19 ms·

Apple forcing app developers to implement auto-billing after free trial

302 points by benologist 6y ago

dave84 6y ago
This has been a rule from day one as far as I can remember. Nothing new here.
- programAgaib 6y ago
  So Apple has always been anti consumer and anti developer. Right, nothing new here.
  - thoraway1010 6y ago
    Uh - you realize they charge a PREMIUM and have some of the highest margins because they are FAR FAR more trusted than most android and other phone mfgs? You realize samsung is pumping ads directly to your handset - and these other folks never update their old devices. So interesting to read the HN folks trashing apple relative to their competitors even though they are almost certainly a leader on almost every trust based metric that matters to the average user.
Y_Y 6y ago
At this point Apple is like Walter White at the end of Breaking Bad. It's absurdly wealthy, but doesn't seem to have any purpose left apart from shoveling out more meth or iPhones to get more useless cash.
wildchild 6y ago
Apple is a scam.
TYPE_FASTER 6y ago
I would love it if subscription services would give me a heads up a day or two before the trial period ends, with a link to cancel.
blendergeek 6y ago
Here is the original Twitter thread that is screenshotted in that Reddit post: https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/1278048862746234883 https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/127804886274623...
thomasedwards 6y ago
Meanwhile... I’m fairly certain I’ve read that the EU and both Visa and MasterCard are looking at ways to prevent auto-billing without secondary confirmation.
- Jnr 6y ago
  I thought this was already illegal in EU. I guess there are still some things to be fixed. :)
kemayo 6y ago
Apple's approach isn't as bad as this title makes it sound. Mostly because they're aggressive communicators about subscription billing -- they send emails well in advance of any subscription renewal, telling you when you'll be billed, how much for, and giving you a link to cancel the subscription. Makes me feel this isn't them hoping you'll just forget and be billed. In fact, I'd suspect this is intended as a user-friendly feature. It means you had to be presented with the cost up-front before you began the trial, avoiding letting shadier developers do a bait and switch when the trial expires and the user needs to sign up again. (Not saying there aren't other ways this could be done, but...)
- itsdrewmiller 6y ago
  I don't think this passes the sniff test - if their trial doesn't require providing a payment method, how is Apple possibly protecting anyone?
  - bluesign 6y ago
    Cause the consumer thinks app is free or one time purchase, they may even not say anything about payment, till your trial is over. And you invested your time on a training, later surprised by the cost, but as you were invested timewise, you are more likely to pay.
    - Frost1x 6y ago
      I wonder which you're more likely to pay for: a subscription you intend to cancel or having something free shift to an expense? From my experience, even with due diligence and setting up calendar event notifications, I've missed a few subscription cancelations I intended. On the other hand, whenever I use something free, I always proceed under the assumption it can shift to a pay for service/product at some point in the future of unknown cost and assess risk accordingly. I don't think I've ever been surprised by a fee or lost time investment because of this. As far as one time purchases vs subscription charges, I think there's a better argument for this case. It should be made very clear up front during the purchase that there's a time subscription model and what services are or aren't included in that service. The model used in Google Play makes it pretty difficult to confuse what services are or aren't subscription based from my experience which seems reasonable (can't say I've looked into the details, just know I haven't been surprised by what is or isn't a monthly subscription).
numbers 6y ago
I don’t see why this is even a complaint... Apple sends users notifications before the trial ends and you can easily just cancel. I guess apps I’ve used already have this auto-billing implemented because I don’t think I’ve confirmed my subscription after the free trial ended and billing began.
- mariopt 6y ago
  How about using a trial and not having to worry about forgetting to cancel?
  - jquery 6y ago
    Nah, I don’t want an app nagging me to subscribe after I’ve already subscribed. That’s not a very “Apple” experience, goes against their philosophy of simple, clean design. Make it easy to cancel (which they’ve done). Perfect.
iandanforth 6y ago
The comments here read like people with Stockholm syndrome.
- berkes 6y ago
  There certainly seems a bias for Apple in here. What I really don't understand is why Some Random Hacker feels the need to jump into a thread and defend Apple, one of the wealthiest companies in the world.
  - mtnGoat 6y ago
    Wealth does not dictate right or wrong nor the need to defend it. Why would someone's income matter anymore then race or religion when it comes to choosing a side in a billing related conversation?
    - berkes 6y ago
      I mentioned "wealthiest" as indication for how powerful the company is. It can very well defend itself. Wealthy people can too. As opposed to minorities (race religion) or people without any means (poor, non-wealthy). But why do you bring race or religion in here? I was talking about a company. A company has no race. It has no religion. Well, maybe, seeing people in HN threads defending apple, it does have similarities with religions.
  - hellofunk 6y ago
    It’s because without the voice of reason to help balance things out, there would be a strong misleading conception that everything about being a developer on Apple’s platforms is 100 percent negative, but this is certainly far from the truth. There are pros and cons, I don’t think it’s necessarily better or worse than developing on other platforms. The advantages outweigh the negatives much of the time.
    - berkes 6y ago
      That explains one or two comments countering an attack on Apple with arguments. I see those too. But it does not explain all the anecdotal (I've never had o cancel. For me X is not an issue. I don't know anyone ever coplaining about Y) arguments. Or personal attacks. And so on. It really reeks like a tribal war. The scorched smell of flamewars.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bluesign 6y ago
