
Apple Threatens to Remove App 'Hey' from App Store over No In-App Subscriptions - sixhobbits
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/06/16/apple-threatens-to-remove-hey-from-app-store/
======
blickentwapft
Previous:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23542937](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23542937)

------
notRobot
It's baffling to me. I can buy a USD1k+ device and still not be able to
install on it the apps I want because the manufacturer doesn't want me to, and
this is legal? Such horsecrap.

People get annoyed when folks on the internet repeatedly bring up Libre/Free
software and software freedoms, but just look at this shit.

There's essentially _no_ way for me to install an app on my iPhone if Apple
doesn't want me to, even though I paid over $1000 for it.

~~~
threeseed
Your outrage would've made a bit more sense a decade ago when the App Store
first came out. But since then it's now the standard for platforms to restrict
what apps can be installed.

For example you can't install any apps you want on a Tesla, Xbox, Playstation,
Nintendo, Samsung TV, Sony Camera.

~~~
syshum
The fact the problem is getting worse is cause for concern not dismissal of
the argument

Do you find this trend acceptable and desirable

~~~
ianai
We’re at a minimum for individual rights and liberties at the gain of
corporate interests.

~~~
toasterlovin
But Apple enforcing this rule also creates a better experience for their
customers (they can sign up without having to leave the app). This really an
argument between two companies about who gets paid for originating the sale.

~~~
syshum
Then the apps should be able to add a line item called "convenience fee" that
si equal to the amount apple is charging them.

The reality is though apple wants to hide their extortion of their customers,
if every in-app purchase had a 30% apple tax applied to it the customers would
be very upset with apple

------
nkozyra
> It's not entirely clear why Apple is requiring Hey to provide an in-app
> subscription option when it allows Netflix and Spotify to decline to offer
> in-app purchase options while still having their apps in the App Store .

I realize this was a rhetorical gesture, but it really highlights the power of
leverage and how few can wield it against the Apples of the world.

~~~
slantaclaus
There are few who can. Thanks, European Union

~~~
shoulderfake
Even more great news ahead of my move to Spain

~~~
thu2111
Hmm, Spain lost Google News entirely and all similar sites because they tried
to wring money out of Google (sorry, make them pay a 'link tax') and Google
walked away. Not sure Spain is a great example of your point.

------
AaronFriel
I think it's not that complicated, it's the Fight Club argument. Apple's
carve-outs for certain companies are likely calibrated such that those
companies have some revenue X that they would lose if they paid the tax, some
legal cost Y to mount a challenge, and there's some likelihood of wining on
the merits P.

If Apple dropped the exception, the expected value of winning a lawsuit is P *
X, so as long as P * X << Y, it's unlikely they'll be sued.

For companies like Microsoft, Netflix, Spotify, and others, the amount they
would lose in revenue to Apple's tax is likely much more than the cost of
mounting a formidable legal challenge to Apple's practices. Apple would like
to protect those practices, so its in their best interest to carve out
exceptions - no matter how absurd - to companies that are large enough and
could make a claim of anticompetitive practices. Apple's tax applies to me,
but not for thee (richest companies in the world).

------
rydre
Apple can't innovate anymore so they have this rent seeking behavior. I'm
going to move away from the iPhone, and make my parents do the same. I hope
you die a swift death of Yahoo, Apple, if you continue this behavior.

Also what the hell is the United States government doing? Are they blind?
Cmon' if someone important is reading this, you know its time to punish Apple
for this. This should be unacceptable behavior and needs to be investigated.
Spotify, Hey, Netflix and other smaller companies need to band up and take
Apple to court over this.

Apple is now a fat old rent seeker fart. This is a large indication that their
shares are now overvalued.

------
tw04
> Apple said that sign-in only apps are allowed for business services, but not
> consumer products.

So... Netflix is now a business app and not a consumer app..? Whaaaaaat?

~~~
black_puppydog
You _don 't_ spend your office hours on netflix and your evenings in your
email client?!

