manton
manton

Apple’s new rules for linking out of an app are totally unacceptable. The whole point of the court ruling is that we shouldn’t have to play these games. I’m not going to opt-in to Apple’s terms and probably no developers will.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
SimonWoods
SimonWoods

@manton ... for the luxury of providing an external link to your own payment system, are they forcing people to use their IAP? Did I read that correctly?

|
Embed
Progress spinner
ryanbooker
ryanbooker

@manton I’m quite disillusioned with Apple at the moment. They seem to be an incredibly greedy and entitled streak.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
manton
manton

@SimonWoods The beginning is a little vague but I don’t think IAP is required. But Apple still wants a 27% cut and to audit your books.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
jasonmcfadden
jasonmcfadden

@manton I'm no dev, but when I saw this, I re-read it a few times and still was scratching my head. How or why can Apple do this? Really? I don't think I understand. It seems...spiteful or greedy? Maybe it's legal, but still.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
SimonWoods
SimonWoods

@manton Here's the bit that's tripping me up:

To qualify for the entitlement, your app must:
... Offer in-app purchases when distributed through the iOS or iPadOS App Store in the United States storefront ...

"in-app purchases" can only mean Apple's IAP.

It's like with Sign-in With Apple, in which if you offer any other sign-in service you are forced to offer Apple's alternative. They're treating your single link with the same level of distrust and hysterical caution as the providers of the "Sign In With..." buttons.

As for auditing your books; yes, that sounds right. I remember Vincent got hit by App Review because they didn't like something on his website. Perfectly healthy and normal ecosystem. 👍

|
Embed
Progress spinner
joelhamill
joelhamill

@manton @SimonWoods It is not vague to my non developer eyes. In the 'Requesting an entitlement' section the 2nd point to get an entitlement is use IAP when distributed through the App Store in the US.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
meaningful_jan@det.social
meaningful_jan@det.social

@manton the point was to allow a possibility to link outside and that’s exactly what is now possible. You may not like the final result but if I were Apple I also wouldn’t give an inch to this Tim Sweeney asshole.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
idnovic@social.lol
idnovic@social.lol

@manton from a user perspective I want to use IAP. I do not want to give out my payment details.
That said I subscribed to MB directly on the website.
But only because MB is a website first, app second service.
I would expect payment over IAP for every app first, website second/non existent service.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
idnovic@social.lol
idnovic@social.lol

@manton For media (books, music, movies) I do not see how the appstore makes them more secure. I think 12% maximum apple fee.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
manton
manton

@meaningful_jan No, the point was to allow a link to alternative payment methods outside the store. Apple is allowing a link but still forcing payment. I'm sure the judge didn't even consider Apple would do this because it's so ridiculous and against the spirit of the ruling.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
manton
manton

@idnovic I don't disagree with that necessarily. The main point of allowing external payments is for existing services (like Micro.blog!) that get little to no value from App Store discovery. Games and other popular apps should continue to use IAP.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
danmurrelljr
danmurrelljr

@manton at my job managing a mobile apps team for an enterprise SaaS company, their reviewer once followed our logo on a web view, to go into the main website and found the paid accounts options. They blocked our app saying we had to make those available through IAP. We had to remove the web view.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
manton
manton

@danmurrelljr Ugh. After hearing similar stories, I'm always careful not to link anywhere. Of course it mostly hurts users.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
In reply to
z428
z428

@manton Interesting. 😕 I then and now ponder going Apple when fed up with the flaws and annoyances of desktop Linux and mobile Android environments. It's things like this to remind me why I so far haven't done that. 😬

|
Embed
Progress spinner
danmurrelljr
danmurrelljr

@manton we just wanted to have a new user sign up form, but they wanted 30% of any of those users if they eventually signed up for a paid plan for their business. These included $300/mo and “call us” enterprise plans. I spent a while on the phone with Apple and they won’t budge. Had to remove it

|
Embed
Progress spinner
vincent
vincent

@SimonWoods It's because I mentioned "Android" on the website — because Gluon was available on both iOS and Android. I think Apple have really hit a low point now, so petty and incredibly fucking stupid and childish. cc: // @manton

|
Embed
Progress spinner
jesse@pub.frostillic.us
jesse@pub.frostillic.us

@manton I don't even sell anything through Apple's stores and this sort of thing makes me think "well, _could_ I use Linux all the time?”.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
tuparev@mstdn.social
tuparev@mstdn.social

@manton
I am a developer, and when I select Xcode -> New project... I think how this will be profitable after Apple's 30% cut.

As a user, I do not want to give my card number to strangers.

As a developer, I want my users to feel safe and comfortable.

|
Embed
Progress spinner
idnovic@social.lol
idnovic@social.lol

@manton Yes that is right. Apple Mafia needs money 😅.

|
Embed
Progress spinner