12 ms·

Apple, Hey, and the Path Forward

107 points by braythwayt 6y ago

nkozyra 6y ago
If you're at the size and visibility of Hey, you can strike these kinds of compromises. This isn't particularly surprising. The real issue is the smaller guys, who are forced with a "take it or leave it" roadblock from app stores. You'd hope the bigger players - particularly ones who have hit these roadblocks - to become advocates for developers. Perhaps working in some sort of ongoing developer agency/evangelist fashion would be good for all involved.
- braythwayt 6y ago
  Lots of people want the walled garden abolished, but it would be HUGE if Apple simply created a set of guidelines—no matter how draconian—and then applied them equally and transparently to everyone, big or small. If the guidelines are transparent and fairly applied, it's up to you as a developer whether to play their game. But it is ridiculous that small developers are literally spinning the Wheel of Fortune every time they submit an app that does exactly what Google, Netflix, Amazon, &c. are doing. And speaking as a user, I bought a mail app called Spark. It's great. But now I have to worry, what if Apple decides that the next release breaks their rules? What if they pull the app entirely? Capricious and unjust application of the rules is bad for users as well as developers.
  - zepto 6y ago
    There are more than 2 million ios developers worldwide. There is literally no evidence at all that developers are spinning the wheel of fortune or that Apple is capricious or unjust. Given that number of developers, hundreds of mistakes every year would be an amazing track record for Apple.
    - braythwayt 6y ago
      There is literally no evidence at all that developers are spinning the wheel of fortune or that Apple is capricious or unjust. Okay then. That settles the matter. It's a mass delusion!
      - zepto 6y ago
        I’m clearly not saying that. What I’m saying is that in order to make these claims you’d need to be able to show that it’s more than just a normal rate of error. If you just take a few reports (or indeed even a few hundred) and ignore the size of the sample, then the conclusion is likely to be flawed. Do you actually know what the rate of ‘capricious’ rejections is? I have seen a few 10s of cases reported, and many of them aren’t actually capricious, although a few clearly are. My guess is that the chances of a capricious rejection of an App Store submission is less than 1 in 1,000,000. I’d say that is neither unjust, nor capricious, and simply a reflection of scale.
        braythwayt 6y ago
        I agree that when they make a mistake in the form of applying the rules inequitably, get called out, and fix it, that's a mistake. But I claim that when they make a mistake in the form of applying the rules inequitably, get called out, and double down on applying the rules inequitably, that is not a mistake, that is capricious. There may only be a small number of times they have been capricious, but they are not "making a mistake." They are applying the rules capriciously. And while nobody is getting killed, the principle of justice is the same here as in our society. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. One person imprisoned for a crime they didn't commit and the police knew they didn't commit taints the entire justice system. It removes confidence for everyone. It's the same principle here. Mistakes, fine. But applying the rules inequitably and doubling down on that even once taints the system for everyone. TL;DR I agree that the system usually works. But for a mistake to be a mistake, Apple has to be prepared to fix the mistake, not double down on continuing to have different rules for different developers.
        zepto 6y ago
        Ok - but then the issue is - what actually constitutes a mistake? In the Hey case it does seem like Apple was simply applying it’s rules, and DHH didn’t quite understand them. As for the justice system - all justice systems are radically tainted in this way. No system has ever been created which does not have this problem, in all of human history. If you are expecting Apple to achieve perfect justice, that is fair enough, but it’s also fair to acknowledge that it’s an unsolved problem. It’s also simply not reasonable for developers to be ‘in fear of capricious rejections’. It’s fairly predictable, or easily resolved in most cases.
  - solarkraft 6y ago
    Couldn't you demand your money back? You or the app provider sue Apple? Is all of this prevented in the ToS? Would that really be enforcable? If the answer is "no" or yes for the last one, that'd go pretty far against my sense of justice. But of course we're talking about american laws.
  - aabbcc1241 6y ago
    Do you really need an app on iPhone to mail?
    - coronadisaster 6y ago
      what can you use besides an app to get your mail on iPhone?
      - dafoex 6y ago