~~~
ashtonkem
That’s probably more common now more than ever.

~~~
conductr
Only way to survive with a toddler running around

------
amatai
Hmm, so Netflix, Audible, Spotify are "reader apps" \- as a user you only
consume content and don't create it.

What about Microsoft Outlook then? Microsoft charges for Exchange and Outlook
is interface to Exchange to consume AND create content.

Any way, I look at this, its inconsistent applied rules by Apple.

~~~
imron
It's completely inconsistent.

For example, I have a Fastmail account that I pay $50/year for, and that needs
to be paid via Fastmail's website.

I also have the Fastmail email app on my iPhone that I don't need to pay
anything for, and that I can use to sign in to my Fastmail account.

I'm a big fan of Fastmail, and don't expect to use Hey, but it seems an almost
identical use case and an identical market.

~~~
weaksauce
it certainly looks like the fastmail app is pretty much identical to this.
login screen to gate off any use of the app; quite inconsistent.

------
etaioinshrdlu
Maybe they could add the option to buy within the app, but charge the user the
30% markup too. And let the user know they can purchase outside the app for a
discount.

Kind of like paying cash instead of card at a restaurant.

Edit: Interesting replies. But selling physical goods is an exception to the
Apple tax. Maybe they can sell you a magic coin for $1 and ship it to you and
that magic coin also coincidentally authorizes you to use the app...

~~~
soheilpro
App Store Review Guidelines 3.1.1 In-App Purchase [1]:

"Apps and their metadata may not include buttons, external links, or other
calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms other than in-
app purchase."

[1] [https://developer.apple.com/app-
store/review/guidelines/#pay...](https://developer.apple.com/app-
store/review/guidelines/#payments)

~~~
toomuchtodo
No surprise the EU has opened an anti trust investigation. Just because you
put verbiage in a contract does not make it legal.

~~~
JMTQp8lwXL
I would be curious to see legal opinions of past anti-trust cases most similar
to what is before us with App stores.

------
ericzawo
If any company has a stranglehold on the media through its own PR, it's Apple.
But still, I'm happy this story has simmered up — it's well-documented in the
developer community, but I think the general public ought to know the hoops
Apple makes developers jump through to offer their iOS apps to people.

Now, if only Apple would acknowledge this developer treatment next week, at
their Worldwide Developer Conference. But I'm not holding my breath.

------
borland
I don't mind that Apple curates the app store. I find it a useful service for
stopping malware and stuff like that.

I DO mind that Apple is forcing companies to give them a 30% revenue cut even
when the companies fully comply with all their rules. The line about
"consumer" vs "business" apps is obvious horseshit, otherwise they best be
kicking out all those other consumer apps like Amazon, Netflix, Spotify, etc

------
DiabloD3
"I'm going to make one of those unpopular opinions, but alas, it must be said:
It is far easier to just drop Apple support entirely."

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23286883](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23286883)

~~~
paxys
Going by that logic, it's far easier to just not build an app in the first
place

------
agakshat
As someone who cherishes privacy (can’t use Android with continuous Google
tracking) and abhors walled gardens (Apple), I think the market is ripe for a
new player.

Is it the natural course of things that every public company will eventually
turn the screws on its customers to keep showing quarterly growth? If so, it
is but natural to expect that they will be replaced by better competitors.

~~~
ars
> can’t use Android with continuous Google tracking

Google sure seems to offer a lot of privacy options to disable tracking. What
is missing that you want?

~~~
agakshat
Yeah, but it ends up hurting usability to a large extent. Also, I’m at a point
where it’s tough to take Google at it’s word about location history etc.

With Apple I’m more comfortable letting them have my data, just because they
have a better record with privacy, at least.

------
granzymes
This is great advertising by Hey.

~~~
bibinou
media plan going very smoothly.

