5 ms·

Apple Rejects Appeal of Email App That Blasted Store Rules

41 points by g_p 6y ago

buboard 6y ago
> “it is much safer to be feared than loved because ...love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.”
KCUOJJQJ 6y ago
One country should decide to fine Apple. The fine should be a tenth of the market capitalization. Problem solved.
- austinshea 6y ago
  Do you think something like this might happen?
coffeefirst 6y ago
These rules are arbitrary and incoherent. But, if Hey adds custom domain support (which they're planning to do anyway), does that make it a business app, and therefore acceptable?
- Shank 6y ago
  Hey already has a "for work" page up on their site: https://hey.com/work/ https://hey.com/work/. I think they're trying to play this card as much as they can, but I'm not sure it'll work.
s3r3nity 6y ago
Basecamp knew what they were doing here - there's no way they can be in the wrong by the community, which comes off as disingenuous to me. They either: 1) win, and are seen as "David beating Goliath" , or 2) lose, and Apple comes off as the bad guy trying to fleece a private company. (They could also lose because they weren't clear on the actual policies, a la the "malice vs. incompetence" rule of thumb. However Basecamp and its team have been in the game long enough to know what to expect with the App Store. I don't KNOW that, but that's my analysis here.) My argument around this goes back to market share: iOS owns, at best, 25% of the global market share for mobile operating systems [1]. Android is 3x that. If you don't like the platform policies, they're a minor share of the market - you don't _have_ to use them. "But $s3r3nity, that is where the paying users are!" Yes, and the spend per person for lamborghini owners probably is much much higher than Prius owners, even though the latter vastly outnumber the former. That doesn't mean the former needs to support any company that wants to make a carplay / carOS service. [1] https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide EDIT: grammar / spelling
- jedieaston 6y ago
  They specifically didn't know though. Basecamp is distributed without an option to buy a subscription via IAP, and never has had that option. If you do not have a Basecamp account, you get little more than the logo smiling back at you. When Hey got rejected, they asked what the difference between Hey and Basecamp was, and Apple said it didn't matter.
  - s3r3nity 6y ago
    As I read more articles about the situation, I'm starting to come around on the idea that it _is_ possible. Nevertheless DHH and the team are pretty experienced for me to immediately buy into that theory. Yet, let's say this were true, or even the most likely scenario. Now you have 3 scenarios, ALL of which portray "Apple = bad, Basecamp = good." When I see something that one-sided, I'm immediately suspicious that there's something missing here that we're not seeing...
    - bjtitus 6y ago
      Perhaps that's because that's what's going on and those are the only real ways to look at this.
    - syshum 6y ago
      So basically you are admitting your favor for apple is so strong you can not possiblly believe Apple is the bad actor in all this HEY is far far far from the only example of Apple abusing their position as gatekeeper to iPhone users
- Shank 6y ago
  > Basecamp knew what they were doing here - there's no way they can be in the wrong by the community, which comes off as disingenuous to me. Let's assume that everything has been calculated. That DHH knew this would happen and that the whole thing was going to blow up the way it has. On that assumption, is it truly disingenuous to anyone but Apple? It seems like it only benefits customers and smaller businesses, at least economically. I can see the argument that the in-app purchase API is better and easier for customers to use. I actually really enjoy paying for things with Apple Pay. That benefit makes sense, from a consumer perspective. On the other hand though, a 30% commission benefits only Apple. If this was a 5% cut it would be expensive, but comparable to Stripe and Braintree, which fall in the 1-3% range. Even a 10% cut would be similar. In this scenario, Apple would get a substantial amount of cash, users would get the Apple Pay experience, and it would be easier for developers to stomach the cost. The fact of the matter is that the 30% amount is entirely arbitrary. That cost is either eaten by customers or by developers, and doesn't benefit anyone but Apple. Running the App Store isn't free. I can definitely see them asking for some amount of cash for bandwidth or maintenance, and I can see justifying _some_ percentage fee or some proportional fee. It's just that for a lot of people, 30% is exorbitant for the value offered.
dccoolgai 6y ago
It's DHH. Simultaneously love and hate the guy. He knew he was breaking the rules.. knew there would be a big dust-up over it he could fan into a bunch of free press for his launch. Knowing how to work media like this is what separates people like him from people like us.
- parthdesai 6y ago
  how's it breaking the rules? https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1273748071298392065 https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1273748071298392065