        A web browser? Aside for a few apps that provide significant advantages over the web version (or those that force you to use the app even in "requst desktop version" mode), I use a browser for everything. Hell, even though the YouTube app was preinstalled on my phone, I still used the mobile site because I just found the experience better.
        coronadisaster 6y ago
        a browser is an app... but I try to do like you and avoid random and single-purpose apps because they are riskier.
        aabbcc1241 6y ago
        Exactly, I consciously check email when I want/need. So I don't even need push notification.
- scarface74 6y ago
  Smaller guys aren’t forced to take it or leave it. Even the no name companies like ACloudGuru that have “view only” functionality force you to subscribe outside of the App Store.
- kemonocode 6y ago
  Just as with YouTube, or Facebook, or just anywhere else whenever there's a big player involved: things get resolved if you have enough clout and you make a big enough of a stink-up. I'd sincerely hope for a genuine change of heart at Apple and that Hey's resolution was just not the exception to the rule, but I seriously doubt so.
  - donarb 6y ago
    There was no change of heart at Apple. Hey changed their app to conform to the rules that all other developers have done.
chj 6y ago
Still not clear if this is a special deal for hey or for all developers as well.
- toyg 6y ago
  Small developers wouldn't even get Schiller's ears in the first place...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- scarface74 6y ago
  There is nothing special about this deal. I can name of list of a dozen of apps that are “reader apps” - view only that force you to subscribe out of the store. Even the major apps from Adobe and MS offer some type of functionality without subscribing.
adrianhon 6y ago
I'm glad Hey now has a future on the App Store – it's better than not existing at all, but the whole episode has been absurd. This new version introduces a new free option for the iOS app. Now users can sign up directly in-app for a free, temporary, randomized @hey.com email address that works for 14 days. Think of it like a temporary SIM card you buy when traveling. Or for when you don’t want to give out your real email address, like a short term “for sale” listing, like Craigslist does it. This, in particular, is just ridiculous. A whole new feature, designed and developed in haste over a weekend, simply to satisfy Apple. But then we've had to do that ourselves in our own apps, and no doubt thousands of other devs have their own stories.
- intopieces 6y ago
  Which is a better user experience: the new implementation, or the original?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - braythwayt 6y ago
    TFA says, "A win for Apple, a win for us, and a win for our customers." Basecamp appears be saying that the new implementation offers a better user experience.
    - adamlett 6y ago
      The win for them is that they get to update their app instead of being booted from the app store.
  - jbigelow76 6y ago
    I suppose if you've been sitting on the sidelines since 1971 to see if this whole "e-mail thing" was a fad or not, and currently don't have an email address, a 14 day trial with some rando address might be just what you're looking for. Now if only you had some one to email...
- 6y ago
toyg 6y ago
So, in the end... is there a link or something, in the app, about upgrading to the paid option?
- cypressious 6y ago
  No, that's against the guidelines.
  - toyg 6y ago
    So the experience of someone who doesn't know anything about HEY, i.e. what Schiller cares about, is: - download the app - use the free service for 14 days - see their emails disappear on day 14 Doesn't seem like a great xp. Wouldn't it be better to be told straight away "you need an account for this"? Also, Schiller has now instigated a wonderful tool for trolling and harassment.
    - latortuga 6y ago
      I'm sure Hey will .... email you wink a link to sign up for a paid account. If they link to the pricing page in the app, that's a no-no, but if they EMAIL it to you, and you just so happen to be using an email client that can display that link, then that's okay.
      - toyg 6y ago
        In Italy that's called fatta la legge, trovato l'inganno - as soon as the law is created, the loophole is found. Apple should just do the decent thing.
paulgb 6y ago
On the first read this seemed like a conclusion of the story, but on a second read it sounds like this is another chess move. 1.0.2 was approved (to Hey's surprise, and likely just to ease some PR/legal pressure), but 1.0.3 is still pending. Hey's approach here seems a bit like lawyering the rules to me -- I could see how temporary email addresses can be useful, but the feature seems to mainly exist to appease Apple rather than users. I hope it works for them, but I'm not holding my breath.
- elicash 6y ago
  I agree it's a chess move. But it's also a way for both sides claim victory. Apple doesn't want to change its rules; Hey doesn't want to change how users sign up. I guess I'm saying I'm more optimistic this will settle the dispute. But I agree, the feature is more aimed at Apple than users.
