
In-App Purchase Rules - 0xQSL
https://marco.org/2020/09/11/app-review-changes
======
InTheArena
I don't have a problem with the app store rules, for apps that are in the app
store. What i do have a major problem with is the inability to use a third
party app store with different rules. Marco is opposed to this - primarily
because it offsets the immediate advantage he would get if Apple was forced to
abandon IAP, while also making him have to possibly go with multiple app
stores - but legally I don't think the government can force Apple to set a
given rate (they appear to be in line with what Sony and Microsoft get for
their hardware, and what Google gets on the app store) or legal terms.

The security in iOS is tied to the sandboxing model - not the app store. The
app store is there to protect Apple's interests. If a customer wants to load a
separate app store, thats on them.

Apple doesn't own the hardware. We do. It should be our choice to open it up
to apps and ecosystems (native app stores) that are competitive.

~~~
nodamage
> The security in iOS is tied to the sandboxing model - not the app store.

I disagree. Sandboxing is designed to prevent your phone from being
_compromised_ but it doesn't prevent bad actors from using legitimate APIs in
malicious ways.

As an example, the App Store review guidelines enforce certain privacy
restrictions such as not allowing third-party analytics or advertising in apps
designed for children. This is not something that is intended to be enforced
via sandboxing.

Edit: As another example, consider an app that might request access to your
contacts for a legitimate purpose (like messaging), but then secretly
transmits and stores that data for an alternative purpose (like selling your
contacts to third parties). Also possible within the sandbox but forbidden by
the review guidelines. Now, I'm not saying the review process is going to
catch all abuses of legitimate APIs ahead of time, but at least there is an
enforcement mechanism if the bad actor gets caught.

~~~
Fr33maan
That's all right and all fine. It's my user choice to install any crappy third
party app store on the hardware I bought. I would like to not being protected.
The same on windows, I'm warned than executing an unknown program is a risk
for me and if I don't know what I do, then I should not do it. That is
perfectly fine. Small fences with warning signs instead of 10 meters walls.

~~~
lukifer
User choice works the other direction as well: that consumers can choose to
knowingly purchase a device that is locked down, for reasons of safety, trust,
experience, etc.

I happen to broadly favor anti-trust intervention against Apple in this
instance; but it's not as though Apple ever deceived users about what their
devices can and can't do. They sell appliances, not "computers". Freedom
(arguably) includes the freedom to take one's own freedoms away, at least up
to a point.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I agree with this. I pay for the experience Apple delivers. I don’t want an
open mobile device, or a free (as in software) mobile device. It’s my hardware
but I agree that Apple dictates the terms and delegate them the authority
necessary. I want a curated experience and pay a premium for it, after
tolerating the rough edges of Android for years.

~~~
elcritch
I’m generally fine with the general lockdown on iOS, but at the same time
there really are only two smartphone players. It’s either the free-for-all
Android or the rigid-reviewed apps on iOS. Given the market realities having
at least the ability to side load apps should be allowed. Apple can still
offer their curated experience, but I should also be able to add my own open
source (or whatever) App Store without Apple’s blessing. Just because I
generally like Apple’s approach on the App Store doesn’t mean I shouldn’t be
able to “mod” my own hardware. It’s like if I buy a BMW because I like their
quality, integration and security that’s fine, but I still want to be able to
replace the stereo if I choose. Actually I think it’s my right since I own the
hardware, no? Or better, if I install a Sirius XM radio in my car why in the
world should Sirius be forced to pay BMW for that “privilege”? If they want to
integrate into their pre-made BMW stereo system sure, but I want to be able
replace that with my own stereo.

------
jamil7
I hope Apple takes notice of the path their walking down right now. When
people like Marco are calling them out on their bullshit it's a clear
indicator that they've pushed the envelope too far. Alienating 3rd party
developers is the same mistake that nearly cost Microsoft everything.

~~~
InTheArena
Lets be relaistic and note that Marco has a very lucrative podcasting career
hosting a apple podcast - which requires content and something to speak of.

Not saying he is wrong - but let's not pretend that he is not usually at the
forefront of every pitchfork carrying moment in the Apple ecosystem.

~~~
MBCook
> but let's not pretend that he is not usually at the forefront of every
> pitchfork carrying moment in the Apple ecosystem.

I think that’s the point. Marco usually isn’t someone who rushes to pitchforks
against Apple.

The fact that Marco, of all people, has had consistently very negative things
to say about Apple during this whole saga shows how far their behavior has
pushed developers.

------
MBCook
At this point I think I’d like to see Apple allow a form of third-party
payment. It works well enough on the web without tons of scams, it could be
done on the iPhone.