  - dccoolgai 6y ago
    Pretty clear. Not saying they are _good_ rules, but https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/18/interview-apples-schiller-says-position-on-hey-app-is-unchanged-and-no-rules-changes-are-imminent/?tpcc=ECTW2020 https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/18/interview-apples-schiller-...
    - parthdesai 6y ago
      It's even worse if they decide to selectively enforce the rules. I don't know what point you're trying to make here.
      - kstrauser 6y ago
        While I get that, there's hardly a company on the planet that doesn't give special deals to large partners. It feels like a bit of feigned surprise that people are shocked when Apple negotiates special rates for Netflix etc. Well, yes; that's what almost everyone does.
- mtmail 6y ago
  I think he's in the right. But also agree it's a lot of PR he's enjoying. Last year he fought against Facebook "delete your account", a couple of months ago how more companies should offer remote work (pointing to their book/ebook). 20 tweets/day attacking big companies, he's used to that, has the audience and press contacts.
Shank 6y ago
I think we as a developer community should be using this momentum as much as we can. It's just economics: being able to publish apps on the app store and not having to take a 30% revenue hit would change the calculus for many indie and small shop developers. 30% can push many hobby apps into full time ventures for people. How many better apps and happier developers would we get if this were the case? I'm glad that DHH has a loud voice, but Basecamp has a lot of developers and I'm sure that when push comes to shove, someone will fold. I doubt it will apply to everyone, though. It would even be easy for Apple to grant an exception and let Hey continue (much easier than changing the policy for everyone). Is there any reason why we, as a community, shouldn't push as hard as we can here?
- google234123 6y ago
  Are you aware of how much Steam takes? Or the Microsoft Store, or Walmart...
  - dmix 6y ago
    Walmart et al makes a significant percentage of their money selling positions on the shelf and in-store promotions. The actual margins on product sales aren't nearly as high as a premium products placed within good eye-range at high trafficked parts of the store. Which are almost entirely major global brands. One way things are 'free' on the internet or at least cheap is by letting the top 10% of products pay extra in a win-win sort of situation, largely subsidizing the wider 90%+. I think what we're seeing here is Apple spotting a major money maker and saying you're not getting a free pass anymore and have pay like one of the big boys. That, or Apple has to change their model somehow, which I think would be largely unattractive to their business interests and its worked fine so far with everyone else.
  - jfim 6y ago
    Steam: 30% for the first 10M in sales, 25% for 10M-50M, 20% for sales above 50M Windows Store: 15% or 30%, depending on the product/platform Epic Store: 12% Amazon app store: 30% in most cases Play Store: 30% Does Walmart actually sell apps?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
statictype 6y ago
I love how Apple pretends the way people get these apps is by browsing the appstore interface and “discovering” them instead of jumping into it from a webpage or google search. Who is downloading and using HEY by searching for email apps in the app store?
wrsh07 6y ago
This is deeply unethical on Apple's part and honestly feels like a harbinger of an Apple I find as distasteful as any other megacorp only interested in profit Requiring apps that are selling digital content to fork over 30% of their revenue is shitty. Apple could do right by their customers: if they didn't fleece developers in the app store, most developers would use the native Apple payment API. Apple is abusing the power of having a blessed app store, and they should face anti trust for this. I don't really care what you think about David or his cofounders, Apple is in the wrong here. This piece is paywalled, but it's worth the price of subscribing for the month: https://stratechery.com/2020/xscale-and-arm-in-the-cloud-hey-versus-apple-apples-iap-campaign/ https://stratechery.com/2020/xscale-and-arm-in-the-cloud-hey... But his Twitter coverage is good too if you don't want to pay: https://mobile.twitter.com/benthompson/status/1273630618891350016 https://mobile.twitter.com/benthompson/status/12736306188913...
- Terretta 6y ago
  On the contrary, Apple doesn’t force apps that are selling digital content to fork over 30% of their revenue. That is the “reader” category of apps that are allowed to have an outside subscription, e.g. Netflix, Kindle, Spotify... The apps that must offer the subscription within the app store, such that users benefit from visible and pro-consumer recurring billing practices, are those where you are subscribing to the app’s functionality, not to content.
asciimike 6y ago
Somewhat confused why Superhuman doesn't seem to have this problem yet Hey does? They're both email clients that have monthly billing, yes? Superhuman doesn't let you sign up for an account (you just sign in with Gmail), so maybe that's a difference?