- scarface74 6y ago
  If someone sends me a PowerPoint slide in an email and then I go to the App Store to download PowerPoint to view it, it would be a horrible user experience if I couldn’t do anything with the app before paying for it. On the other hand, I can still view the slides without paying MS, but I have to have a subscription to edit it. I can’t pay for the subscription within the app. I think that’s a decent compromise.
- petey283 6y ago
  Looks like 1.0.3 has been updated to "In Review" status. https://mobile.twitter.com/dhh/status/1275085027613609984 https://mobile.twitter.com/dhh/status/1275085027613609984
samtimalsina 6y ago
I don't have a horse in the race, but watched this closely. The whole situation put Apple in a bad light, and Basecamp got free publicity. I hesitate to say it was planned, as DHH likes to mention he's not THAT smart. Regardless of the drama, HEY the actual product, looks like it does a lot of things right.
- j0hnml 6y ago
  I agree on the free publicity part. Don’t think I would’ve given this product this much of my attention if it weren’t for this whole debacle. The free publicity in this case is likely to turn out to be a net positive for Basecamp.
mhaberl 6y ago
This is great news Apple and Hey managed to find a way to go foward, but I wonder would Hey get this far if it was not backed up by Jason and DHH
- zepto 6y ago
  What are you talking about? They complied with the guidelines.
  - mhaberl 6y ago
    Having a bad day? I am referring to communication with "Apple’s Senior Vice President of Worldwide Marketing" after which Hey did an implementation of a functionality which clearly is not a "basic functionality", but a 14 day demo. After that the app is approved. Would some random developer really get such treatment from Apple?
    - zepto 6y ago
      Probably not an SVP, however I have had Apple engineers proactively call me to discuss ways to make non-compliant apps fit their guidelines, and that’s without me complaining at all - they initiated it following the rejection.
dsalzman 6y ago
"And Phil, we set aside an amazing @hey.com address for you. Free for life, our gift to you. Lemme know." hmmm. Anyone guess what that could be?
- nazka 6y ago
  chick-phil@hey.com?
satvikpendem 6y ago
I think having a free trial is a good idea regardless of in app versus out of app purchases. That it had to be done so hastily is unfortunate, though.
eddieroger 6y ago
I may be cynical to this whole thing, but to me this conclusion reads as Hey acquiescing to Apple’s policies, and now the whole thing feels like a PR stunt, particularly shaded by DHH’s documented “pick a fight” stance [1]. It feels like we got played. It’s remarked as a compromise, but it doesn’t feel that way to me. 1. https://m.signalvnoise.com/pick-a-fight-on-twitter/ https://m.signalvnoise.com/pick-a-fight-on-twitter/
- dabeeeenster 6y ago
  Im not sure if they planned it, but I feel like they definitely played their hand around using it as a marketing / publicity stunt
  - ksec 6y ago
    Agreed. You cant "plan" an App Store rejection when they did show they make all the effort to comply with the App Store policy. Again, Hey was really hyped, 70,000 on waiting list alone. They dont even need any of these marketing to get customers. Name me an SaaS product that had these kind of traction baring FAANG. But this letter, the initial tone from DHH, and no further complains about App Store really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
oflannabhra 6y ago
I know this will be unpopular on HN, but I actually appreciate Apple’s stance here as a user. I don’t want to give developers my billing info. I even have to use a special throwaway number at Home Depot. There’s no way I’d trust hundreds of developers with that info when I don’t even trust a F500 company. I don’t want to download apps that literally do nothing except kick me out to a website for a billing transaction, especially a recurring one with no way in app to cancel that subscription. If I delete the app, I want to get promoted to cancel the subscription. Apple has some major issues with the App Store (search, discovery, business models, % cut, just as a few), but in this case I actually agree with their principles.
- andreicek 6y ago
  I agree with you. There is much place for improvement but the verion you donwload now on AppStore is new user hostile, especially when you figure out that they have a waiting list...
- grk 6y ago
  But then the rule could be "one of the payment options needs to be Apple Pay, we take 3% cut".
  - basch 6y ago
    or let the developer say "Sign up with Apple Pay for 30% more, or go sign up at our website for standard pricing."
    - Hamuko 6y ago
      43% more if Apple wants a 30% cut.
- api 6y ago