Let developers choose between any “certified“ payment provider. Apple would be
one, and then you could add Square, PayPal, and other big companies that could
jump through Apple’s hoops. Like making sure the refund experience is easy so
no one can make really convoluted anti-user workflows.

Maybe app purchase still has to go through Apple, it’s only IAPs that can go
through anyone.

Apple, naturally, would be forced to lower their cut because otherwise why
would anyone choose them?

I’d be happy to choose them as a user over other payment providers if given a
choice. I like the current payment experience on iOS.

Apple can even keep all their crazy rules like Marco is talking about. It’s
just the other payment providers wouldn’t have to follow them. Let Apple see
how well that goes.

Anyone can take payments, using any big provider, for anything on iOS. Seems
easy enough.

I don’t think it’ll ever happen without government intervention though.

~~~
gok
> It works well enough on the web without tons of scams

What web have you been using?

~~~
jasonlotito
The one where I can charge back any fraudulent charge with ease. I know how to
do that without thinking about it. I've logged into Apple twice now and
neither account areas provide a place for me to cancel subscriptions.

~~~
codetrotter
> I've logged into Apple twice now and neither account areas provide a place
> for me to cancel subscriptions.

You mean like so?

[https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202039](https://support.apple.com/en-
us/HT202039)

I agree that it is weirdly convoluted, but I don’t see what you mean about
there being no place to cancel subscriptions.

But perhaps you were talking about something else and I misunderstood?

------
pornel
To me the smoking gun is that Apple forbids informing consumers about IAP fees
and alternative payment options that developers may offer elsewhere.

If IAP was so great and in consumers' best interest, surely consumers would
still choose it even if they knew it's 10x more expensive than card
processing.

------
jeff_tyrrill
The rules are complex but the principle is simple.

Apps are required to use in-app purchase if:

(1) The customer relationship originated in the app; and

(2) The primary nexus of the purchased item is to improve the purchaser's
personal in-app experience.

Rules get complex around edge cases even when the principles are simple.
Sometimes Apple makes the wrong call on those edge cases based on those
principles (Hey, WordPress, in-app fitness training calls), and today's rule
changes feel like Apple's acknowledgement of that.

Apple has also signaled that they don't feel the simple principles need any
adjustment.

~~~
XCSme
> The customer relationship originated in the app

Why does that matter if the one who brought the customer to download the app
in the first place it was you, through your own promotion, and not Apple?
Apple should take their cut only if they promoted the app to the user that
would have not installed it otherwise.

------
nickm12
I for one don't understand why Section 3.3.1 wasn't the end of it. Google it
if you don't remember that in 2010 Apple tried to mandate which programming
languages could be used to develop apps on the iPhone. To this day, your app
can be blocked for having a link to your own website or a mention that your
app is also available on Android.

I don't believe all software has to be free software, in the GPL sense, but I
will not use a computing device as personal as the modern phone if the vendor
gets to control what software I can run.

------
JiNCMG
The thing no one talks about, because Apple has kept full control of its
platform, it can/has easily changed directions and drop entire sections of its
API with minimal issues. They even do this on their CPUs.

Imagine all these other 3rd party App-Stores, they need to flag and request
updates from their developers. All this causing a sh*tstorm on the iOS device
and the customer will expect Apple to fix it at the Genius Bar. Proof of this
already happening is the Microsoft Stores. People bringing in their OEM
laptops for repair and workers providing them with phone numbers to call Sony,
Toshiba, Lenovo, etc.