41 points by g_p 6y ago

> “it is much safer to be feared than loved because ...love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.”

KCUOJJQJ 6y ago

One country should decide to fine Apple. The fine should be a tenth of the market capitalization. Problem solved.

austinshea 6y ago
Do you think something like this might happen?

coffeefirst 6y ago

These rules are arbitrary and incoherent. But, if Hey adds custom domain support (which they're planning to do anyway), does that make it a business app, and therefore acceptable?

Shank 6y ago
Hey already has a "for work" page up on their site: https://hey.com/work/ https://hey.com/work/. I think they're trying to play this card as much as they can, but I'm not sure it'll work.

s3r3nity 6y ago

Basecamp knew what they were doing here - there's no way they can be in the wrong by the community, which comes off as disingenuous to me. They either: 1) win, and are seen as "David beating Goliath" , or 2) lose, and Apple comes off as the bad guy trying to fleece a private company. (They could also lose because they weren't clear on the actual policies, a la the "malice vs. incompetence" rule of thumb. However Basecamp and its team have been in the game long enough to know what to expect with the App Store. I don't KNOW that, but that's my analysis here.) My argument around this goes back to market share: iOS owns, at best, 25% of the global market share for mobile operating systems [1]. Android is 3x that. If you don't like the platform policies, they're a minor share of the market - you don't _have_ to use them. "But $s3r3nity, that is where the paying users are!" Yes, and the spend per person for lamborghini owners probably is much much higher than Prius owners, even though the latter vastly outnumber the former. That doesn't mean the former needs to support any company that wants to make a carplay / carOS service. [1] https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide EDIT: grammar / spelling

jedieaston 6y ago
They specifically didn't know though. Basecamp is distributed without an option to buy a subscription via IAP, and never has had that option. If you do not have a Basecamp account, you get little more than the logo smiling back at you. When Hey got rejected, they asked what the difference between Hey and Basecamp was, and Apple said it didn't matter.
- s3r3nity 6y ago
  As I read more articles about the situation, I'm starting to come around on the idea that it _is_ possible. Nevertheless DHH and the team are pretty experienced for me to immediately buy into that theory. Yet, let's say this were true, or even the most likely scenario. Now you have 3 scenarios, ALL of which portray "Apple = bad, Basecamp = good." When I see something that one-sided, I'm immediately suspicious that there's something missing here that we're not seeing...
  - bjtitus 6y ago
    Perhaps that's because that's what's going on and those are the only real ways to look at this.
  - syshum 6y ago
    So basically you are admitting your favor for apple is so strong you can not possiblly believe Apple is the bad actor in all this HEY is far far far from the only example of Apple abusing their position as gatekeeper to iPhone users
Shank 6y ago
> Basecamp knew what they were doing here - there's no way they can be in the wrong by the community, which comes off as disingenuous to me. Let's assume that everything has been calculated. That DHH knew this would happen and that the whole thing was going to blow up the way it has. On that assumption, is it truly disingenuous to anyone but Apple? It seems like it only benefits customers and smaller businesses, at least economically. I can see the argument that the in-app purchase API is better and easier for customers to use. I actually really enjoy paying for things with Apple Pay. That benefit makes sense, from a consumer perspective. On the other hand though, a 30% commission benefits only Apple. If this was a 5% cut it would be expensive, but comparable to Stripe and Braintree, which fall in the 1-3% range. Even a 10% cut would be similar. In this scenario, Apple would get a substantial amount of cash, users would get the Apple Pay experience, and it would be easier for developers to stomach the cost. The fact of the matter is that the 30% amount is entirely arbitrary. That cost is either eaten by customers or by developers, and doesn't benefit anyone but Apple. Running the App Store isn't free. I can definitely see them asking for some amount of cash for bandwidth or maintenance, and I can see justifying _some_ percentage fee or some proportional fee. It's just that for a lot of people, 30% is exorbitant for the value offered.

dccoolgai 6y ago

It's DHH. Simultaneously love and hate the guy. He knew he was breaking the rules.. knew there would be a big dust-up over it he could fan into a bunch of free press for his launch. Knowing how to work media like this is what separates people like him from people like us.