  I call this the paradox of Apple: they're the least open platform and perhaps as a result are the best for privacy, security, and user trust. Android is much more open and is a spyware free for all. The Internet is like a failed state. Apple is like a walled and privately patrolled compound where the wealthy have taken shelter. Outside the compound everything is spying on you and if you get something from a random site there's a decent chance it contains malware. Tech-savvy users think nothing is wrong and wonder why everyone shelters in the compound, but they're like the street kids who grew up with hard-earned street smarts. They know how to avoid trouble and know how to fight. People like that can live on the street but it's no place to raise a family. Taking this analogy way too far, I guess you could compare a web browser with its armored sandbox JavaScript VM to an armored vehicle with bullet proof glass that you can use to drive around. Just make sure you've got plenty of gas and never open the door.
rvz 6y ago
Interesting outcome for both Apple and Hey. However, the threat still exists when Apple can potentially announce a similar service to hey.com somewhere in the future, which will be a kick in the teeth to everyone. Would that be considered as a win? I don't ever underestimate Apple's strategic plans to maintain control of the ecosystem and compete with your own apps. Seriously. Apple 'really' is not your friend.
slipheen 6y ago
I think Apple is overreaching on this whole thing, but it feels somewhat disingenuous to argue that they did what Apple/Phil asked for. He asked for a basic version that people can use without their service, and instead they implemented a variation on a 14 day demo. Then they're posting publicly saying "We did what Apple asked for", without clearing this new solution (which isn't really what Apple asked for). To be clear, I think Apple shouldn't be demanding a 30% cut here at all! But this article feels like they're presenting their solution publicly in order to try to leverage Apple into accepting it.
- drewbug01 6y ago
  > He asked for a basic version that people can use without their service To be clear, Apple asked them to do something that they surely must know isn't possible. Hey specifically doesn't offer IMAP/POP access because they layer enough features on top of email that IMAP and POP simply can't support. For the same reasons they don't offer IMAP/POP access, they couldn't "just" add the "bring your own server" feature that Apple asked for. The Hey iOS app isn't an IMAP/POP client with fancy chrome; it's designed specifically to work with Hey's servers and nothing else. Even if they shoe-horned an IMAP/POP client into the app to try and satisfy Apple, I think the user experience would end up far worse than what they've just implemented this weekend; and likely would violate other provisions of the App store.
HHalvi 6y ago
Quick Wins have never helped anyone in the long run but they fool you into thinking you can go on with it forever. When the entire debacle started I was suddenly an optimist on: - Mobile vs Web debate forcing gate keepers on giving equally competent choices for users & makers alike. - Apple relooking and rethinking their 70-30% strategy - Small & Indie Developers openly talking about the problems being at the mercy of Apple and Google's stores.
dustinmoris 6y ago
Just downloaded the app and there’s no sign of a free tier whatsoever. I can’t do anything with it, absolute shite if I didn’t know that it’s still in closed preview.
- donarb 6y ago
  They just submitted version 1.0.3 this morning, they needed the weekend to implement it. It'll probably be released sometime today.
i_don_t_know 6y ago
The cynic in me thinks this whole thing was a publicity stunt. I find it hard to believe that they hadn't thought of offering an in-app free trial. I wouldn't be surprised if they had it implemented all along in a separate branch and just waited a few days to create a storm.
- manojlds 6y ago
  That could have been the case if the app had been rejected. It was approved, and Apple says it was a mistake that it was approved. And that point, they can't know that bug fix updates would be rejected.
- AnonC 6y ago
  Considering DHH’s choice of words on Twitter, I’d be inclined to believe the same too.
merty 6y ago
Since the whole issue boiled down to "providing some functionality to users who saw the app in the App Store and downloaded" and completely moved on from the initial IAP discussion, I believe a good compromise for all parties would be to allow developers to submit such applications but simply unlist them, making them only discoverable via search or deep links.
manojlds 6y ago
So Android users have to continue to clamour for the invite? If they had done the same for Android it would have been reasonable.
pier25 6y ago
I'm glad they found a solution that was satisfactory for Apple, but this random email thing seems forced and useless. If you end up signing up on HEY will the random address keep working? Otherwise why use an address that will disappear no matter what. Obviously you can't use it to sign up on anything, or tell people to contact you at that address. It would only work for sending test emails between HEY and your other email addresses. I mean, who's going to do that? Is this really better for the end user?

