Na esteira dessas manchetes, quatro organizações não governamentais entraram com uma ação judicial contra a Apple Brasil por não realizar a verificação de idade em apps de apostas, com menção ao jogo Casino Roulette: Roulettist, disponível na App Store. O processo foi protocolado na Justiça de São Paulo e cobra indenização de R$300 milhões por danos morais.
Além do jogo supracitado, o advogado da Anced, Márlon Reis (um dos autores da ação), menciona que há pelo menos seis títulos de jogos que simulam cassino e estão disponíveis para download por menores, mesmo que a classificação seja para 18 anos ou mais.
Segundo o processo, a ausência de controle etário permite que crianças baixem o app, adquiram créditos e apostem sem qualquer restrição. Nesse cenário, as ONGs argumentam que a Apple tem responsabilidade direta no caso por intermediar a compra de créditos dentro do jogo, sem verificar quem realiza os pagamentos.
Não se trata de entretenimento gratuito ou meramente simbólico. O usuário emprega recursos financeiros reais para adquirir fichas, arrisca-as nas partidas e, depois de perdê-las, é estimulado a realizar novos pagamentos para continuar jogando.
Além da indenização, as entidades pedem que a Apple suspenda todos os aplicativos de cassino disponíveis em sua loja até comprovar a adoção de um sistema efetivo de verificação de idade. A ação solicita que a Justiça fixe multa diária de R$500 mil caso a Apple não cumpra as medidas em dez dias.
A Apple disse ao Estadão que a verificação de idade para apps destinados a maiores de 18 anos “está em fase de testes e deverá ser lançada nos próximos meses”. Ela também destacou que já oferece ferramentas de controle parental.
A novidade pode ser considerada uma expansão da sincronização limitada que já existia entre os dois aplicativos, e que permitia enviar dados já consolidados do aplicativo da Apple para o do Google — mas não o contrário.
Segundo o site, agora é possível compartilhar dados gravados com o Fitbit Air — como registros de exercícios, de sono e de passos — diretamente para o app da Maçã, sem usar qualquer gambiarra ou apelar para o registro manual.
Para isso, basta tocar no ícone de perfil dentro do app do Google, selecionar “Apps parceiros” e depois escolher o Apple Health entre as opções. Aí, é só conceder as permissões para a sincronização ser completada.
De acordo com o site Droid Life, no entanto, a sincronização ainda não funciona para a variabilidade da frequência cardíaca (HRV), uma vez que as duas empresas calculam essa métrica usando fórmulas diferentes.
Despite predictions that AI agents could make traditional apps obsolete, developers are shipping new software faster than ever. From smarter bookmarking tools and neighborhood marketplaces to digital pen pals and nature journals, here are the latest App Store finds worth adding to your Home Screen.
Todas as empresas de capital aberto (que possuem ações à venda na bolsa de valores) são obrigadas, por lei — na maioria dos países (inclusive Brasil) —, a disponibilizar publicamente suas demonstrações financeiras periodicamente. Esse costuma ser um momento bastante esperado por acionistas (analisando se a empresa na qual estão investindo está sendo bem administrada e gerando lucros), investidores (para captar novas oportunidades de alocar seus recursos), além da imprensa e de curiosos em geral. Na última quinta-feira (30/7), foi a vez da Apple de divulgar seus resultados financeiros referentes ao trimestre abril-junho de 2026.
Para alegria de todos, o CEO 1Chief executive officer, ou diretor executivo.Tim Cook se despede da sua posição com o melhor terceiro trimestre fiscal que a empresa já registrou — um recorde absoluto! Como já informado aqui no MacMagazine, no período de abril a junho (encerrado no dia 27/6), a companhia relatou uma receita de US$109,4 bilhões (alta de 16,4%) em relação ao mesmo trimestre do ano anterior, e lucro líquido de US$29,8 bilhões (um avanço de 27%). A margem bruta chegou a incríveis 50,1%, a maior já apurada em períodos semelhantes da história da empresa!
Hoje, a Apple tem orgulho de relatar o nosso melhor trimestre de abril-junho de todos os tempos, com crescimento de receita de dois dígitos em iPhone, Mac e Serviços, e em todos os segmentos geográficos.
Uma das grandes surpresas do relatório foi o crescimento no faturamento de Macs. Pela primeira vez, a categoria ultrapassou a casa dos US$10 bilhões em um trimestre abril-junho, e o crescimento de 29% superou o do iPhone.
A explicação está em parte na procura alucinada por Macs mini para rodar agentes de inteligência artificial e na leva de lançamentos de março: MacBook Air com M5, MacBook Pro com M5 Pro e M5 Max, e principalmente o MacBook Neo, o modelo de entrada que estreou a US$600 — preço que subiu para US$700 em junho, no reajuste geral motivado pelo custo de memória. A Apple parece ter encontrado um mercado relevante abaixo do Air, e vale acompanhar o que isso faz com a margem da linha nos próximos trimestres.
O iPad foi a única categoria no vermelho, com queda anual de 6%. Não é surpresa: a própria Apple havia avisado que a comparação seria difícil, pois no ano anterior houve o lançamento do iPad com chip A16. O iPad Air com M4, que chegou em março, não foi suficiente para compensar. Cabe ainda analisar se o bem-sucedido MacBook Neo não acabou levando um pouco do mercado dos tablets, também.
O asterisco que quase ninguém vai mencionar
A margem bruta de 50,1% e o lucro por ação de US$2,02 não são resultado apenas da operação, e esse detalhe se perde facilmente na comemoração dos recordes.
À primeira vista, no press release — e nos comentários que fizemos no último podcast —, esse ponto não ficou bem claro, mas merece atenção. A Apple informou, no comunicado, que a margem incluiu cerca de dois pontos percentuais e o lucro por ação incluiu US$0,11 vindos de reembolso de tarifas, dinheiro que a empresa havia pago ao governo americano e recebeu de volta depois que a Suprema Corte derrubou, em fevereiro, as tarifas impostas sob a IEEPA (a lei de poderes econômicos internacionais de emergência). A empresa não detalhou a origem exata dos valores devolvidos, mas a decisão da Corte é o evento que abriu caminho para os reembolsos.