------
creddit
Easily biggest US antitrust issue in tech.

~~~
FirefoxIsSlow
I'd much rather we let capitalism destroy Apple.

------
joegibbs
30% does seem a little bit high. What justification does Apple use for
charging that much?

~~~
simonhamp
Because they have a monopoly on App Stores on iOS devices

Edit: clarification of Apple’s monopolising

~~~
intopieces
Is Wal-Mart a monopoly too, since I’m not allowed to walk in and set up my own
shelf of goods to sell? Serious question

~~~
simonhamp
That’s the wrong comparison. In this context your opportunity is to create an
entirely new supermarket in the same country.

No one can create a new App Store on iOS devices.

~~~
why_only_15
The equivalent would be buying an Android phone, which many people do (in fact
more than have an iPhone).

~~~
simonhamp
I see that as equivalent to opening your Wal-mart competitor in a different
country... there’s no competition.

------
quotha
This is because the App Store is a monopsony

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22051915](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22051915)

------
m463
This is the monopsony side of the app store equation.

"In the microeconomic theory of monopsony, a single entity is assumed to have
market power over sellers as the only purchaser of a good or service, much in
the same manner that a monopolist can influence the price for its buyers in a
monopoly, in which only one seller faces many buyers."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony)

~~~
wyxuan
Ehh not really. Technically speaking Apple isn’t buying anything, the users
are. Maybe if Apple was buying in app subscriptions on behalf of everyone, it
would be a monopsony, but it isn’t the case here

------
tekcyb-org
Not sure why everyone is so surprised. This goes hand in hand with apples
goals in creating a seamless ecosystem for the customer. It's part of their
brand, mission and identity to have this tight/strict policy. It would
actually hurt their brand if they derailed from this.

Apple is an end to end ecosystem. It has a straight line vision. I think they
would be wrong to not do this.

And this is coming from a privacy / open source geek. I run my own mail
servers.

------
scarface74
I usually come to Apple’s defense about their in app purchase requirements
because you can subscribe outside of the app and still use it. There are at
least a dozen apps that I have used that I have paid for outside of the store.

But this goes too far.

I have never heard mention of a carve out for “reader apps”. But I guess they
meant apps that don’t allow you to create content. But that still feels
arbitrary.

It’s politically stupid to go after DHH. He has a large following and has
already been before congress for exactly this.

~~~
nojito
Why should you get an exemption because you have a cult following?

AppStore policies are extremely transparent and Apple has provided in-depth
responses to him at every step of the way.

They even went so far as apologize for approving it and giving him the false
impression that they didn’t see him try to sneak past the rules.

He has gotten way more favorable treatment than anyone else.

~~~
scarface74
There is nothing transparent about this. The rules have been for the longest
that you can’t provide a link to a web page for out of store payments But you
have never been forced to allow in app purchases.

Speaking of favorable treatment, Amazon Prime Video gets special treatment.
You can now purchase and rent video from Amazon directly in the app without
Apple getting a cut.

Heck, since both Apple and Amazon participate in Movies Anywhere, if you buy
an app from a participating studio from Amazon within the app, the video
counts as being purchased on iTunes (and Google Play Video, Vudu, etc.)

~~~
nojito
You didn’t respond to my statement that Apple has responded to him every step
of the way.

They even apologized when they didn’t realize he tried to sneak around the
rules and approved the app.

