费应用程序)，Apple可以按比例分配其运营成本。
Free apps often still earn money through advertising, but Apple is usually not taking any commission out of this. By setting transparent standards on how much it costs to be distributed on iOS, the iPhone company could make all developers pay a small fee for being featured in the App Store.
免费应用程序仍然经常通过广告赚钱，但是苹果公司通常不从中收取任何佣金。 通过为在iOS上分发多少费用设定透明的标准，iPhone公司可以使所有开发人员为在App Store中进行展示而支付少量费用。
This move could further decrease the 10% commission for paid transactions in apps if Apple were willing to act as a hosting provider.
如果苹果愿意充当托管服务提供商，此举可进一步降低应用程序中付费交易的10％佣金。
所以现在，苹果需要决定他们如何塑造未来。 (So now, Apple needs to decide how they’re shaping the future.)
苹果的情况 (The situation for Apple)
Apple is in an uncomfortable situation right now.
苹果目前处境不佳。
In the eyes of customers, Apple is the highest-rated personal computer company, according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index.
在客户眼中，根据美国客户满意度指数，苹果是获得最高评价的个人计算机公司 。
In the eyes of developers, Apple is a necessary evil required for being present on 24,82% of all mobile devices.
在开发人员看来，苹果是出现在所有移动设备中的24.82％所必需的邪恶手段 。
Inspired by how 9to5mac put it in regards to the Apple vs. Epic battle, the current situation has three possible outcomes, and most of them are not good news for Apple.
受9to5mac如何对待Apple与Epic之战的启发，当前的情况可能产生三种结果，其中大多数对苹果而言不是好消息。
Apple will continue to cut exclusive deals with big publishers, bending more on its “standard terms for all” promise. Apple wins, and they are not forced to change their current practices.
苹果将继续削减与大型发行商的独家交易，更多地履行其“所有人的标准条款”的承诺。 苹果公司获胜 ，他们没有被迫改变目前的做法。
Enough developers will raise their voices against the company to make them rethink their App Store business model. Apple loses, but they can make changes in their own terms, before any official decree forces them.
足够多的开发人员将对公司发出声音，以使他们重新考虑其App Store业务模型。 苹果公司败诉 ，但在任何正式法令强迫他们采取行动之前，他们可以按照自己的意愿进行更改。
As a consequence of current investigations, the company is forced to make specific changes in how they operate. Apple loses, and they might be compelled to change more than just their App Store practices.
由于目前的调查，该公司被迫对其运作方式进行特定的更改。 苹果输了 ，他们可能被迫做出改变，而不仅仅是他们在App Store中的做法。
The situation above does not only concern Apple, but other marketplace owners as well, like Google, Samsung, or Amazon.
上述情况不仅涉及苹果公司，还涉及其他市场所有者，例如Google，三星或亚马逊。
In the coming months, we’ll see how much power developers have over their landlords, and if those companies will be forced to change the way they operate.
在接下来的几个月中，我们将看到开发商拥有多少拥有权力的开发商，以及这些公司是否将被迫改变其运营方式。
翻译自: https://blog.prototypr.io/apple-app-store-rebellion-9a66cbf24368
苹果app store水军