107 points by braythwayt 6y ago

If you're at the size and visibility of Hey, you can strike these kinds of compromises. This isn't particularly surprising. The real issue is the smaller guys, who are forced with a "take it or leave it" roadblock from app stores. You'd hope the bigger players - particularly ones who have hit these roadblocks - to become advocates for developers. Perhaps working in some sort of ongoing developer agency/evangelist fashion would be good for all involved.

braythwayt 6y ago
Lots of people want the walled garden abolished, but it would be HUGE if Apple simply created a set of guidelines—no matter how draconian—and then applied them equally and transparently to everyone, big or small. If the guidelines are transparent and fairly applied, it's up to you as a developer whether to play their game. But it is ridiculous that small developers are literally spinning the Wheel of Fortune every time they submit an app that does exactly what Google, Netflix, Amazon, &c. are doing. And speaking as a user, I bought a mail app called Spark. It's great. But now I have to worry, what if Apple decides that the next release breaks their rules? What if they pull the app entirely? Capricious and unjust application of the rules is bad for users as well as developers.
- zepto 6y ago
  There are more than 2 million ios developers worldwide. There is literally no evidence at all that developers are spinning the wheel of fortune or that Apple is capricious or unjust. Given that number of developers, hundreds of mistakes every year would be an amazing track record for Apple.
  - braythwayt 6y ago
    There is literally no evidence at all that developers are spinning the wheel of fortune or that Apple is capricious or unjust. Okay then. That settles the matter. It's a mass delusion!
    - zepto 6y ago
      I’m clearly not saying that. What I’m saying is that in order to make these claims you’d need to be able to show that it’s more than just a normal rate of error. If you just take a few reports (or indeed even a few hundred) and ignore the size of the sample, then the conclusion is likely to be flawed. Do you actually know what the rate of ‘capricious’ rejections is? I have seen a few 10s of cases reported, and many of them aren’t actually capricious, although a few clearly are. My guess is that the chances of a capricious rejection of an App Store submission is less than 1 in 1,000,000. I’d say that is neither unjust, nor capricious, and simply a reflection of scale.
      - braythwayt 6y ago
        I agree that when they make a mistake in the form of applying the rules inequitably, get called out, and fix it, that's a mistake. But I claim that when they make a mistake in the form of applying the rules inequitably, get called out, and double down on applying the rules inequitably, that is not a mistake, that is capricious. There may only be a small number of times they have been capricious, but they are not "making a mistake." They are applying the rules capriciously. And while nobody is getting killed, the principle of justice is the same here as in our society. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. One person imprisoned for a crime they didn't commit and the police knew they didn't commit taints the entire justice system. It removes confidence for everyone. It's the same principle here. Mistakes, fine. But applying the rules inequitably and doubling down on that even once taints the system for everyone. TL;DR I agree that the system usually works. But for a mistake to be a mistake, Apple has to be prepared to fix the mistake, not double down on continuing to have different rules for different developers.
        zepto 6y ago
        Ok - but then the issue is - what actually constitutes a mistake? In the Hey case it does seem like Apple was simply applying it’s rules, and DHH didn’t quite understand them. As for the justice system - all justice systems are radically tainted in this way. No system has ever been created which does not have this problem, in all of human history. If you are expecting Apple to achieve perfect justice, that is fair enough, but it’s also fair to acknowledge that it’s an unsolved problem. It’s also simply not reasonable for developers to be ‘in fear of capricious rejections’. It’s fairly predictable, or easily resolved in most cases.
- solarkraft 6y ago
  Couldn't you demand your money back? You or the app provider sue Apple? Is all of this prevented in the ToS? Would that really be enforcable? If the answer is "no" or yes for the last one, that'd go pretty far against my sense of justice. But of course we're talking about american laws.
- aabbcc1241 6y ago
  Do you really need an app on iPhone to mail?
  - coronadisaster 6y ago
    what can you use besides an app to get your mail on iPhone?
    - dafoex 6y ago
      A web browser? Aside for a few apps that provide significant advantages over the web version (or those that force you to use the app even in "requst desktop version" mode), I use a browser for everything. Hell, even though the YouTube app was preinstalled on my phone, I still used the mobile site because I just found the experience better.
      - coronadisaster 6y ago
        a browser is an app... but I try to do like you and avoid random and single-purpose apps because they are riskier.
      - aabbcc1241 6y ago
        Exactly, I consciously check email when I want/need. So I don't even need push notification.
scarface74 6y ago
Smaller guys aren’t forced to take it or leave it. Even the no name companies like ACloudGuru that have “view only” functionality force you to subscribe outside of the App Store.
kemonocode 6y ago
Just as with YouTube, or Facebook, or just anywhere else whenever there's a big player involved: things get resolved if you have enough clout and you make a big enough of a stink-up. I'd sincerely hope for a genuine change of heart at Apple and that Hey's resolution was just not the exception to the rule, but I seriously doubt so.
- donarb 6y ago
  There was no change of heart at Apple. Hey changed their app to conform to the rules that all other developers have done.