Please show an instance where Apple has done this for any other app.

~~~
scarface74
What’s there to respond to? Apple has never not allowed an app to forgo in app
purchases as long as you didn’t provide an outside link. Saying Apple
responded to them and apologized is about like saying an abusive spouse
apologized after beating them.

------
evolve2k
> Apple allows these kinds of client apps -- where you can't sign up, only
> sign in -- for business services but not consumer products.

Wondering out loud, what if they changed their home page copy to “business
email”.. “down to business email” etc even if it didn’t work it could garner a
new round of press and publicity.

------
alexashka
I predict they'll reach a backroom deal and that this abuse of power from
Apple continues towards anyone who doesn't have the power to push back (unlike
Spotify, Netflix, Uber, etc).

On a sidenote - I can't help but wonder who'll pay 100$/year for an email
client. This product to me will be the decider between users no longer willing
to pay for anything unless they absolutely have to, and people being rational
and understanding that if the benefit outweighs the cost, the price doesn't
matter.

------
echelon
It is time to sue Apple. It is time for the DOJ to break them apart. They are
a monopoly, and this is unjust. Plain and simple.

If technology had evolved in an open fashion, this form of taxation would
never have developed. The web could have been a completely open platform with
a fully native experience. Instead Apple and Google shit on the web and force
us to use their competing standards.

Both of these companies are a hindrance.

There should be one native experience and SDK. WASM has a chance to get us
back to that enlightened path.

~~~
SeanLuke
> They are a monopoly, and this is unjust.

Over what market does Apple have a monopoly?

~~~
echelon
This is going to sound contrived, but they have a monopoly over the Apple App
Store.

You might argue that this isn't the definition of a monopoly, but the DOJ gets
to decide that, not you. And there is a case to be made that this is, in fact,
anti-competitive.

Apple is forcing businesses that want to deploy paid software to pay their
tax. You might say there are alternatives: Google.

Google does the same thing and should also be punished.

Before Apple started this extortion racket, there were ways to deploy paid
software that could reach customers without having to go through a gatekeeper.
Now there are very few ways to do so.

Both Apple and Google have undercut the web. You can't write streaming video
software that isn't native. You can't have any sort of first class experience.

This is one of very few markets where there are no alternatives and the
duopoly has actively done harm to the open alternative.

Is this Apple's responsibility or fault? Absolutely. And I remind my
legislators of this.

If you're a developer that doesn't work for Apple or Google, you should feel a
call to action to fight this asymmetric advantage they hold over us.

~~~
FirefoxIsSlow
Stop buying Apple products.

Android can side load + web apps.

This is a non issue as an Android user.

~~~
echelon
It's not a non-issue! _You_ might not be an Apple user, but the rest of the
market has quite a few of them.

You're also never going to teach the majority of Google users how to side-load
as Google has done no work to make this a friendly, safe, and simple process.
(Their interests are aligned against doing so.)

The services you subscribe to have to charge you as an individual more because
their subscriber base is being taxed. That isn't fair as a business or as a
consumer.

~~~
dingaling
> Google has done no work to make this a friendly, safe, and simple process

It's very easy, when you try to install from a non-Play Store source you are
presented with a security dialog which leads directly to a page where you can
toggle installation from that source.

I can't see how it could be much easier.

------
benologist
I hope this uproar doesn't die down before WWDC because it's going to suck if
Apple announces all the ARM Mac software must go through their app store.

~~~
JohnTHaller
They will once they can get away with it. They've been inching closer to this
over the years with the MacOS GateKeeper settings and defaults.

~~~
wool_gather
Nah. [Quoting myself][0]:

> They can't do this unless they are okay with never selling machines again to
> anyone who needs to write code. There's no feasible way for all programming
> tools to be distributed through MAS. IPython isn't going to suddenly go
> through the marathon of crap you need to get into the store.

> If absolutely nothing else, native developers: you can't have more than one
> version of a MAS app installed. Nearly every iOS developer I know has at
> least two versions of Xcode at any given time.

[0]:[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22721310](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22721310)

------
aabbcc1241
You have the choice to not pay to apple, and they have the choice to not
publish your app.

Apple App Store is proprietary, and majority of iOS user aren't going to
jailbreak. This is ~50% of world currently.

(It's is >50% of the market in my area, even worse)

One thing we should try, is to make some great app, exclusively for open
platforms, then encourage the folk to move forward.

------
m3kw9
When the gold standard for making money is inapp purchases and subscriptions,
and Apple seeing almost all big apps circumventing that cash flow they gonna
do something.