É dinheiro real, entra legitimamente no resultado, mas não é recorrente e não diz nada sobre a capacidade da Apple de vender aparelhos. Descontando o efeito, a fotografia muda um pouco: a margem bruta cai para aproximadamente 48%, exatamente o que o consenso projetava, e o lucro por ação vai para cerca de US$1,91, contra os US$1,89 esperados. De uma superação de 6,9% no lucro, sobra uma de pouco mais de 1%.
Ou seja: o trimestre continua bom em receita e em volume, que são genuinamente fortes. Mas o brilho extraordinário no lucro é, em boa parte, contábil, e não se repete.
A Apple abre a margem bruta em dois blocos apenas: produtos e serviços. Ela nunca divulga margem por categoria individual (não existe margem oficial de iPhone, Mac ou iPad em documento nenhum da empresa, e todo número desse tipo que circula é estimativa de analista), mas os dois blocos que ela abre já contam a história.
Linha de negócio
Margem do FQ3 2026
Margem do FQ3 2025
Variação
Produtos
40,07%
34,52%
+5,55pp
Serviços
75,62%
75,58%
+0,04pp
Consolidado
50,06%
46,49%
+3,57pp
A margem de hardware subiu 5,55 pontos percentuais em 12 meses. A margem de hardware não sobe 5 pontos por ganho de eficiência: é ali que o reembolso de tarifas desembarcou, porque tarifa incide sobre produto físico. A prova está na linha seguinte: serviços, que não pagam tarifa nenhuma, ficou praticamente parado. A melhora não foi operacional.
Vale registrar um desequilíbrio que explica boa parte do valuation da Apple. Serviços representam 28,1% da receita, mas respondem por 42,4% do lucro bruto do trimestre. Produtos são 71,9% da receita e apenas 57,6% do lucro. Cada dólar de serviço vale quase o dobro de um dólar de hardware, e é por isso que o mercado aceita pagar perto de 40x o lucro por uma empresa que, no fim das contas, vende telefone.
Serviços: um pequeno sinal de alerta
Os relatórios revelaram um problema silencioso do trimestre. Serviços cresceram 12,1%, um bom número isolado, mas bem abaixo dos 16,2% do trimestre encerrado em março e, mais grave, abaixo do que a própria Apple havia sinalizado. Na teleconferência de abril, o diretor financeiro Kevan Parekh disse que os serviços cresceriam em ritmo “similar ao reportado em março” (ou seja, algo perto de 16%, ressalvando o efeito cambial). Ficaram cerca de 4 pontos percentuais aquém.
A linha chegou a recuar 0,8% em relação ao trimestre imediatamente anterior. Foi o único item da projeção que a Apple não cumpriu, e não é um item qualquer: é o que sustenta o múltiplo da ação. Parte da imprensa de mercado atribuiu a reação negativa à combinação de serviços com a Grande China, embora as estimativas para a região divergissem bastante entre as casas: havia projeções de US$18,8 bilhões, que o resultado cumpriu, e de US$19,5 bilhões, que não.
Fora das manchetes do balanço, três indicadores das demonstrações merecem atenção, e nenhum deles apareceu no material de divulgação.
O estoque quase dobrou, de US$5,7 bilhões em setembro de 2025 para US$11,1 bilhões, alta de 94%. Uma empresa que é referência mundial em operar com estoque enxuto dobrou o estoque em 9 meses. A leitura mais provável é compra antecipada de memória, antes que os preços subam ainda mais. É a confirmação contábil do que Cook disse em junho, quando afirmou que aumentos de preços eram inevitáveis.
Pesquisa e desenvolvimento saltou para US$11,7 bilhões, o dobro do ritmo da receita, e passou de 9,4% para 10,7% do faturamento. Ao mesmo tempo, o investimento em ativo fixo (equipamentos, imóveis, veículos etc.) caiu 28% no acumulado de 9 meses. É a tese da IA “capital-light” traduzida em números: a Apple gasta mais em gente e software, e menos em concreto e servidor, apostando em rodar inteligência nos mais de 2 bilhões de aparelhos que já estão nas mãos dos usuários. O oposto de Microsoft, Google e Amazon.
O caixa operacional de 9 meses foi de US$117 bilhões, contra US$81,8 bilhões. Mesmo assim, a recompra de ações caiu de US$70,6 para US$62,1 bilhões. A Apple está segurando dinheiro, o que é coerente com o estoque dobrado e com uma troca de comando marcada para 1º de setembro.
Há ainda um detalhe na linha de outras receitas, que agrupa o que a Apple ganha fora da operação: juros do caixa aplicado, juros pagos sobre dívida, variação cambial e valorização de participações minoritárias. O resultado foi de US$572 milhões positivos, contra US$171 milhões negativos há um ano — um giro de US$743 milhões. A carteira de caixa e aplicações subiu para US$146,5 bilhões, enquanto a dívida caiu para US$82,3 bilhões. Mais dinheiro rendendo, menos juros a pagar. É lucro financeiro, não operacional.
A projeção para setembro veio bem abaixo
O trimestre relatado é recorde. A projeção que o acompanha, não. E como o mercado precifica futuro e não passado, foi ela que dominou a reação. A ação, que havia fechado o pregão a US$333,43, caiu cerca de 6,5% na negociação estendida ao longo da teleconferência, o que equivale a aproximadamente US$317 bilhões de valor de mercado. No dia seguinte, a queda se confirmou: -7,35%. A projeção da Apple para o trimestre de setembro, o último do ano fiscal, veio com dois números desconfortáveis.
Indicador
FQ3 2026 (real)
FQ4 2026 (projetado)
Crescimento de receita
16,4%
de 9% a 11%
Margem bruta
50,1%
de 47% a 48%
Margem bruta sem reembolso de tarifas
48,1%
de 47% a 48%
Receita implícita
US$109,4 bilhões
de US$111,7 a US$113,7 bilhões
A desaceleração de 16,4% para algo entre 9% e 11% já seria suficiente para incomodar. O que agravou foi a justificativa: Parekh afirmou que o impacto das restrições de oferta deve “aumentar significativamente” em relação ao trimestre anterior — citando explicitamente iPhone, Mac e iPad —, e mencionou ainda ventos contrários de câmbio sobre a receita de iPhone.