chj 6y ago

Still not clear if this is a special deal for hey or for all developers as well.

toyg 6y ago
Small developers wouldn't even get Schiller's ears in the first place...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
scarface74 6y ago
There is nothing special about this deal. I can name of list of a dozen of apps that are “reader apps” - view only that force you to subscribe out of the store. Even the major apps from Adobe and MS offer some type of functionality without subscribing.

adrianhon 6y ago

I'm glad Hey now has a future on the App Store – it's better than not existing at all, but the whole episode has been absurd. This new version introduces a new free option for the iOS app. Now users can sign up directly in-app for a free, temporary, randomized @hey.com email address that works for 14 days. Think of it like a temporary SIM card you buy when traveling. Or for when you don’t want to give out your real email address, like a short term “for sale” listing, like Craigslist does it. This, in particular, is just ridiculous. A whole new feature, designed and developed in haste over a weekend, simply to satisfy Apple. But then we've had to do that ourselves in our own apps, and no doubt thousands of other devs have their own stories.

intopieces 6y ago
Which is a better user experience: the new implementation, or the original?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- braythwayt 6y ago
  TFA says, "A win for Apple, a win for us, and a win for our customers." Basecamp appears be saying that the new implementation offers a better user experience.
  - adamlett 6y ago
    The win for them is that they get to update their app instead of being booted from the app store.
- jbigelow76 6y ago
  I suppose if you've been sitting on the sidelines since 1971 to see if this whole "e-mail thing" was a fad or not, and currently don't have an email address, a 14 day trial with some rando address might be just what you're looking for. Now if only you had some one to email...
6y ago

toyg 6y ago

So, in the end... is there a link or something, in the app, about upgrading to the paid option?

cypressious 6y ago
No, that's against the guidelines.
- toyg 6y ago
  So the experience of someone who doesn't know anything about HEY, i.e. what Schiller cares about, is: - download the app - use the free service for 14 days - see their emails disappear on day 14 Doesn't seem like a great xp. Wouldn't it be better to be told straight away "you need an account for this"? Also, Schiller has now instigated a wonderful tool for trolling and harassment.
  - latortuga 6y ago
    I'm sure Hey will .... email you wink a link to sign up for a paid account. If they link to the pricing page in the app, that's a no-no, but if they EMAIL it to you, and you just so happen to be using an email client that can display that link, then that's okay.
    - toyg 6y ago
      In Italy that's called fatta la legge, trovato l'inganno - as soon as the law is created, the loophole is found. Apple should just do the decent thing.

paulgb 6y ago

On the first read this seemed like a conclusion of the story, but on a second read it sounds like this is another chess move. 1.0.2 was approved (to Hey's surprise, and likely just to ease some PR/legal pressure), but 1.0.3 is still pending. Hey's approach here seems a bit like lawyering the rules to me -- I could see how temporary email addresses can be useful, but the feature seems to mainly exist to appease Apple rather than users. I hope it works for them, but I'm not holding my breath.