------
Animats
At this point, the answer may be to regulate in-app purchase services as
banks. Regulate them like credit card processors.

~~~
kccqzy
What kind of regulations? My understanding is that credit card processors have
significant power to pick and choose which merchants they do business with.
Mostly famous American Express rejected all adult websites:
[https://www.zdnet.com/article/amex-just-says-no-to-porn-
site...](https://www.zdnet.com/article/amex-just-says-no-to-porn-sites/)

Regulating Apple like credit card processors will continue to allow Apple to
set detailed rules on what payment processing Apple wants to do, which is the
subject of this article.

The real issue is that in the real world the merchant can also choose not to
do business with American Express and just accept say Visa and MasterCard.
That's not currently a possibility on Apple's platforms.

------
Razengan
Let's say Apple allows everything that Epic etc. is asking for. Would it
really be better for everyone?

\---- The problems with letting all apps advertise external payment systems:

• Someone may publish a free app to avoid paying anything to Apple, and then
charge users [an asston of] money to ""unlock"" via an alternate payment
system.

• Users may not be able to see a list of all in-app purchases (and their
guaranteed prices) as they can on the App Store, without downloading the app.

• Sharing your payment details and other information with multiple entities,
and having to continually trust each of them (e.g. to not abuse or leak).

• Confused users may clog up Apple's customer support with complaints related
to third-party payment systems.

• Angry users may demand Apple to offer refunds for shit that was paid for via
third-party payment systems.

\---- The problems with allowing third-party app stores on iOS:

• How will iOS sandboxing be enforced for apps delivered via third-party
stores? Will those apps still have to be submitted to and signed by Apple?

• Store apps would need the privilege to write binaries on your iPhone. How
will that privilege be regulated to prevent abuse? e.g. what happens if a
store starts writing malware?

• Users may sometimes have to wait longer for an app to update on one store
than on others (as already happens on Steam vs GoG).

• Developers would no longer be assured that they will have access to
literally all the users that iOS has, by publishing on just one store.

You would have to submit to each store, wait for approval on each of them,
update for each of them... to come close to the userbase that you can
currently access by just publishing once on the App Store.

• Developers will no longer all play by the same rules. One store may allow
some content while another may prohibit it.

For example, take porn: Should any third-party store be allowed to serve apps
with "adult" content, or will they still ultimately be bound by Apple's ruling
on such matters?

• iOS Parental Control settings may be ineffective on other stores (and
browsers if third-party engines were allowed too).

• If an app or game is exclusive to a store that a user isn't already using,
they would have to create a new account and download an additional app just to
access that one exclusive.

• Not all stores may be compatible with the iOS backup and restore system, or
the APIs for app-thinning and on-demand resources.

~~~
JiNCMG
"Store apps would need the privilege to write binaries on your iPhone. How
will that privilege be regulated to prevent abuse? e.g. what happens if a
store starts writing malware?" Thats the thing. Epic doesn't want Apple to
have access/approval to anything. They want OS level access! It's in the court
filings. So at that point Parental Control, agreements made with carriers,
everything is out the door aka it's like buying an Android phone from some
unknown company on AliExpress.

You get all these people screaming about how unjust Apple is! Everyone has
been doing this for decades in different markets.

~~~
bigiain
It’s not just off brand AliExpress Android devices that already show all those
problems, it’s top line Samsung devices as well. As well as GooglePlay, I need
to deal with Samsung’s shitty App Store, and the Oculus one if I want to use
the GearVR.

------
maerF0x0
> developer relations are significantly repaired, and Apple can go back to
> spending its time, resources, PR, and political capital on making their
> products better and customers happier.

Your first mistake was assuming that they care about those more than
maximizing shareholder value

~~~
bigiain
And the second mistake was assuming Apple’s customers care at all about app
developers fights over transaction fees or commissions.

It’s no surprise a lot on HN readers/posters care here, because there’s “free
money” on the table for them if Epic win. Money they knew Apple was gonna take
if they’d looked at AppStore guidelines any time in the last 12 years or so,
since the AppStore first debuted. Nobody has _ever_ developed an iPhone app,
without knowing the rules to get into the AppStore include a 30% cut to Apple.
IAP is newer, but it’s still the same deal, in my opinion.

Non HN reading iPhone owners, largely, don’t give a fuck about developers
feeling hard done by paying a 30% cut to Apple. A non technical friend of mine
explained to her son why he can’t install Fortnite on a new phone right now,
saying “They’re fighting with Apple over the rules to be allowed to have apps
on iPhones.”

This is totally not customer or customer PR problem for Apple, and they know
it. Epic haven’t worked that out yet.

~~~
maerF0x0
This is true, generally speaking if the fee is invisible then people don't
care.

I could see developers simply adding a 2nd line item "Apple Fee 30%" and gross
up the price by that amount. Then let Apple answer the questions why there is
a 30% fee added in their products, but not others (if that's the case).

------
manzu
sounds like any other contract. it simoly legal-ese.

------
meritt
I'm glad Marco finally stepped up to set the HN groupthink tone because you
guys have been salivating to defend Apple the past month in every goddamn
thread about Epic Games.

~~~
dang
Obviously some HN users have defending Apple while others have been denouncing
Apple. So much so that I've had to pin moderation comments to the top asking
for better discussion than Glory-to-$BigCo vs. Death-to-$BigCo flamewars [1].

But everyone notices and remembers the comments they dislike the most [2], so
each side thinks that "HN" is slavishly and perversely on the other side [3].
It would be good to get a little more awareness into this process.

[1] Like
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24310804](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24310804)
and
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24249613](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24249613).