A margem projetada de 47% a 48% é o número mais revelador de todo o balanço. Ela fica abaixo do resultado limpo deste trimestre sem o reembolso de tarifas. Ou seja: a Apple está dizendo que a margem vai cair de verdade, em bases comparáveis. O colchão de estoque de memória comprado a preço favorável, que segurou os custos nos últimos trimestres, está acabando, e o trimestre de setembro é justamente o que carrega o lançamento dos “iPhones 18 Pro/18 Pro Max” — e provavelmente do “iPhone Ultra”, o primeiro dobrável da empresa.
Ternus assumirá como diretor executivo em 1º de setembro, com Cook passando a presidente executivo do conselho. A julgar pelo balanço, ele recebe uma casa em ordem: receita recorde, base instalada de aparelhos ativos em máxima histórica em todas as categorias principais, patrimônio líquido de US$107,5 bilhões e — possivelmente — a companhia mais valiosa do mundo.
Recebe também três problemas bem definidos. O primeiro é o custo de memória, que já forçou aumentos de preço no MacBook Air, no Mac mini e no Mac Studio, e que agora vai comprimir margem sem o amortecedor do estoque barato.
O segundo é a desaceleração dos serviços, com os recursos judiciais contra o acordo de busca com o Google ainda pendentes.
A leitura mais honesta deste balanço talvez seja esta: Cook encerra sua gestão entregando o melhor trimestre abril-junho da história da Apple, a maior capitalização de mercado do mundo e uma operação que cresce dois dígitos em todos os continentes em que atua. O que ele não entrega pronto é a próxima curva: provar que a aposta de rodar inteligência artificial dentro do aparelho, e não na nuvem, vale o múltiplo de 40x que a ação vinha cobrando. Essa parte, agora, é com Ternus.
Metodologia
Os números do trimestre e do comparativo anual foram extraídos das demonstrações consolidadas condensadas não auditadas da Apple referentes ao terceiro trimestre fiscal de 2026 e ao terceiro trimestre fiscal de 2025, conferidas linha a linha. As margens por linha de negócio, os indicadores de balanço patrimonial e de fluxo de caixa e todos os percentuais foram calculados a partir desses documentos.
As estimativas de consenso de Wall Street citadas foram compiladas antes da divulgação junto a Yahoo Finance, TipRanks, Zacks, Visible Alpha, Hudson Labs e Goldman Sachs.
A projeção para o trimestre de setembro e as declarações do diretor financeiro vêm da teleconferência de 30 de julho de 2026, com apuração de 9to5Mac, CNBC e AppleInsider.
Os dados de mercado chinês são da IDC e da CAICT. A série de fechamentos mensais da ação tem origem em StatMuse, StockAnalysis.com, FinancialContent e Macrotrends, via S&P Global Market Intelligence.
O ajuste identificado como “sem reembolso de tarifas” não é uma linha contábil: é cálculo próprio a partir do efeito que a Apple declarou no comunicado de resultados.
Observação
Este texto não constitui recomendação de investimento.
Fechando a semana e o mês de julho com a nossa seleção de promoções na App Store!
O nosso destaque do dia é Pin To Wall: Photo Widget, um app simples e direto ao ponto, pensado para quem quer manter uma única foto sempre à mão no iPhone, iPad ou Apple Vision Pro.
Ele funciona como um quadro digital: você escolhe uma imagem, fixa na Tela de Início como widget e pronto, ela fica ali até você trocar.
A proposta é armazenar apenas uma foto por vez, seja da sua biblioteca ou com uma nova captura, evitando acúmulos desnecessários na biblioteca de fotos e tornando o app leve e fácil de usar.
Para quem gosta de foco e não quer gerenciar álbuns, é uma solução prática. Aproveite a oferta! 🌠
Abaixo outros jogos/apps que, juntos, somam quase R$100 em descontos:
Jogos
Puzzles.
Jogo de estratégia.
Jogo de cartas.
Aplicativos
Editor de vídeos.
Utilitário para desenvolvedores.
Aproveite as ofertas e tenha um excelente final de semana! Vale lembrar que as ofertas são sempre por tempo limitado, então é bom correr. 🦖
App Store regulatory changes are beginning to affect Apple Services growth as developers gain more ways to avoid Apple’s payment system or pay lower commissions in major markets.
Apple finance chief Kevan Parekh told investors that changes to the App Store business model in some countries had affected its performance during the June quarter. Softer spending on mobile games created additional pressure.
The acknowledgement is significant because regulatory risk has appeared in Apple filings for years without producing a clearly identified effect on Services performance. Apple is now confirming that rule changes have advanced far enough to influence reported results.
The impact does not mean the App Store has stopped growing. Apple described the store as reaching another June-quarter revenue record, while Services expanded by approximately 12% from the previous year.
The emerging issue is the rate of growth. A purchase can still occur inside an iPhone app while generating less revenue for Apple when the customer pays through a developer’s website or uses terms carrying a reduced fee.
App Store Regulatory Changes Affect Several Markets
Apple did not identify one country or policy as solely responsible for the effect.
The company is adapting to a collection of court orders, competition laws and regulatory agreements that differ substantially among the United States, European Union, China, Brazil, Japan, South Korea and other markets.
Some rules concentrate on payment choice. They allow developers to place links or buttons inside apps leading customers to external checkout pages.
Other changes permit alternative app marketplaces or direct distribution outside the App Store. Several regulators are also examining whether Apple can charge developers for transactions completed through another payment provider.
The financial result depends on the model adopted in each country. Apple may receive no commission, a reduced commission or another fee connected with platform technology and distribution.
This creates a more fragmented App Store business. A subscription sold through the same application can produce different revenue for Apple according to the customer’s country, payment route and the developer terms governing that version of the app.
Image Credit: Apple Inc.
The United States Changed External Payment Links
The most direct change in the United States came from the long-running legal dispute between Apple and Epic Games.
A federal court previously ordered Apple to stop preventing developers from directing customers toward outside purchasing options. Apple responded by allowing certain external links while seeking commissions of between 12% and 27% on purchases completed through them.
The company also introduced design restrictions, an approval process and a warning screen displayed when customers left the App Store environment.
In April 2025, the district court found Apple in civil contempt for failing to comply fully with the anti-steering injunction. The ruling prohibited the company from collecting a commission on purchases made through external links and removed several restrictions governing their appearance.