elicash 6y ago
I agree it's a chess move. But it's also a way for both sides claim victory. Apple doesn't want to change its rules; Hey doesn't want to change how users sign up. I guess I'm saying I'm more optimistic this will settle the dispute. But I agree, the feature is more aimed at Apple than users.
scarface74 6y ago
If someone sends me a PowerPoint slide in an email and then I go to the App Store to download PowerPoint to view it, it would be a horrible user experience if I couldn’t do anything with the app before paying for it. On the other hand, I can still view the slides without paying MS, but I have to have a subscription to edit it. I can’t pay for the subscription within the app. I think that’s a decent compromise.
petey283 6y ago
Looks like 1.0.3 has been updated to "In Review" status. https://mobile.twitter.com/dhh/status/1275085027613609984 https://mobile.twitter.com/dhh/status/1275085027613609984

samtimalsina 6y ago

I don't have a horse in the race, but watched this closely. The whole situation put Apple in a bad light, and Basecamp got free publicity. I hesitate to say it was planned, as DHH likes to mention he's not THAT smart. Regardless of the drama, HEY the actual product, looks like it does a lot of things right.

j0hnml 6y ago
I agree on the free publicity part. Don’t think I would’ve given this product this much of my attention if it weren’t for this whole debacle. The free publicity in this case is likely to turn out to be a net positive for Basecamp.

mhaberl 6y ago

This is great news Apple and Hey managed to find a way to go foward, but I wonder would Hey get this far if it was not backed up by Jason and DHH

zepto 6y ago
What are you talking about? They complied with the guidelines.
- mhaberl 6y ago
  Having a bad day? I am referring to communication with "Apple’s Senior Vice President of Worldwide Marketing" after which Hey did an implementation of a functionality which clearly is not a "basic functionality", but a 14 day demo. After that the app is approved. Would some random developer really get such treatment from Apple?
  - zepto 6y ago
    Probably not an SVP, however I have had Apple engineers proactively call me to discuss ways to make non-compliant apps fit their guidelines, and that’s without me complaining at all - they initiated it following the rejection.

dsalzman 6y ago

"And Phil, we set aside an amazing @hey.com address for you. Free for life, our gift to you. Lemme know." hmmm. Anyone guess what that could be?

nazka 6y ago
chick-phil@hey.com?

satvikpendem 6y ago

I think having a free trial is a good idea regardless of in app versus out of app purchases. That it had to be done so hastily is unfortunate, though.

eddieroger 6y ago

I may be cynical to this whole thing, but to me this conclusion reads as Hey acquiescing to Apple’s policies, and now the whole thing feels like a PR stunt, particularly shaded by DHH’s documented “pick a fight” stance [1]. It feels like we got played. It’s remarked as a compromise, but it doesn’t feel that way to me. 1. https://m.signalvnoise.com/pick-a-fight-on-twitter/ https://m.signalvnoise.com/pick-a-fight-on-twitter/

dabeeeenster 6y ago
Im not sure if they planned it, but I feel like they definitely played their hand around using it as a marketing / publicity stunt
- ksec 6y ago
  Agreed. You cant "plan" an App Store rejection when they did show they make all the effort to comply with the App Store policy. Again, Hey was really hyped, 70,000 on waiting list alone. They dont even need any of these marketing to get customers. Name me an SaaS product that had these kind of traction baring FAANG. But this letter, the initial tone from DHH, and no further complains about App Store really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

oflannabhra 6y ago

I know this will be unpopular on HN, but I actually appreciate Apple’s stance here as a user. I don’t want to give developers my billing info. I even have to use a special throwaway number at Home Depot. There’s no way I’d trust hundreds of developers with that info when I don’t even trust a F500 company. I don’t want to download apps that literally do nothing except kick me out to a website for a billing transaction, especially a recurring one with no way in app to cancel that subscription. If I delete the app, I want to get promoted to cancel the subscription. Apple has some major issues with the App Store (search, discovery, business models, % cut, just as a few), but in this case I actually agree with their principles.