parthdesai 6y ago
how's it breaking the rules? https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1273748071298392065 https://twitter.com/dhh/status/1273748071298392065
- dccoolgai 6y ago
  Pretty clear. Not saying they are _good_ rules, but https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/18/interview-apples-schiller-says-position-on-hey-app-is-unchanged-and-no-rules-changes-are-imminent/?tpcc=ECTW2020 https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/18/interview-apples-schiller-...
  - parthdesai 6y ago
    It's even worse if they decide to selectively enforce the rules. I don't know what point you're trying to make here.
    - kstrauser 6y ago
      While I get that, there's hardly a company on the planet that doesn't give special deals to large partners. It feels like a bit of feigned surprise that people are shocked when Apple negotiates special rates for Netflix etc. Well, yes; that's what almost everyone does.
mtmail 6y ago
I think he's in the right. But also agree it's a lot of PR he's enjoying. Last year he fought against Facebook "delete your account", a couple of months ago how more companies should offer remote work (pointing to their book/ebook). 20 tweets/day attacking big companies, he's used to that, has the audience and press contacts.

Shank 6y ago

I think we as a developer community should be using this momentum as much as we can. It's just economics: being able to publish apps on the app store and not having to take a 30% revenue hit would change the calculus for many indie and small shop developers. 30% can push many hobby apps into full time ventures for people. How many better apps and happier developers would we get if this were the case? I'm glad that DHH has a loud voice, but Basecamp has a lot of developers and I'm sure that when push comes to shove, someone will fold. I doubt it will apply to everyone, though. It would even be easy for Apple to grant an exception and let Hey continue (much easier than changing the policy for everyone). Is there any reason why we, as a community, shouldn't push as hard as we can here?

google234123 6y ago
Are you aware of how much Steam takes? Or the Microsoft Store, or Walmart...
- dmix 6y ago
  Walmart et al makes a significant percentage of their money selling positions on the shelf and in-store promotions. The actual margins on product sales aren't nearly as high as a premium products placed within good eye-range at high trafficked parts of the store. Which are almost entirely major global brands. One way things are 'free' on the internet or at least cheap is by letting the top 10% of products pay extra in a win-win sort of situation, largely subsidizing the wider 90%+. I think what we're seeing here is Apple spotting a major money maker and saying you're not getting a free pass anymore and have pay like one of the big boys. That, or Apple has to change their model somehow, which I think would be largely unattractive to their business interests and its worked fine so far with everyone else.
- jfim 6y ago
  Steam: 30% for the first 10M in sales, 25% for 10M-50M, 20% for sales above 50M Windows Store: 15% or 30%, depending on the product/platform Epic Store: 12% Amazon app store: 30% in most cases Play Store: 30% Does Walmart actually sell apps?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

statictype 6y ago

I love how Apple pretends the way people get these apps is by browsing the appstore interface and “discovering” them instead of jumping into it from a webpage or google search. Who is downloading and using HEY by searching for email apps in the app store?

wrsh07 6y ago

This is deeply unethical on Apple's part and honestly feels like a harbinger of an Apple I find as distasteful as any other megacorp only interested in profit Requiring apps that are selling digital content to fork over 30% of their revenue is shitty. Apple could do right by their customers: if they didn't fleece developers in the app store, most developers would use the native Apple payment API. Apple is abusing the power of having a blessed app store, and they should face anti trust for this. I don't really care what you think about David or his cofounders, Apple is in the wrong here. This piece is paywalled, but it's worth the price of subscribing for the month: https://stratechery.com/2020/xscale-and-arm-in-the-cloud-hey-versus-apple-apples-iap-campaign/ https://stratechery.com/2020/xscale-and-arm-in-the-cloud-hey... But his Twitter coverage is good too if you don't want to pay: https://mobile.twitter.com/benthompson/status/1273630618891350016 https://mobile.twitter.com/benthompson/status/12736306188913...

Terretta 6y ago
On the contrary, Apple doesn’t force apps that are selling digital content to fork over 30% of their revenue. That is the “reader” category of apps that are allowed to have an outside subscription, e.g. Netflix, Kindle, Spotify... The apps that must offer the subscription within the app store, such that users benefit from visible and pro-consumer recurring billing practices, are those where you are subscribing to the app’s functionality, not to content.

asciimike 6y ago

Somewhat confused why Superhuman doesn't seem to have this problem yet Hey does? They're both email clients that have monthly billing, yes? Superhuman doesn't let you sign up for an account (you just sign in with Gmail), so maybe that's a difference?