A lot of companies doesn’t realize Apple did built a software and hardware
platform with audiences that pay. They use the platform and cry foul when
Apple wants a cut.

~~~
harpratap
You are already paying your dues to Apple's platform for $100/year.

~~~
dannyw
Yeah. How about Apple charge for app store review and distribution? $0.02 per
GB transferred through the App Store, and/or $0.02 per MAU per month.

Exemptions for personal, non-monetised projects.

This way, they get to collect on advertising companies like Facebook too.

------
Axsuul
I can understand dhh's frustrations. Apple should really only deserve the 30%
if they referred users to HEY via the App Store. Outside of that is just
unfair and predatory.

This is similar to what Wix requires when you develop for their platform. Wix
requires developers to profit share 20% of your revenue for any customers that
just so happen to use the part of your app that communicates with Wix. Why do
platforms continue to think they're entitled to such a thing? And why would
any developer want to integrate with Wix with such a clause?

~~~
toasterlovin
> This is similar to what Wix requires when you develop for their platform.
> Wix requires developers to profit share 20% of your revenue for any
> customers that just so happen to use the part of your app that communicates
> with Wix.

As you have described the Wix situation, it is not analogous. Apple only gets
a share of revenue that they originate (user creates an account using in app
purchase). Apple does not receive any revenue from users who sign up elsewhere
and sign into their account in the app using their already extant account.

------
troughway
Considering 37signals are, I believe, Mac lovers, this doesn't bode well for
either camp.

------
CPLX
I've been waiting for an HN thread on the actual product.

Has anyone used it? Is it any good?

~~~
stOneskull
100 dollars for an email address, that doesn't support IMAP or even POP. it
doesn't seem to be worth it. for that money, you could register 3 domains and
a year of migadu or similar.

~~~
gfodor
the point of this app has completely sailed over your head. less space than a
nomad.

~~~
stOneskull
the point of the app is to make money. to lock people into using it. the
features don't seem good to me but i am a bit tempted by the vanity aspect of
the cool domain name.

~~~
gfodor
i should have said 'value proposition' instead of 'point'. i'd have assumed
that was obvious, but i guess not.

------
nashashmi
Can the app developer sell the app instead, for a dollar? And refund the
dollar to the person upon sign in? I think that's a viable workaround.

------
jasonhansel
Here's a suggestion, if they _really_ want to stand their ground: provide a
version of the app for jailbroken devices.

------
crazygringo
EDIT (previous comment deleted): I was making the case that Apple seemed to be
in line with stated policy, but karl11 made the correct point that Fastmail is
allowed, free, but without in-app signups.

So regardless of policy, Apple clearly is being deeply inconsistent here and
deserve to be called out. The only thing worse than bad policy is
inconsistently bad policy. Thanks for the correction!

~~~
karl11
They aren’t being consistent. Basecamp is monetized identically and is in the
App Store. So is Fastmail. So is Slack. Etc.

------
jasonjayr
Does apple prohibit them from charging $baseprice + 30% for iOS subscriptions?

~~~
Shank
I believe this is a viable path forward. If Hey were to charge an in-app-
purchase of basically any amount they would be okay. As long as they aren't
telling users to go to hey.com and pay there instead, they'd be able to.
Google does this for YouTube Premium right now, for example.

The catch and the thing that Basecamp probably wants to avoid is that they
would have to have a higher sticker price in iOS, and have to build support
for it. The current price on their website is $99/yr, which would be an
interesting iAP price too (so they'd probably want to go full monthly).

~~~
Marsymars
I wonder how Apple would react if Basecamp made the iOS IAP price something
like $99/month.

~~~
chj
IAP price must be same as advertised elsewhere.

~~~
Marsymars
How does that square with e.g. Spotify formerly charging iOS users more?

------
chubs
So apple's reasoning is that this exemption only applies to 'business' or
'reader' apps. Would Basecamp/Hey's solution be to remarket Hey as a business
offering? I imagine most people who pay for a premium email are using it for
work.

