
Updated Microsoft Store App Developer Agreement: New Revenue Share - ductionist
https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2019/03/06/updated-microsoft-store-app-developer-agreement-new-revenue-share/
======
jawns
Here's how the new payment structure works:

> When Microsoft delivers a customer through other methods (tracked by an
> OCID), such as when the customer discovers the app in a Microsoft Store
> collection, through Microsoft Store search, or through any other Microsoft-
> owned properties, then you will receive 85 percent of the revenue from that
> purchase.

> When there is no CID or OCID attributed to a purchase, in the instance of a
> web search, you will receive 95 percent revenue.

So this is all about rewarding organic discovery, or paid discovery outside of
Microsoft channels.

In other words, by allowing your app to be discovered first through the
Microsoft Store search, you're paying Microsoft what amounts to a 10%
commission.

And then, regardless of how it was discovered, you're paying 5% to Microsoft
just for being on the platform.

It will be interesting to see what effect this has on the ecosystem. On the
one hand, it seems like a reasonable shifting of costs. If you rely mostly on
Microsoft for acquiring new customers, then Microsoft should get a little bit
more of a cut, and if you rely mostly on your own marketing methods, then it
should get less. But on the other hand, part of the strength of an ecosystem-
based business model is that it's a one-stop shop, and one would think that
Microsoft would want to incentivize discovery happening within that ecosystem,
not to disincentivize it.

~~~
stephenhuey
So if they are browsing your website, decide they’ll probably purchase it, but
then later they open up the Microsoft store and search for it there, you lose
money you would’ve had if they’d immediately downloaded it from a link on your
website?

~~~
ductionist
If they click your link (that includes the `?cid` parameter) while they're on
your website, I believe the `cid` value is cookied/stored with their Microsoft
Store profile, and will be respected even if they buy later directly from the
Store.

If they visit your website but don't click the link, then there's no way for
the Store to attribute the sale to your website, so you'll probably be charged
full freight (15%).

~~~
chipperyman573
Can you just include an invisible iframe with that link so the cookie gets
placed?

------
muststopmyths
Microsoft is like a competitor in a Three-legged race
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-
legged_race](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-legged_race)) except both
runners are running in opposite directions.

You have one side that's actively working to make Windows obsolete and another
that's flailing about trying to make it relevant somehow.

I'm a bitter ex-Windows Phone user, so my perspective could be colored.

~~~
titanix2
I was a WP7&8 user as well as developer and yes the whole story left me a
bitter taste, especially at the end. I had fun getting phones for free,
participating at MS hackhatons, making friends and of course learning to
develop mobile apps but it seems every decisions by MS during after Mango have
been against the consumer. Also at the time the store took 30% as well...

------
nerdywordy
I'd be interested to take the pulse of HN:

When you are looking for a new Windows app, does opening up the store even
cross your mind?

I nearly always go to a web search + download first. Or if it's something dev-
centric I look at scoop or chocolatey. The Windows Store is far, far behind in
my mindshare.

There are a few glimmers of hope though. Python has begun to distribute via
the store which is cool. And the Linux distros available are helpful in some
edge cases or for a quick dev environment.

~~~
hateful
My issues with the store apps are that most of them act like "apps" and not
like "programs/applications". For example, they close on their own with no
warning. I tried to use the store version of the Pandora app, but it would be
closed when I left it paused for too long. Same with Facebook's Messenger. I
don't want that. I want to be able to control when I open and close a program.

~~~
MentallyRetired
That doesn't happen to me with the messenger app...

My biggest issue is the amount of unofficial apps that look official. It's a
trust issue. If I go to the website I at least know that I'm getting legit
software.

------
nickpp
Desperation move. Microsoft is probably looking at its internal Store numbers
and realizing it is a failure.

I guess this is the final attempt. We'll see if it works.

~~~
nickflood
They were talking about this change in 2017, and actually said it will come in
2018,so they kind of actually took too long to implement this.

That said, I'd say the Store is not breaking any records. It looks like their
reaction to that is to allow other stores on Windows while taking a step back
and concentrating on being a good platform.

------
rchaud
I can understand Microsoft having an app store when Windows Phone and Windows
RT were still around, but now Windows is all x86, so people aren't even
installing desktop apps anymore outside of games and work-specific apps (say,
R), that wouldn't appear on the app store anyway.

What's the most popular app on Windows Store anyway? I use Windows 10 every
day and I've never noticed anything outside of Bejeweled, Candy Crush and
other "mobile" type games.

