3 ms·
EDIT: I'm retracting my statement. This is how things used to work. I don't see any changes to the policy. Yet, the app is still not getting approved. And it is
by outworlder 6y ago
EDIT: I'm retracting my statement. This is how things used to work. I don't see any changes to the policy. Yet, the app is still not getting approved. And it is not taking users to its own payment portal.
So I got no clue WTF is going on.
> In rejecting Hey's appeal, Apple notes that the developers could work within Apple's rules by allowing the app to function as a reader for standard e-mail, while also offering Hey subscriptions from its Web site. Alternatively, it says Hey can add an in-app subscription option, sharing revenue on those purchased within the app while keeping all subscription revenue earned outside of Apple's ecosystem.
1) Don't handle payments inside the app at all, do everything payment-related on the website.
2) Implement in app purchases
These are the options. "Hey" should pick one.
- ChrisLTD 6y agoThey already did #1. Apple is saying they have to do #2.
- vasachi 6y agoWell, they did implement option 1.
- cmelbye 6y ago“1” isn’t an option on its own, that’s what they’re already doing today and part of why they were rejected.
- davesmylie 6y ago> 1) Don't handle payments inside the app at all, do everything payment-related on the website. It's not quite so simple as that. If you're charging a subscription for functionality you're providing through an iOS app, that subscription must be available through Apple's payment system.
- xxpor 6y ago#1 USED to be the option. Apple decided to start enforcing the letter of the agreement, which meant 1 is only available for "reader" apps. That's what's so egregious.
- obahareth 6y agoHey already picked option 1. Their app was rejected after doing that. There is no way to purchase anything on the iOS version.