Apple updated its App Review Guidelines in May 2025. Apps distributed through the United States storefront can include buttons, external links and other calls to action leading customers toward another payment method.
The rules no longer require a special external-link entitlement for the U.S. storefront.
That change gives developers a straightforward financial reason to move some transactions to the web. A company can process a payment through another provider instead of giving Apple a percentage of the digital sale.
The customer can return to the iPhone app and use the purchased subscription or content. The app remains distributed through Apple, but the associated transaction no longer produces the same App Store commission.
Enough developers adopting that route can slow Apple Services growth even if total spending on iPhone applications continues increasing.
The European Union Introduced Alternative Distribution
The European Union’s Digital Markets Act requires Apple to permit alternative app marketplaces, outside payment systems and other changes intended to reduce its control over iOS distribution.
Developers can remain under Apple’s conventional App Store terms or adopt business terms designed for the European market.
The alternative structure separates several services that were previously combined inside one commission. Developers can choose different levels of App Store support, use Apple’s payment system, provide another payment option or distribute software through a competing marketplace.
Apple introduced reduced commissions and technology-related fees to preserve compensation for the tools, security systems, distribution infrastructure and platform access it provides.
Those terms have changed several times following regulatory objections. Beginning in 2026, Apple started moving from its earlier Core Technology Fee toward a Core Technology Commission applied to eligible digital transactions under particular conditions.
The structure means outside payments do not always eliminate Apple fees in Europe. They can still reduce the amount Apple collects or shift revenue among different fee categories.
Regulators continue examining whether the terms provide meaningful choice or discourage developers from leaving the standard model.
Apple argues that alternative stores and payment systems create additional privacy, security and fraud risks. The European Commission has focused on whether Apple’s warnings, technical requirements and fees make those options unnecessarily difficult to use.
European developers must calculate more than one commission. They need to consider payment-processing costs, marketplace charges, customer acquisition, reporting obligations and the Apple terms attached to each distribution method.
The result may be lower App Store revenue without an equally large shift toward independent marketplaces. External website payments can change Apple’s economics more quickly because they do not require customers to install another store.
Apple lowered several commission rates in the China mainland storefront beginning March 15, 2026.
Qualifying transactions under the App Store Small Business Program and Mini Apps Partner Program now carry a 12% commission. The same rate applies to eligible auto-renewing subscriptions after the subscriber’s first year.
These transactions previously qualified for a higher 15% rate.
A three-percentage-point reduction may appear small beside demands for completely independent payments. At the scale of China’s app economy, it can remove a meaningful amount of revenue while improving the share retained by developers.
The Mini Apps Partner Program is particularly important in China because large platforms can contain many smaller services inside one host application.
Reducing the commission can encourage those ecosystems to continue using Apple In-App Purchase. It also demonstrates how Apple may respond to pressure by offering more favorable terms before regulators require a more disruptive change.
Lower commissions can support transaction growth over time, but the immediate calculation is straightforward: Apple receives less from each qualifying purchase.
Image Credit: Apple Inc.
Brazil Opens iOS to Outside Stores and Payments
Apple introduced alternative app distribution and payment options in Brazil through an agreement with the country’s competition regulator, CADE.
Beginning with iOS 26.5, developers can distribute apps through alternative marketplaces, operate those marketplaces and process digital payments outside Apple In-App Purchase.
Apps can also present links leading users to an external website where the transaction is completed.
Apple continues applying notarization and other technical requirements to software distributed outside the App Store.
The company maintains that these protections reduce risks but cannot provide the complete safeguards associated with App Review.
Brazil is a major smartphone and digital-services market. Its effect on Apple Services will depend on whether large developers adopt the new options and whether customers are willing to leave the familiar App Store purchasing flow.
An external option existing in software does not guarantee that people will use it. The developer must usually offer a meaningful advantage, such as a lower price, a different subscription package or payment methods better suited to local customers.
Adoption can increase gradually as existing apps release updates. The financial impact may therefore become more visible over several quarters rather than appearing immediately after the regulatory agreement takes effect.
Why Outside Payments Reduce Apple Services Revenue
Apple receives a commission when an eligible digital purchase uses its in-app payment system.
The fee compensates Apple for distribution, payment processing, fraud management, developer tools, customer support and access to the iOS platform, according to the company.
The standard percentage varies. Small developers and long-running subscriptions can qualify for reduced rates, while other eligible digital transactions may carry higher commissions.
When payment moves to a developer’s website, an independent processor handles the financial transaction. The developer pays that provider, manages more of the customer relationship and retains the amount that would otherwise become an App Store fee.
Apple may still provide the operating system, APIs, development tools and App Store distribution without receiving the conventional payment commission.
This separation explains why App Store activity and App Store revenue can move differently. People may download more applications and spend more on digital services while Apple captures a smaller percentage of the commerce.
The same customer could maintain several subscriptions used exclusively on an iPhone without any of their monthly payments passing through Apple.
Apple can collect other revenue from that user through hardware, advertising, iCloud or its own subscriptions. The external transaction nevertheless removes one part of the Services model.
Most App Store Commerce Never Paid Apple a Commission
The size of the App Store economy should not be confused with Apple’s commissionable revenue.
Apple says the global App Store ecosystem facilitated more than $1.4 trillion in developer billings and sales during 2025. More than 90% of that commerce did not produce a commission for the company.
The largest categories involve physical goods and services such as retail purchases, travel, grocery delivery, restaurant orders and transportation.
Apple does not collect a percentage when someone uses an Amazon app to order furniture, books a hotel or pays for a meal delivered through an iPhone.
App Store commissions generally concentrate on digital goods, application features, virtual items and subscriptions sold through Apple In-App Purchase.
Regulatory changes target this smaller but financially important part of the ecosystem.
Digital transactions require no physical inventory or delivery network, allowing payment commissions to carry attractive margins. Losing part of that revenue can therefore affect profitability more than the dollar amount alone suggests.
Apple does not disclose App Store revenue or profit separately. The category remains combined with cloud services, advertising, media subscriptions, AppleCare, payments and other operations inside Services.
Mobile Gaming Weakness Adds Another Pressure
Regulation was not the only factor Apple identified.