~~~
WorldMaker
A lot of classic x86 Win32 apps are in the Store these days, too. It is a
safer way to buy and install such things. (Photoshop, iTunes, Office, etc.)

Windows is continuing to expand to ARM even without phones right now. The
HoloLens 2 is reported to be built around a Qualcomm Snapdragon.

Windows 10 ARM tablets/netbooks are a product again, in trying to compete with
Chrome OS, and it isn't a repeat of the Windows "RT" tablets because Windows
10 on ARM now supports x86 emulation and a lot of classic 32-bit Win32
applications.

Just because you currently don't have a use for the Store doesn't mean that no
one has a use for the Store. It's nice finally having a proper central app
installer/updater without every application developer installing their own
baroque updater and running it on every Windows startup. Getting rid of the
Apple Updater alone by installing iTunes from the Windows Store is such a
relief.

------
arkitaip
This is an amazing deal for Win devs and one of many needed efforts if MS
intends for the Microsoft Store to remain the number one platform for software
downloads on Windows.

Currently I'm seeing much more dev excitement for platforms like Electron
where you can slap a wrapper around your existing web tech but damn would I
love to see a renaissance for native Windows apps. I feel like Microsoft
botched native Windows dev by having many and competing eco systems, some
which feel incredibly outdated. It says a lot when even they prefer Electron
for stuff like Visual Studio Code.

------
speeq
Nice move! I hope that Google & Apple will reduce their 30% tax someday..

~~~
ehsankia
I think this system would work well for game platforms too, such as Steam. A
big point of contention for Steam is, how much the platform does for
advertising your game. By having two separate taxes depending on how the game
was found, you can have the best of both worlds. If you do your own brand
building and advertising, then those sales get a better cut, while the
platform can also get their cut for the advertising they do.

This also aligns the incentives on what the platforms advertises, to some
extent.

~~~
themacguffinman
Steam already relinquishes their cut if the game is bought via a third party
retailer. It costs nothing to generate or activate Steam keys outside the
Steam store.

------
z3t4
I tried adding a web app to the store. Its extremely complicated compared to
adding a hosted web app to chrome, where you just need an app manifest. For
the windows store you need a bunch of xml files and it seems you must use
their IDE. I want to build the package manually via command line so I can
understand each step and then automate it.

------
bdz
>The new fee structure excludes all games and any purchases on Xbox consoles.

Interesting considering the rise of Epic Store

------
duado
The Microsoft App Store is a complete graveyard so it hardly matters what they
do or don’t do with it.

------
nxc18
I feel like given the circumstances, Microsoft should probably make
distribution free and collect no revenue, at least until the platform becomes
popular.

There are costs to targeting the Windows platform, especially if you're doing
things their new preferred way (UWP). Primarily a slow, difficult to work with
development kit. Lots of mysterious crashes that you can't do much about, lots
of leaky abstractions over COM.

If anything, Microsoft should be paying developers to target their store. I do
personally prefer modern apps and the experience of the store, I just know not
to reach for it first. As a customer I would appreciate more apps, they need
to figure out a way to make the platform more appealing for developers.

~~~
yunyu
They've attempted to do that before:
[https://www.theverge.com/2013/3/19/4124548/microsoft-
paying-...](https://www.theverge.com/2013/3/19/4124548/microsoft-paying-
developers-cash-for-windows-apps)

All that lead to was a bunch of similar looking apps of questionable quality
flooding the store.

~~~
ktjfi
That was absolutely retarded. I remember they went around universities handing
out Lumia 925 mobiles to anybody who uploaded a few apps... imagine the
quality of the apps.

If only they had spent that money on actually making the OS better. Imagine
that.

~~~
shawnz
> If only they had spent that money on actually making the OS better. Imagine
> that.

What do you think they were trying to do? Apps are what make an OS good. Even
if they caused 10,000 trash apps to be created and only 100 good ones, that's
still 100 more good apps than they had before.

~~~
ktjfi
Not having a new toolkit every version would've been good. Allowing users of
WP 7.* to update to 8, good too. Allowing all users of 8.1 to update to 10.