[2]
[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=notice%20dislike%20by:dang&dat...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=notice%20dislike%20by:dang&dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment)

[3]
[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=demons%20by:dang&dateRange=all...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=demons%20by:dang&dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=commentm)

~~~
meritt
> It would be good to get a little more awareness into this process.

Make upvotes and downvotes public, and do something to reduce the constant
flood of throwaway accounts who do nothing more than constant trolling on
contentious topics.

~~~
easton
Downvotes and upvotes being hidden is the only thing keeping HN from devolving
into reddit. Otherwise, people would just agree with whatever had the biggest
number instead of (hopefully) applying some critical thinking.

~~~
meritt
I'm not talking about the quantity, I'm talking about a list of who upvoted
and downvoted a specific comment/post.

Also what you've described happens anyway. The fact that a number isn't
displayed doesn't really matter when comments are ultimately ordered by score.
When someone writes a comment that doesn't adhere to the current groupthink,
they get downvoted. When people are downvoted too much they delete their
comments, stop commenting, or through pavlovian reinforcement change their
opinions until they get positive points.

~~~
colejohnson66
Wouldn’t _knowing_ who upvoted and downvoted be even _worse_ as retaliation
would become a thing?

------
summitsummit
how do the presumably low paid hourly workers that perform app reviews keep
track of all the details and complexity of the ever-growing rules and
regulations regarding app development?

do they have an infinitely long checklist?

~~~
kinkrtyavimoodh
They don't have to. For big enough players (think NFLX), these things are
beyond their pay grade and are duked out by lawyers who craft these intricate
sequences of laws and bylaws so that these apps make their way through. For
small players, well what are they gonna do? Stay hungry?

------
kgc
Marco's proposal fails to incorporate the fact that the fees collected help
pay for the App Store... It's not free to create and maintain.

~~~
function_seven
The costs to run the App Store are probably something like 0.1% of the fees
collected on apps.

Apple collected $15 billion from the app store in 2019. I'd wager that $15
million would cover the operating costs, which I'd guess are largely the
salaries of app reviewers. Even if I'm off by 2 orders of magnitude, that
still leaves 90% of Apple's cut as profit.

The app store is a huge driver toward selling the hardware. If Apple were
banned from charging any fee at all, they'd still run the app store. They're
not dependent on the 30% cut.

EDIT: I'm _not_ saying that, therefore the fee is wrong, or too high, or
whatever. Just that the cost of operating the App Store is not a justification
for their current level.

~~~
mthoms
Apple claims to have "hundreds"[0] of reviewers (which was notable to me
because they didn't say "thousands"). So, we know it's somewhere between 200
and 1999. Just for fun, let's say it's 1500. Again, just for fun let's
calculate: 1500 reviewers x $50,000 = $75 million.

So, their (likely) largest expense is 0.5% of their total revenue. Even if I'm
off by a factor of 10, the numbers are absolutely mind-blowing.

~~~
etchalon
I'm not sure why total revenue would be what to compare to the costs against.

Apple is profitable precisely because they don't, as a company, have many/any
"loss leaders". Each unit within the company is expected to financially
contribute to its margins.

That was one of the (many) changes Jobs brought to Apple when he returned.

I'm also not sure how a reviewers salary would be $50,000. Where'd you get
that number?

~~~
mthoms
>I'm not sure why total revenue would be what to compare to the costs against.

Why not? I was just trying to do some back-of-the-napkin math to ballpark the
profitability of the app store "for fun".

>Apple is profitable precisely because they don't...

Cool. That has nothing to do with this particular comment chain.

>Where'd you get that number?

The 50k was totally made up. Do you have a better guesstimate? Lower or
higher? Keep in mind this would be the average among their global reviewer
workforce, not just US.

But... it doesn't matter though, does it? Whether their reviewer costs are
0.5% or 1.0% of their revenue doesn't really move the needle. At all.

------
m3kw9
Marco is purposely being dense, and wildly sarcastic about the rules. Not sure
what his problem is these days about Apple

------
unnouinceput
Lol, I might've woken up my neighbors with my laugh. It's 5 AM, and reading
this. Jesus I just realized that Apple is the same as Microsoft in 90's. Do
all companies when become behemoths start to "do you are have the stupid?".
Because it seems so.

------
telaelit
I really wish Apple would allow third-party payment processing. All their
rules around in-app purchases are overly complex and oppressive. I really
believe that Apple is stifling innovation with these insane rules and
monopolistic practices.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
As a user the last thing I want is to start wondering whether I can trust each
different app with my credit card details. If this happened I would almost
certainly spend less on software.