Parekh said softer mobile gaming activity also affected the App Store. Games represent an important source of digital transactions because players purchase virtual currency, characters, cosmetic items, subscriptions and access to additional content.
A decline in game spending directly affects the commission Apple receives through In-App Purchase.
Gaming is also one category where developers have pushed aggressively for alternative stores and payments. Epic Games began its legal confrontation with Apple after introducing another payment method inside Fortnite and attempting to bypass App Store commissions.
The simultaneous effects are difficult to separate. A game can generate lower revenue because players are spending less, because payments moved outside Apple’s system or because both changes occurred together.
Apple does not provide enough category detail to calculate the contribution from each factor.
The distinction matters for the outlook. Gaming demand can recover with successful releases and stronger consumer spending. A permanent regulatory change does not reverse when one popular game reaches the top of the charts.
Image Credit: Apple Inc.
Developers Gain Revenue but Assume More Work
Outside payments can improve the amount a developer retains from each purchase.
A company moving from a conventional App Store commission to a lower-cost web payment processor may use the difference to reduce prices, fund development or improve profitability.
The developer also assumes responsibilities previously handled through Apple.
Independent billing requires payment processing, tax management, fraud protection, refunds, account recovery and customer support. Subscription status must synchronize correctly between the website and the iPhone app.
Customers changing devices or reinstalling an app expect their purchases to remain available. The developer needs its own account system capable of verifying ownership without relying entirely on Apple’s purchase history.
Small developers may decide that Apple In-App Purchase remains worth its fee because it removes operational complexity and gives customers a familiar checkout experience.
Large subscription businesses have stronger incentives to build their own systems. They already maintain accounts and payments across websites, televisions, Android devices and other platforms.
The regulatory effect will therefore vary by developer size and business model. One company may remove Apple billing completely, while another continues using it because external infrastructure would cost more than the commission saved.
Customers May Receive Lower Prices
External payments create the possibility of lower subscription prices because developers no longer need to incorporate the complete App Store fee into the amount charged.
Some services already cost more when purchased through an iPhone app than through their websites. The higher price allows the developer to preserve similar revenue after Apple receives its share.
A visible external link makes comparing those prices easier. Customers can leave the app, complete the transaction on the web and return with an active account.
Savings are not guaranteed. A developer can retain the entire difference rather than passing it to subscribers.
Independent billing can also make subscription management less consistent.
Purchases completed through Apple appear in one location:
Settings > Apple Account > Subscriptions
A subscription purchased directly must be canceled through the developer’s website or account system. Customers using many external services may need to remember several billing portals and renewal policies.
Refunds and purchase disputes also move away from Apple. The developer or its payment processor becomes responsible for resolving the transaction.
Choice can reduce prices while increasing complexity. The practical outcome depends on whether developers make external checkout clearly cheaper and easy to manage.
Apple Is Expanding Other App Store Tools
Apple is responding to the changing environment by adding business models and marketing systems that can keep developers using its commerce platform.
Monthly subscriptions with a 12-month commitment allow participating apps to offer lower recurring payments while securing a complete year of revenue.
The Advanced Commerce API supports more complex content catalogs, optional add-ons and subscription structures that were previously difficult to manage through standard In-App Purchase products.
Apple has also expanded tools for custom product pages, promotional offers, application analytics and international distribution.
These additions increase the value attached to App Store billing. A developer may tolerate a commission when Apple provides conversion tools, subscription management and access to promotional placement that would be expensive to reproduce independently.
The company can also adjust rates for particular categories. The Small Business Program, Mini Apps Partner Program and reduced commission for longer-running subscriptions already demonstrate differentiated pricing.
A more competitive payment market may push Apple toward additional service tiers rather than one universal commission.
The UK Could Create the Next Material Change
The United Kingdom’s Competition and Markets Authority is consulting on rules that would allow developers to direct customers outside Apple and Google’s payment systems.
The regulator expects any fee charged for steering to be fair, reasonable and lower than current app-store commissions. It wants the resulting savings passed to customers or reinvested in developer businesses.
The UK proposal is not yet a final requirement. Its eventual structure could determine whether developers receive the broad freedom available in the United States or a fee-based model closer to some European arrangements.
Regulators are also considering app-review fairness, interoperability and access to mobile-platform capabilities.
The outcome will matter beyond British customers. Each major jurisdiction creates another model that regulators elsewhere can examine when designing their own rules.
Apple must decide whether to continue maintaining different commercial systems by country or move toward broader global terms that reduce operational complexity.
Developers face the same choice. Supporting a separate payment route, marketplace package and reporting process for every region can become expensive enough to cancel some of the benefits regulation intended to create.
The next evidence will come from behavior rather than another policy announcement: how many major apps add external payment links, whether they offer lower prices and how quickly customers move away from Apple’s checkout.
Avaliada agora em US$4,537 trilhões (US$308,91 por ação, queda de 7,35%), a Maçã já tinha visto o valor dos seus papéis recuar cerca de 3% ainda ontem, logo após o fim da reunião com investidores, nas negociações pós-fechamento da Nasdaq.
Como era de se esperar, a queda grande de hoje fez com que a Apple perdesse o posto de empresa mais valiosa do mundo, ocupado agora pela NVIDIA [$NVDA], que fechou o dia avaliada em US$4,862 trilhões (US$200,75 por ação, +2,93%).
A gigante de Cupertino, no entanto, permanece à frente da Alphabet [$GOOG], que apresentou hoje um crescimento forte de 6,88% e fechou o dia avaliada em US$4,362 trilhões (US$356,65 por ação).
Em quarto lugar, temos a Microsoft [$MSFT], um dia após suas ações registrarem a maior valorização da história em um único dia (ontem os papéis subiram 15,51%, adicionando cerca de US$450 bilhões ao valor de mercado da companhia). Avaliada agora em US$3,451 trilhões (US$464,72 por ação), ela apresentou hoje um crescimento de 3,02%.
What sets Pastebot 3 apart is its addition of deep automation tools. Not only does the update add MCP support, making it an excellent tool to use with Claude or ChatGPT/Codex, but it includes a brand new CLI that you or an agent can use from Terminal or incorporate into scripts you build.