------
simonhamp
I genuinely love that DHH still has the guts to make a stand like this even
though he mostly loves on Apple products and has even been given pre-release
goodies to try out directly from Apple.

This is how you don’t become a sell-out! Don’t lower your standards just
because someone gives you pretty things.

Great example for all of us

~~~
actuator
Umm... pretty sure he isn't lowering his standards because there is his money
at stake here. If he had not been affected by this monetarily he most probably
would have kept quiet like most humans to keep the good relations.

~~~
copp
Except that he testified before the congress on this of monopoly way before
this.

~~~
actuator
His app Basecamp has been on the App Store way before he testified.

------
huntermeyer

      That is obscene, and it's criminal, and I will spend
      every dollar that we have or ever make to burn this down 
      until we get to somewhere better.
      - DHH
    

Was this an intended reference to the Steve Jobs quote of a similar tune
directed at Android?

------
ilyas121
Twitter thread from founder for more info:
[https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1272968382329942017](https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1272968382329942017)

------
pdq
Slightly off topic. What is their need for an email app, which just works with
their new domain? Is this remarkably better than the iOS Mail app?

~~~
aloukissas
It's not an email app (only). It's an email service (to replace e.g. Gmail).

~~~
geerlingguy
Except this email service offers no IMAP, POP3, or other standards support so
you can’t read or send Hey.com email without doing so through their client
app.

~~~
Daegalus
that's the whole point of Hey, they want to fundamentally alter how email
works. adding all those would be just limiting what the point of it is.

~~~
dingaling
It's a clever UX, with interesting features in the business logic. But at the
data layer none of it prohibits IMAP integration; simply presenting IMAP
folder emulation for the emails and attachments would suffice for export or
off-platform access. The fact that they aren't willing to do so is suspicious.

------
syshum
> "There is never in a million years a way that I am paying Apple a third of
> our revenues," Heinemeier Hansson told Protocol. That is obscene, and it's
> criminal, and I will spend every dollar that we have or ever make to burn
> this down until we get to somewhere better."

Hmm this makes me want to sign up for this service even though I really have
no need for it. More companies need to stand up to both Apple and Googles
obscene store policies and fees

------
elamje
As much as DHH can be a bit angry on Twitter, I think he has the resources and
fervor to go to bat and give Apple hell for this.

Interestingly, while Apple is constantly touting its own privacy and anti ad
features, this huge fee drives App developers to monetize through less
scrupulous means to avoid paying the Apple tax. Generally, this mean apps that
harvest data or show ads.

I’m not sure what the correct % is in this case, but 30% and 15% is large for
a mobile email client.

For those that don’t know what Hey is, it’s a new email service launching with
the @hey.com domain. There’s been a frenzy of invite swapping just to try to
lock in the good 2, 3, and 4 character email prefixes. Also they are charging
$999 a year for a 2 character email which is a good way to capture value.

~~~
jaredtn
$99

~~~
elamje
No it’s certainly $999/yr. and $349 for a 3 character email. And $99 after
that.

~~~
jaredtn
Interesting, don't see that listed on
[https://hey.com/pricing/](https://hey.com/pricing/). Where are those policies
listed?

~~~
dangoor
If you select a 2 or 3 character email name when signing up, it pitches the up
charge to you. Not a big deal to select longer, and personally if I use it
I’ll be using my own domain name.

------
buboard
See, the problem is you made an app for it. why?

doesnt ios have a mail app ?

why would you want to lock yourself inside an app store anyway

~~~
surround
Notifications.

~~~
sam_lowry_
Who uses notifications anyway?

~~~
copp
Are you serious though ?

~~~
sam_lowry_
Yes. I do not want apps to be proactive. If I need to check mail, I will do
it. If I need to check it regularly, I'll set up a calendar event (OK, once in
a while I need notifications), but these should be notifications I personally
configure.

