I'm actually happier to pay a small premium for IAP based subscriptions because of the cancellation options.<p>Having been subjected to asinine "retention" policies that make ending a subscription service an onerous and time consuming process (ex: NYT), and having seen first hand how a company purposefully makes subscription cancellations difficult, being able to open a single interface and click `Cancel` is a massive UX benefit.<p>I'm not debating if a 30% cut is reasonable, but in the drive to move everything to a subscription model, I have started avoiding services without an IAP option.
Apple is nothing else but the digital equivalent of a landlord extracting economic rents from everyone in the ecosystem. It's time to put an end to it, and while we're at it the same goes for all the other platform owners.<p>We (in this case the EU) should give it the same treatment we gave credit card companies. Cap their rates at 1% or whatever so they can cover the operational costs of their stores, stop them from banning apps from their stores that aren't breaking any laws, and that's that. If they want to make more money for their shareholders they should actually build things rather than abuse their gatekeeper position.<p>Just imagine if Microsoft had taken a 30% cut from every developer who ever compiled software for windows, or told them what software stack to use to develop their software. We'd have gone on the barricades immediately. Microsoft had to face scrutiny for bundling a browser, compared to what smartphone companies have done to their devices that was a joke
This reminds me of a very different time...<p>In 1997, then CEO of Sybase Mitchell Kertzman said in an interview with the French trade magazine 01 Informatique:<p>"Q: When you launched Jaguar CTS, a middleware tool competing with a Microsoft product, you received a rather explicit phone call...
A: It was the Mafia! When I hung up, I realized that I had just received a phone call from the godfather who forbade me to sell drugs on his territory. And you know, Microsoft people behave like the Mafia: they don't have to break your leg, they just have to threaten you."<p>Source (in French): <a href="http://bat8.inria.fr/~lang/hotlist/free/abuse/mafia/kertzman.html" rel="nofollow">http://bat8.inria.fr/~lang/hotlist/free/abuse/mafia/kertzman...</a>
I hope that the model Apple is using will be made illegal, most likely in the EU first. But I am concerned that if you have a one trillion dollars, they you pretty much can do anything you want, as with such money you can buy any decision. Apple should be forced to allow 3rd party app stores in their ecosystem. There are many other things Apple is doing wrong and all we can do now is to raise awareness about their shady practices.
I am proud that I pretty much cured everyone in my circle from buying any Apple products.
I think this is what happens when we have a "feudal system". People have given over control to a few feudal lords. We increasingly don't control our infrastructure or data. We are seeing the consolidation of power into the hands of a few powerful organizations. Once you get locked into your walled in garden, it's difficult to leave, be this for developers or end users, and these organizations know it.
Let's just use PWA! Oh wait, no push notifications, proprietary asset properties, and other crippled feature sets on iOS? Guess that option is out too.
Google/Apple should drop the percentage. 30% is too high. Store is a kind of ecosystem which based on the mutual benefits of both Apple and Devs. Devs helped to accelerate their products. Having billions in reserve, they should not hurt this relationship.
From the article : Apple responded, saying that free companion apps to paid online services are no longer required to have in-app purchases as of September 11, 2020. As long as paid upgrades are not offered through the app and it has no notifications to customers about an external subscription service, everything is fine.<p>So....
I read the article, but I'm still stuck on why Apple is asking for IAP to be included. Is the argument: "Hey, your app works with subscription services. You need to give Apple users the option to purchase via the App Store."<p>If so, why doesn't Fastmail (from what I can tell) offer IAP? Isn't this the same idea?
The walled garden could have worked if Apple had acted as a benevolent dictator. Instead, it degraded into a despot and it will face the consequences of this.
I have no problem with Apple's basic approach with the App Store, they provide a service and are entitled to charge for it.<p>I do think they have gone too far with some of their practices though. This sort of shake down of free apps is over-reach and I'm glad they have revised the App Store guidelines. I hope this sort of arm-twisting doesn't happen in future.<p>It is a tricky issue. As I said it's their product their rules, but those rules do need to be clear, be fair and be impartially applied. I really don't want to see heavy handed regulation in this area, which could be incredibly damaging.
What problem does Apple have with PWAs (apart from monetary ones ofcourse), how are they justifying not implementing features in browser for a good PWA?
The payments landscape is under great flux for those of us that live it and know extremely well first hand. As a serial entrepayneur having been in this "game" for many decades more and more business' are coming to realize they need to own and control the process from customer to bank in order to offer better support in this now nearly complete digital online world. The middlemen are jockeying for position through value added service functions and customer lock in through such technologies as tokenization while the card brands and competing FinTechs continue to buy up all up and coming payments companies globally. If you want control you need to own it yet very few seem to understand this thinking as most believe payments is more than just ones and zeros which it is not.
No matter what Apple does, people will say they're right to do so. The biggest fuck you that app devs can show to Apple is to develop exclusively for Android. Then add a notice on their page WHY they won't develop an iOS app. Maybe even a hip hashtag like #AppleMafia<p>Voilà. If you're treated like shit in a store, don't use the bloody store.
Despite all this, I currently have more respect for Apple's ethics than most other companies - <i>currently</i>. But if their incentives continue to lead them in this direction, Apple will be the Oracle of 2025. They should actually welcome regulation in this area, because its difficult for a company to change its own incentives.