[…]
New filters have been added that allow you to transform clippings using text transformations and even shell scripts. Using the ability to script custom filters, I’ve begun adding a few of my own to Pastebot for things like adding and removing bullets from multiple lines of text.
I’ve long been aware of this app but hadn’t paid much attention because I’m happy using LaunchBar as my clipboard and snippet manager. LaunchBar has some transformations built-in, and I’ve built up a collection of my own scripts, but it’s appealing that Pastebot comes with so many out of the box.
From Pastebot’s main UI, you can select multiple items at once and right-click to add them to a Stack, or you can pick them one at a time in any order you’d like. As you select items, they’re numbered in the order you’ll paste them into a document using a keyboard shortcut. It’s an excellent feature for filling out forms or copying data from one spreadsheet to another.
There are also rule-based Smart Pastebins for automatic organization, like every link or image copied from Safari. Smart Pastebins can be filtered by clipping size, type, file extension, creation date, text, text length, and more. Multiple parameters can be combined for detailed filtering, and custom notes can be added to clippings to make them easy to find via search.
[…]
Tapbots says Pastebot 3 was built to work with Apple's Universal Clipboard feature, and when enabled and active, anything you copy on your iPhone is saved in Pastebot automatically.
Importantly, Pastebot 3 requires macOS 26 Tahoe or later and comes with a 14-day free trial. Users can buy the app directly from Tapbots for $39 or subscribe through the App Store for $2.99 per month or $24.99 per year.
[…]
The direct purchase includes one year of updates, with additional years available for $19 each. Users who stop paying for updates can continue using the latest version covered by their purchase. Pastebot 2 owners can also get a $12.99 upgrade discount by entering their existing license key at checkout.
They are not offering any upgrade path for MAS customers. The reason they stated was “upgrade pricing has always been our way of thanking people who bought directly from the site.”
I generally try to avoid complaining about App Store review, since I do think they have a really hard job to do. But I’m about 2 more PB3 rejections from just giving up.
O aplicativo oficial do Shazam, de propriedade da Apple, foi atualizado hoje com uma novidade bem interessante para aplicativos de mensagens e afins: o suporte a figurinhas (stickers).
A novidade estreia na forma de uma parceria da plataforma com a cantora Ariana Grande, especialmente para divulgar seu novo álbum, “petal”.
Inspiradas na estética do álbum, as figurinhas podem ser adicionadas a partir do botão de adição do app Mensagens (Messages), escolhendo a opção “Adesivos” e depois tocando no ícone do Shazam.
Além disso, elas podem ser usadas tanto no app de mensagens oficial da Apple quanto em qualquer aplicativo com o teclado de emojis disponível.
Os óculos inteligentes da Meta podem parecer relativamente distantes da realidade brasileira no momento, mas já são um fenômeno (e tanto) lá fora, a tal ponto que o atual terceiro aplicativo pago mais baixado na App Store americana tem como proposta detectá-los; refiro-me ao Antizuck Smart Glasses Scanner.
O interessante é que nem mesmo a procedência desconhecida do utilitário foi capaz de conter a curiosidade dos usuários, interessados em descobrir se ele realmente funciona como anunciado.
A promessa do desenvolvedor Albert Pariente Cohen é de que a detecção ocorre por meio de sinais Bluetooth emitidos pelos óculos, sendo compatível com os Meta Glasses, Ray-Ban Meta, Snap Spectacles, Amazon Echo Frames e o RayNeo. Supostamente, o app também é capaz de estimar a proximidade dos óculos em relação ao iPhone/iPad.
Teoricamente, óculos inteligentes como os da Meta contam com um LED 1Light emitting diode, ou diodo emissor de luz. não removível na lateral, que permitiria às pessoas ao redor alguma ciência de que estão sendo gravadas. Já existem no mercado, no entanto, alternativas para coibir o funcionamento desse mecanismo, como tampas de plástico ou adesivos que inibem a visibilidade da luz de gravação. Varejistas como a Amazon ou a própria Meta trabalham para tirar esse tipo de produto de circulação, mas ainda é possível encontrá-los à venda.
A categoria de produtos levanta constantes debates sobre ética, visto que os casos de gravações não consentidas se tornam cada vez mais frequentes. Na semana passada, o diretor do Instagram, Adam Mosseri, declarou que vídeos contendo gravações de assédio com estranhos em lugares públicos — frequentemente gravados com o hardware da Meta — terão como consequência o banimento na rede social:
Se você está postando conteúdo que tira vantagem de pessoas e assedia elas, como muitos desse tipo de vídeo de cantadas que costumamos ver e ouvir falar, então nós vamos derrubar o conteúdo. […] Nós não queremos que pessoas sorrateiramente gravem vídeos de outras pessoas e as assediem e então postem na nossa plataforma. Então nós estamos tentando lutar de todo o jeito que conseguimos.
Apple is still pulling in massive amounts of money from its services division, but the numbers recently fell slightly short of Wall Street’s lofty expectations. The technology giant reported a strong $30.7 billion in services revenue for the quarter, marking a healthy 12 percent jump from the same time last year. However, analysts expected slightly […]
Softness in mobile gaming and Apple's changes to the App Store business model in some countries impacted the performance of the App Store, Apple CFO Kevan Parekh said during today's earnings call.
Apple's services revenue was $30.7 billion, a 12% increase over the $27.4 billion it earned in the year-ago quarter. Though the category saw growth, revenue came in under expectations, prompting analyst questions that led to Parekh's comments on the App Store.
We also had some factors that impacted the performance of the App Store. We did see some headwinds in mobile gaming, and then keep in mind, we also made some changes to the App Store business model in certain countries, and in the U.S., we do continue to operate under a court ruling impacting the link-out transactions. But we're pleased the Supreme Court will hear our appeal.
There have been App Store fee updates in Japan and Brazil as of late, with Apple collecting no fees on link-outs in the U.S. and lower fees from alternative app marketplace apps in the EU. Despite the rule changes, the App Store still set a June quarter revenue record. Apple saw double-digit growth in cloud services, video, payment services, and advertising, with a record level of Apple Pay users.
During the call, Apple also said it now has 1.5 billion paid subscriptions, with transacting and paid accounts hitting an all-time high.