Also their own apps were poor. I remember Skype for WP 8 was absolutely
unusable. MS is composed of many teams and many of them clearly didn't give a
shit about WP.

------
Animats
What was Microsoft's cut before?

~~~
ductionist
30% on one-off purchases of apps and IAPs, and 15% of subscriptions.

------
bitL
Will this kill Steam? I suspect that's their main adversary as in mobile space
they are non-existing, yet they can't dominate gaming space on PC.

~~~
muststopmyths
Games are still 30%, so no.

Apparently Microsoft believes that there is demand for a Windows Store and its
apps, but games on the Windows Store are so successful that they don't need
the cut.

I would not have thought that possible, but I don't have access to Microsoft's
business metrics.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
I thought the same thing, but there's a rumor suggesting Microsoft may make
Xbox One games available on Windows via the Windows Store. It seems a bit far
fetched to me, but not impossible. If true, they might be right about not
needing to cut it and still be able to threaten Steam.

------
pjc50
They don't _quite_ require that you log into your desktop with an online
account to use the store, but the route around this is non-obvious.

------
burtonator
That's cool... assuming you can get in:

[https://getpolarized.io/2019/02/28/dear-app-stores-dont-
bloc...](https://getpolarized.io/2019/02/28/dear-app-stores-dont-block-apps-
lead-with-the-carrot.html)

I found out that our app was crushed after 2 weeks of development.

Basically, they won't let us in because we use Electron.

Electron is developed in part (primarily) due to Github which they now own.

TWO WEEKS I spent porting to the MS App Store only to have them just crush us
...

It's great that I can make 95% of zero...

But seriously. If anyone from Microsoft is listening - please unblock us ;)

I'm considering submitting this as a PWA but it's missing a lot of features as
a PWA.

~~~
MSJo
Hi, I'm a Microsoft employee and own the certification for apps. Electron is
allowed. I checked with my team it. The failure is related to browsing
capabilities which have to comply with 10.2.1.

~~~
avinium
No vested interest in this whatsoever - just wanted to let you know that it's
cool you picked this up on HN, followed it up internally and responded
publicly to clarify the situation.

That kind of transparency really helps build confidence in Microsoft Store as
a platform. It's important to show that the team is accessible (and, frankly,
human). It also helps to correct misleading narratives (e.g. "MS Store doesn't
Electron apps").

------
m-p-3
If only they did this while Windows Phone was still a thing, maybe (and a big
MAYBE) it would have fared better in terms of developer engagement compared to
iOS and Android.

------
tanilama
It is not surprising that in terms of develop engagement, Microsoft is at a
huge disadvantage. They need some differentiation to attract developers.

~~~
ductionist
I think that's part of it. It's also a more open platform, so they have to
compete with, say, Stripe or Digital River etc. on their commission
percentages to get the big Windows software titles on board.

------
nbevans
This is a smart move that will drive more traffic to the Windows Store. They
should have done this ages ago!

------
airstrike
I'm surprised it isn't 100% – it should have been so from the outset.

It's not like Microsoft really needs the revenue from the half-dozen apps
available in their store right now. What they need is _momentum_.

If I were in charge of making this decision I would pull the levers on every
incentive I can give developers, cause God knows most people don't even
remember the MS Store exists...

~~~
rubbingalcohol
Compared to the massive cut Apple takes on their app stores Microsoft's
revenue split seems pretty generous.

I downvoted your comment because you aren't being intellectually honest to
suggest it makes sense for them to provide payment processing, update
management and DRM for free to app developers when at the very least they'd be
losing big on the credit card processing side. So your comment reads as an
elitist jab against Microsoft and not actual constructive criticism.

~~~
airstrike
I am being intellectually honest. Users make the platform. Microsoft should
recognize they are dead last in this race and bite the bullet to provide
developers with a clear incentive to develop for the MS store.

Apple takes the massive cut they do in their app store because developers
can't really afford not to pay for that level of access to users.

One day when (IF!) Microsoft's store becomes relevant like that, they can
think about what share they're entitled to

Finally, but also importantly, I don't know where in God's green world you got
"elitism" from... which is pretty rich coming from someone calling my comment
intellectually dishonest and "not actual constructive criticism".