Guessing this is a hugely unpopular opinion here:<p>A mafia engages in racketeering/extortion. They take a game that’s fair, and make it unfair. Instead of creating value, they steal it. Without the mafia, people would retain more value for themselves.<p>Apple, on the other hand, created and maintains an enormous platform. Without Apple, the App Store would not exist. The rules are posted to a webpage and are applied more or less equally to everyone. All the transactions that occur in this App Store are value they enable to exist. Without Apple, instead of creating an app you would have to create an app and the platform and distribution mechanism etc. The cut they take, in light of this, seems more than reasonable to me.<p>The hate Apple gets here and other places seems really misplaced to me. They’re not a common carrier. They’re not a monopoly. They’re not even close to being a monopoly. They’re a huge company, but there is plenty of competition out there. I don’t understand why people act like they can’t make the rules of their platform. Much less why people would say they are a mafia.<p>Concretely about this post: it seems really naive!<p>> "Out of the blue, one day they said you have to add in-app purchase to stay in the App Store. They stumbled upon something in the app that mentioned there were paid plans, they went to the website and saw there was a subscription you could purchase, and then turned around and demanded we add IAP.<p>This sounds like a child making up a story for the principal. Come on... really? Proton mail is a huge thing. Apple’s rules are public and easy to understand. How is it that I can understand the App Store rules but Proton Mail cannot? Apple want their cut! They don’t want a mechanism to side step or encourage users to side step that cut. It’s so simple.
A Plus plan is currently $5/mo through their web. If you purchase an annual plan it's $4/mo ($48).<p>From what I can see, you can only purchase an annual plan on iOS for $60/mo. They also have fine print that states that Apple takes a 30% fee.
In August Wordpress complained about the same thing... and Apple apologized and changed the policy:
<a href="https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/22/21397424/apple-wordpress-apology-iap-free-ios-app" rel="nofollow">https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/22/21397424/apple-wordpress-...</a><p>Protonmail brings up a 2018 incident that has already been addressed by the new policy. What point does this article serve? I think it's just free and easy publicity for ProtonMail.<p>If they had spoken up earlier, maybe they could have been the reason for change instead of WordPress.
Forced in-app purchases are just a vector for governments to figure out who is using protonmail and how. They are better off avoiding apple as a platform if they don't understand why in app purchases are a bad idea given protonmail's business model.
I am sure if Apple dropped the percentage to single-digit, no developer would argue the value that IAP provide, the problem has always been the exorbitant 30%.
Apple's walled garden is great for me as a consumer.<p>I trust it
I know the billing is simple
I know apple stand by the transaction<p>In the age of click bait and the information wars it is refreshing to trust the computer in my pocket.
ProtonMail complaining about extortion? That's rich. I was a visionary user for 2 years, and then decided to move somewhere where IMAP/SMTP was a bit easier to do than to run a piece of Go that somehow still required half of Gnome to run.<p>The experience was full of dark patterns. There is simply no way to terminate at the end of your billing period (and I had an annual subscription). If you have custom domains, you lose them immediately upon clicking the unsubscribe button, as do you lose your only way to properly move data off the service (as they have still no export feature)
I actually like Apple's walled garden. If you want a phone which allows you to run random binaries found on the internet, buy an Android phone.<p>I recently started submitted apps to the iOS store and I found it very much fair. I don't have to worry about scailing servers to host my .ipas, users are ensured I'm not going to try and hack their phones.<p>I do think Apple should allow apps to clearly state they charge more due to Apple policies. But it's like if you come into Apple's house , you need to respect Apple's rules.<p>I guarantee you within days of allowing 3rd party App stores users would be getting their IDs stolen and blaming Apple
Another thread where people will fly to defend Apple and explain how it's circumstances are similar to PS and Xbox and no one is coming after Sony, yet everyone conveniently decides not to compare Apple to early 2000s Microsoft which is basically a mirror situation.<p>I guess people "expect" stuff like this from Apple which is the reason we are not allowed to criticize them, yet if Microsoft came out and said Steam breaks their "arbitrary rules" (well they are Microsoft rules, you need to respect them duuh) and kicked Steam off the whole Windows platform, all hell would break loose, people would be screaming for heads to fall..
"ProtonMail says that Apple forced it to monetize its app".<p>I stopped there. I have seen a lot of articles like this misleading the public about the issue. Apple didn't force them to monetize anything. It was monetized. Apple told them to use IAP or don't direct to your own payment system in the app.<p>Either these journalists aren't capable of doing some basic research to understand the issue or are outright trying to deceive the public. Either way is saddening.<p>Another deceiving post:
<a href="https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/8/21506995/apple-forced-in-app-purchase-protonmail-ceo-wordpress-iap" rel="nofollow">https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/8/21506995/apple-forced-in-...</a><p>Edit: I see a lot of downvotes. Don't downvote! explain how is this "forcing to monetize". Webster dictionary: monetize - to utilize as a source of profit. Forcing to monetize means the app wasn't selling anything and Apple forced them to sell something. This is not the case! Apple forced them to choose between using IAP for payment system instead of their own system OR don't direct users to external payment system from within the app.
It's the price we all pay for ignoring user experience.<p>This goes way back. Take this from the old jargon file:<p><a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/P/point-and-drool-interface.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/P/point-and-drool-inter...</a><p>From the earliest days of computing, hacker types have regarded ease of use and simplicity as indicative of stupidity and as a "dumbing down" of computing. This mentality survives to this day in the fetish that so many have for complexity and the fact that UI/UX is often the last thing to get attention in designs led by programmers.<p>Apple meanwhile took the opposite stance. Computers should be easy to use. Complexity is bad, especially at the UI level. Things should "just work."<p>Calling bullshit on the sentiment in that Jargon file entry above made Apple for a time the most valuable company on Earth.<p>The tax we now have to pay to them is a dumb tax for the cult of complexity and "real men do it manually" bullshit. To break the App Store and Apple semi-monopoly, start not by criticizing but by <i>asking why it is so successful</i>. Only by answering that question will any challenger including FOSS be able to successfully compete with it.