Parekh said it wasn't the App Store alone that impacted services revenue, and Apple also took a hit from foreign exchange. Last year, Apple also had the theatrical release of F1, and no equivalent release this year, making for a tougher compare.
Services growth in the September quarter is expected to be similar to the June quarter when excluding an approximately 2.5 percentage point foreign exchange headwind.
Released less than a month ago by an unknown developer, Chrome Browser Default has somehow become a top download in the United States Mac App Store, alongside well-known developers Amazon, WhatsApp/Facebook/Meta, and Microsoft[…]
[…]
Chrome Browser Default is the top search result for “Google Chrome” in the Mac App Store. Chrome itself is distributed as a direct download from Google, outside the Mac App Store. Notice also that the Chrome Browser Default app icon resembles the Google Chrome app icon[…]
Both the name and icon violate Apple’s guidelines, and the preview images are not actually screenshots of the app. The App Store is great for distributing apps that piggyback on the names of popular apps. They’d be hard to find with a regular Web search, but in the App Store they appear at the top.
The app appears to do what the description says it does, though it’s quite primitive and likely vibe-coded. I can add rules, but I couldn’t find a way to edit or delete added rules, which is ridiculous. The developer’s privacy policy is on GitHub in a repository where most of the commits were co-authored by Claude.
[…]
At the bottom is a section that shows, allegedly, what “People are Saying” about the app. Yet none of these 5-star reviews are from the App Store. According to Google Search, the reviews are not from anywhere on the web.
This app is no longer available in the Mac App Store.
[…]
I have no idea why the Dutch name “Standaard Browser Wisselen” appears in the alert, because the App Store Purchased section says “Chrome Browser Default,” and my only Mac system language is English (US). The name of the developer in the App Store was Chinese, 立花 卢.
[…]
My suspicion is that Apple, not the developer, removed the app from the App Store, which explains why I can’t download it. Whether this removal was triggered by my blog post or by App Store user reports, I don’t know.
Doesn’t say amazing things for the Mac App Store that I find it faster to search for something in a search engine than within the MAS itself. And that’s when I already know the name of what I’m looking for.
Brazilian users browsing the App Store rankings in categories such as Navigation, Travel, and Weather have noticed a growing number of poorly made games appearing among the top results, many of them featuring AI-generated illustrations of animals as their app icons. Many carry an AL age rating, making them available to users of all ages, including children.
As it turns out, these are so-called jacket apps, which are just a front for hidden betting and gambling apps.
[…]
The repository also includes explicit instructions intended to prevent the apps from being flagged as suspicious during App Store review. These include giving each app uniquely named startup and remote-configuration codes, making it harder for reviewers to identify them as part of the same group.
Ironically, the App Store’s own recommendation system appears to have little trouble grouping the apps together, as the “You Might Also Like” section on several of these apps points users toward other suspicious apps more frequently than they point to genuine apps.
Obviously the main problem is that these apps disguise themselves Trojan Horse-style, and slip through App Store review undetected. I don’t think it’s reasonable to think App Store review could catch every attempt at this sort of thing though — if the horses are disguised well-enough, some of them are going to slip through. That’s actually fine.
I agree that it’s unreasonable to expect App Review to catch all those, but then Apple should not be pretending that it can. This was all obvious from day one. The public perception of App Review is completely at odds with what it actually can and does do.
But the first example 9to5Mac cites isn’t well disguised at all. What sense does it make that “PotatoPlot Puzzle” — a game featuring a rabbit potato farmer — is a weather app? How is that not a red flag right there?
[…]
I always mention that the point of such a squad shouldn’t be to make the App Store 100 percent scammer-free — which I believe is an impossible goal that would set the team up for failure. The point should be only to make the App Store free of successful scams. Focus on the most popular apps and the most lucrative apps.
The App Store is more than 18 years old. The idea of patrolling the top charts probably occurred to Apple before it even shipped. They just don’t want to do it.
Apple only took 24 hours to approve my iOS app update that crashed instantly on launch. Such a blessing to have that extra level of reliability and security that only a manual review process can provide 🙏
Incidentally, the crash was due to a missing dylib - something that could easily have been detected by the automated scan process, if only that scan were designed to protect users’ and developers’ interests instead of Apple’s.
There is simply no other way to maintain a modern, healthy software ecosystem without making sure that apps that have been around for 7 years and 20 major versions can’t get a build looked at within 48 hours. There’s no other way. Probably needs to be longer, honestly.
I had to file an Expedited Review Request because this update is a legitimate emergency. Four hours later, App Review rejected the build because they didn’t follow the first sentence of the testing instructions (which haven’t changed in 7 years). Back to Waiting for Review! There’s no other way.
We got rejected in the Expedited Review again, this time for not having an account deletion feature. Except we do, and it’s one button press away from the screen that the reviewer was on. And it has always existed. Is this how the expedited review works? Malicious incompetence?
If you were wondering how long one of the “you can ask us to approve this build and can fix this issue in the next release” App Review errors takes to resolve when you’re in the Expedited Review Queue… me too! So far, 18 hours. (Ignoring the fact that we have the feature the rejection was for.)
Apple is facing a new lawsuit accusing the company of allowing a fraudulent Bitcoin wallet app to remain on its App Store for more than a week after users reported significant losses.
According to the complaint, three individuals collectively lost approximately $1.84 million after downloading an app that impersonated the legitimate Sparrow Wallet. The victims entered their Bitcoin seed phrases into the fake application, enabling scammers to drain their funds. One plaintiff reported losing $875,000, while another lost $840,000; the delay in removing the app after the first report allegedly contributed to further losses.
The lawsuit claims Apple’s marketing and App Store presentation led users to believe applications available on the platform undergo careful vetting and are safe. Plaintiffs allege the company ranked the fraudulent app and even included it in curated cryptocurrency app collections alongside genuine Bitcoin wallets. The legal action accuses Apple of violating consumer-protection laws, engaging in fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, and failing to adequately warn consumers about risks.
This is not the first time Apple has faced similar claims. In 2021, cryptocurrency holders sued the company over a fake wallet app scam; that case was ultimately dismissed by a federal judge.
Apple has stated that it has removed apps impersonating Sparrow Wallet from the App Store and terminated the associated developer accounts.
MacDailyNews Note: The plaintiffs are seeking reimbursement of the stolen assets along with compensatory and punitive damages.
