/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

Some developers say Apple's new Core Technology Fee in the EU is eerily similar to the controversial Runtime Fee that Unity touted and withdrew after a backlash

Chris Kerr / Game Developer :

Game Developer Chris Kerr

Context & Ripple Effects

The comparison emerged as Apple introduced an EU-specific per-install charge, with contemporaneous coverage illustrating how that structure could burden free and freemium apps at scale through a €0.50 charge tied to first installs. It also arrived after Unity had proposed installation-based fees, making developers especially sensitive to usage metrics becoming a billing base.

The dispute became part of a broader DMA compliance fight: Apple later added exemptions and a temporary on-ramp for smaller developers, while subsequent EU scrutiny focused on whether the fee could raise developers’ costs.

First-order effects

  • EU developers must model distribution costs against installs rather than revenue alone, making high-download free and freemium releases the most exposed to the new fee structure.
  • Apple’s DMA-era App Store terms face an immediate credibility problem among game and app developers, who associate installation-based billing with Unity’s backlash.

Second-order effects

  • Developers may adjust launch, monetization, and EU distribution plans to limit exposure to install-based charges, while alternative stores and payment routes gain a clearer cost-comparison role.
  • The resemblance to Unity’s abandoned fee model gives critics a concrete framing for challenging Apple’s terms, increasing pressure for carve-outs or revised pricing mechanics.

Third-order effects

  • If regulated platforms retain access charges while opening distribution, compliance may shift from a simple commission debate toward how platforms price reach, installs, and technical access.
  • The longer-running test is whether DMA remedies produce economically viable choice for developers; later changes replacing the Core Technology Fee with tiered commission show that fee design can remain central to that outcome.

The trend: Platform regulation is pushing app-store economics away from a single revenue share and toward contested, more granular charges for distribution and platform access.

Discussion

  • @prime_31 @prime_31 on x
    Did Apple just pull a Unity?!? WTF is going on in the games world? Imagine a few months from now you use Unity 6 (dumb move #1) and end up getting dinged per install TWICE. Plus the Core Technology Fee. What a year it's gonna be...🤣
  • @sirstendec @sirstendec on x
    I hope everyone who hated Unity for bullshit per-installation fees is going to show up to hate Apple for trying the same bullshit in the EU. Apple's garbage is worse than Unity's ever was. Those fees are absolutely insane. Company run by greedy clowns.
  • @incvuvuu @incvuvuu on x
    this just in, apple has committed a unity
  • @nimajamalian Nima Jamalian on x
    #Apple copying #Unity was not in my 2024 bingo card💀
  • @yacinemtb Kache on x
    imagine how much worse the whole unity thing would have been if they had a monopoly on the game engine market. yep, that's apple.
  • @dev_avocado @dev_avocado on x
    Regarding App Store installation fees. I think the solution is pretty clear, developers need to unite and do what they decided to do with Unity. App developers need apple's platform but if there're no apps then it is just another Windows Phone.
  • @podopriguez Andrei Podoprigora on x
    interesting news from Apple. and we thought Unity was crazy? [image]
  • @andytouch Andy Touch on x
    Did Apple really just “hold my beer” to Unity?! 🤣
  • @oskargroth Oskar Groth on x
    Apple is pulling a Unity here. We all know how that went...
  • @injimaru @injimaru on x
    @AshleyGullen For each first annual install doesn't sound too bad or am I missing something? 🤔 It's not like you'll get charged for multiple installs from the same user in that year right?
  • @paulplaystudio @paulplaystudio on x
    @AshleyGullen Now it makes sense... developers can choose to stay with Apple's existing terms. This is for developers that want to use „the new capabilities" (= alt. payment methods) which will definitely not be worth it if they get through with this... [image]