andreicek 6y ago
I agree with you. There is much place for improvement but the verion you donwload now on AppStore is new user hostile, especially when you figure out that they have a waiting list...
grk 6y ago
But then the rule could be "one of the payment options needs to be Apple Pay, we take 3% cut".
- basch 6y ago
  or let the developer say "Sign up with Apple Pay for 30% more, or go sign up at our website for standard pricing."
  - Hamuko 6y ago
    43% more if Apple wants a 30% cut.
api 6y ago
I call this the paradox of Apple: they're the least open platform and perhaps as a result are the best for privacy, security, and user trust. Android is much more open and is a spyware free for all. The Internet is like a failed state. Apple is like a walled and privately patrolled compound where the wealthy have taken shelter. Outside the compound everything is spying on you and if you get something from a random site there's a decent chance it contains malware. Tech-savvy users think nothing is wrong and wonder why everyone shelters in the compound, but they're like the street kids who grew up with hard-earned street smarts. They know how to avoid trouble and know how to fight. People like that can live on the street but it's no place to raise a family. Taking this analogy way too far, I guess you could compare a web browser with its armored sandbox JavaScript VM to an armored vehicle with bullet proof glass that you can use to drive around. Just make sure you've got plenty of gas and never open the door.

rvz 6y ago

Interesting outcome for both Apple and Hey. However, the threat still exists when Apple can potentially announce a similar service to hey.com somewhere in the future, which will be a kick in the teeth to everyone. Would that be considered as a win? I don't ever underestimate Apple's strategic plans to maintain control of the ecosystem and compete with your own apps. Seriously. Apple 'really' is not your friend.

slipheen 6y ago

I think Apple is overreaching on this whole thing, but it feels somewhat disingenuous to argue that they did what Apple/Phil asked for. He asked for a basic version that people can use without their service, and instead they implemented a variation on a 14 day demo. Then they're posting publicly saying "We did what Apple asked for", without clearing this new solution (which isn't really what Apple asked for). To be clear, I think Apple shouldn't be demanding a 30% cut here at all! But this article feels like they're presenting their solution publicly in order to try to leverage Apple into accepting it.

drewbug01 6y ago
> He asked for a basic version that people can use without their service To be clear, Apple asked them to do something that they surely must know isn't possible. Hey specifically doesn't offer IMAP/POP access because they layer enough features on top of email that IMAP and POP simply can't support. For the same reasons they don't offer IMAP/POP access, they couldn't "just" add the "bring your own server" feature that Apple asked for. The Hey iOS app isn't an IMAP/POP client with fancy chrome; it's designed specifically to work with Hey's servers and nothing else. Even if they shoe-horned an IMAP/POP client into the app to try and satisfy Apple, I think the user experience would end up far worse than what they've just implemented this weekend; and likely would violate other provisions of the App store.

HHalvi 6y ago

Quick Wins have never helped anyone in the long run but they fool you into thinking you can go on with it forever. When the entire debacle started I was suddenly an optimist on: - Mobile vs Web debate forcing gate keepers on giving equally competent choices for users & makers alike. - Apple relooking and rethinking their 70-30% strategy - Small & Indie Developers openly talking about the problems being at the mercy of Apple and Google's stores.

dustinmoris 6y ago

Just downloaded the app and there’s no sign of a free tier whatsoever. I can’t do anything with it, absolute shite if I didn’t know that it’s still in closed preview.

donarb 6y ago
They just submitted version 1.0.3 this morning, they needed the weekend to implement it. It'll probably be released sometime today.

i_don_t_know 6y ago

The cynic in me thinks this whole thing was a publicity stunt. I find it hard to believe that they hadn't thought of offering an in-app free trial. I wouldn't be surprised if they had it implemented all along in a separate branch and just waited a few days to create a storm.

manojlds 6y ago
That could have been the case if the app had been rejected. It was approved, and Apple says it was a mistake that it was approved. And that point, they can't know that bug fix updates would be rejected.
AnonC 6y ago
Considering DHH’s choice of words on Twitter, I’d be inclined to believe the same too.

merty 6y ago

Since the whole issue boiled down to "providing some functionality to users who saw the app in the App Store and downloaded" and completely moved on from the initial IAP discussion, I believe a good compromise for all parties would be to allow developers to submit such applications but simply unlist them, making them only discoverable via search or deep links.

manojlds 6y ago

So Android users have to continue to clamour for the invite? If they had done the same for Android it would have been reasonable.

pier25 6y ago

I'm glad they found a solution that was satisfactory for Apple, but this random email thing seems forced and useless. If you end up signing up on HEY will the random address keep working? Otherwise why use an address that will disappear no matter what. Obviously you can't use it to sign up on anything, or tell people to contact you at that address. It would only work for sending test emails between HEY and your other email addresses. I mean, who's going to do that? Is this really better for the end user?