Please help support MacDailyNews — and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more — by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!
Matt Corey, the maker of Bills to Budget and Signals, has organized indie developers for a big sale that runs from July 28 - 30. The sale includes over 200 apps that will be offered at a discount through Thursday. The list is too long to publish here, but it includes many apps we’ve covered here on MacStories and on Club MacStories in the past, including:
There are a lot of great deals, with many apps discounted 50% or more. What’s listed above is a small fraction of the participating apps, so be sure to visit Indie App Salesand support these great indie apps.
The complaint alleges that Apple violated California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act and other laws by failing to adequately review and monitor apps distributed through the App Store, despite marketing it as “a safe and trusted place to discover and download apps.” Due to these assurances in Apple’s marketing, the complaint said the plaintiffs trusted that a Sparrow Wallet app they downloaded from the App Store on iOS was legitimate, when in reality it was a fraudulent spoof designed to steal Bitcoin from users.
Sparrow Wallet is only available on Windows, macOS, and Linux. The popular Bitcoin wallet is not available on iOS, but scammers have released fake lookalike apps in the App Store that can trick users into giving up control of their funds.
[…]
Even when victims reported fraud, the lawsuit alleges that Apple often took little to no action, and it says other fake Sparrow apps remain in the App Store.
Sparrow Wallet developer Craig Raw has publicly addressed Apple’s slow response to multiple fake versions of his app appearing in the App Store. In a January 2024 social media post, for example, he said “there is still a scam ‘Sparrow Wallet’ app on the @Apple App Store, despite myself and others having reported it weeks ago.”
My attempt to protect users from scam apps on the
@AppStore
has gotten my Apple Developer account flagged for termination - ironically, for “dishonest activity”.
[…]
I’m the developer of the real Sparrow Wallet, a desktop app, and I hold the registered US trademarks for the name and logo. I have publicly warned
@Apple
and the community about these fake apps from early 2024, but they keep appearing.
The app
@Apple
flagged was a placeholder that was never published. Its only purpose was to warn users that Sparrow is desktop-only and that other “Sparrow” apps aren’t mine. This approach may have been misguided, but there was nothing dishonest about it.
In response to our request for comment, Apple said it has taken swift action to remove any apps impersonating Sparrow Wallet[…] Apple says it takes immediate action against apps that do not comply with its guidelines.
The complaint targets one of Apple’s longtime competitive arguments: that its tight control over its App Store makes its platform safer than those offered by its rivals. The company has used this claim to push back against deregulation of the app ecosystem, including third-party app stores and sideloading.
“As part of a sustained marketing campaign, Apple has positioned itself, its products and services, as offering a level of security and trustworthiness superior to any competing technology company,” the new filing states. “This includes assurances about the safety of applications distributed through its App Store. By retaining exclusive control over which apps are permitted on Apple devices, Apple has structured its platform to ensure that consumers depend entirely on its promise of safety and reliability,” it reads.
With third-party app stores, there would be an incentive to do better vetting than Apple, and with sideloading it would be clear that the app was not being downloaded from sparrowwallet.com.
What struck me about Apple’s response is that it places the burden of curating the App Store on developers and users rather than taking responsibility for it. After all, Apple reviews every version of every app before it can be published to the App Store. If Apple is curating the App Store, then why do scams have to be reported and removed? One wonders how the scams get past Apple review in the first place, and even if Apple review “is not perfect” (a gross euphemism), how the second line of defense, Apple employees patrolling the App Store for scams that the review team missed, also fails. The burden of App Store curation should not fall to me, a lone indie developer.
Apple’s response also ignores that the indie developer did report the scams, multiple times.
O app de leitura Instapaper foi atualizado hoje para a sua versão 10.0 com uma série de novidades — incluindo uma interface repaginada e adaptada ao Liquid Glass (e outras mudanças de design em grande parte do app), bem como novos recursos e melhorias de desempenho.
O Menu de Seções, por exemplo, agora pode mostrar as Contagens de seção em todos os lugares, bem como permite ordenar pastas e etiquetas por nome, ordem de adição ou contagem. Também há melhorias na exibição e suporte completo ao Liquid Glass no iPad.
Quando falamos na Lista de Artigos, ela foi redesenhada com um novo modo Condensado, opções de tipografia e uma nova ação de deslize para mover artigos para o topo. Ela também cria automaticamente listas de reprodução a partir da lista de artigos completa.
Por fim, o Leitor agora conta com quatro novas fontes de leitura (Literata, New York, Open Sans e Atkinson Hyperlegible), bem como permite escolher o que é aberto ao se tocar em um artigo (a Vista de Artigo, a Vista Web, o navegador integrado ou o padrão).
Também contando agora com um widget para ver os artigos lidos no momento ou os salvos recentemente, o Instapaper é grátis para baixar na App Store, mas para usá-lo por completo é necessária uma assinatura Premium, que sai por R$10/mês ou R$100/ano.
E vamos deixando o nosso aplicativo — disponível para iPhone, iPad, Mac e Apple Watch — cada vez mais nos trinques! 😉
Acaba de sair a versão 5.1 dele, e agora é possível dar um “Peek” nos artigos diretamente pela tela inicial de posts: basta tocar e segurar sobre um deles para ter uma prévia rápida do conteúdo, sem precisar abri-lo por completo.
Também chegou o suporte a deep links: a partir de agora, ao tocar em qualquer link do MacMagazine — seja recebido por mensagem, encontrado em outro app ou mesmo em uma busca —, você é automaticamente levado para o post correspondente dentro do nosso app.
A tela de posts ganhou ainda dois novos ajustes de personalização: um para sempre lembrar o filtro selecionado e outro para exibir sempre os títulos completos dos posts na lista principal, sem cortes.
Além disso, esta versão traz correções de bugs e refinamentos na interface, bem como mais aprimoramentos gerais em acessibilidade.
Agradecimentos
Fica aqui um agradecimento especial ao Cassio Rossi pelas colaborações feitas em nosso projeto no GitHub para esta versão.
A atualização já está disponível na App Store — e, como sempre, vale a pena atualizar o quanto antes para aproveitar todas as novidades. Em breve, é claro, voltamos com mais! 😉
Login