To be honest this rule is for a reason. Onboarding people without price, then telling them about price certainly will increase your retention, but not the best case from consumer side. From twitter they say: “ We've experimented with auto-charging trials in the past and they lead to (1) fewer users trying the product (2) a huge number of refund requests by users who forget to cancel and (3) complete disbelief from those users when we explain that Apple won't allow us to issue refunds.” By they are also not showing any pricing in the beginning. If they would show try for 15 days free then it is X usd / month. It would be more honest.
- gizmo 6y ago
  If the issue is that app developers are not upfront about pricing then the solution is to tell app developers to be more upfront about pricing.
  - gumby 6y ago
    Exactly!
  - wool_gather 6y ago
    Apple does indeed have rules they enforce about this. Anecdotally, I see quite a bit of chatter/questions about App Store review rejections due to the wording or lack of billing copy, compared to other reasons.
  - bluesign 6y ago
    how they will manage? they will check every day your app behaving correctly? or is it easier to force trials to be on apple subscriptions, and don't have any problem.
dnissley 6y ago
I think I can give Apple the benefit of the doubt on this one -- it kind of seems like they just didn't even think of this particular use case (not auto billing at the end of a trial period), since almost all companies would prefer to auto bill at the end of a trial. That said, they should definitely allow this, especially if (as claimed in the twitter thread[1]) they don't allow apps to refund accidental subscriptions. [1] - https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/1278048862746234883 https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/127804886274623...
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  >they just didn't even think this particular use case (not auto billing at the end of a trial period) I don't think Apple's auto-billing practices are predatory, like many other companies are, but I'm not sure I can agree that they didn't even think of this possibility.
rgovostes 6y ago
Is it really that they are forcing them to implement auto-billing, or that they are forcing the trial to go through standard App Store mechanisms? Is it anti-consumer to make all subscriptions behave the same? Suppose half of apps managed their own trial period and half of them used auto-renewing App Store trials. Also worth noting it is really, really trivial to cancel an app subscription from within your Settings, and to see much of the trial period is remaining.
- warp 6y ago
  > Also worth noting it is really, really trivial to cancel an app subscription from within your Settings, and to see much of the trial period is remaining. I think for most people it's pretty hard to find. It's not actually in Settings. You have to open the App Store, click your face, and that screen has a "Subscriptions >" menu item. I don't subscribe/purchase that much stuff on iOS, so it always takes me a while to find it. EDIT: thanks for the reply, TIL it's _also_ in Settings :)
  - igorlp 6y ago
    You can also access subscriptions via “Settings > AppleID Banner > Subscriptions”
    - ascagnel_ 6y ago
      I think this was only added in the latest iOS release. That said, most iOS devices that can run the latest version are running some variant of v13.
      - ballenf 6y ago
        Every release since trials were implemented seem to have made cancellations easier and subscription status review more prominent. It's now to the point of almost being annoying in how many different places take you to subscriptions. But great for casual users, so I don't complain (except here).
  - 6y ago
codetrotter 6y ago
I support Apple all the way on this one. Having all trials work the same way is a huge plus in my book as an iOS device user. It’s not about whether this one developer would do totally free trial or not, it’s about complete confidence for the user that all apps work the same wrt trials.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  If that's all you wanted, then Apple could have defaulted to a customer-friendly option across the board like requiring a 2nd opt-in to transition into the recurring billing at the end of the trial. That would be superior in every way.
  - occamrazor 6y ago
    Maybe in some ways, but not in every way. Apple’s approach presents the subscription conditions in a standardized way at the beginning of the trial period and not at the end, i.e. before the user invests time in the app.
gardaani 6y ago
Apple has introduced an appeal process for these kind of rejections. They could challenge the guideline. "Additionally, two changes are coming to the app review process and will be implemented this summer. First, developers will not only be able to appeal decisions about whether an app violates a given guideline of the App Store Review Guidelines, but will also have a mechanism to challenge the guideline itself." https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-reveals-new-developer-technologies-to-foster-the-next-generation-of-apps/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-reveals-new-dev...
- saagarjha 6y ago
  I’m curious when that is going to roll out; at WWDC it didn’t seem to look like anyone knew how it worked. Probably because it was a new change?
jasonpbecker 6y ago
Most apps I use that have free trials implement it as a one time, in app purchase for $0. This doesn't have the subscription implication or the auto-charge, and has been entirely acceptable under the rules.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jgoewert 6y ago
Switch to Android?
- m3kw9 6y ago
  Into the fire
ryukafalz 6y ago
Is it just me or does this seem like it might be a blow back at Hey? They got their app into the app store by creating temporary trial accounts[0], but they still don't bill through Apple or accept signups through the app. This seems like a way to force them to do so. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/22/21298552/apple-hey-email-app-approval-rules-basecamp-launch https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/22/21298552/apple-hey-email-...
- burlesona 6y ago
  It feels to me more like a publicity grab by the app developer. “Hey” got an enormous amount of attention and 10 times the number of sign-ups they were expecting because they picked a fight with Apple and screamed about it really loud. Not surprising to see more developers try this approach.
m3kw9 6y ago
So you promised a 1 month free trial, and after one month you either disable the app, or not charge and let them continue their free trial. Either is allowed or makes sense.
- ryandrake 6y ago
  Does Apple now allow an app to start up but do nothing? Back when I was a developer, that was against the AppStore guidelines.
- john-shaffer 6y ago
  The developers can't choose to not charge or to cancel a subscription. The user must cancel. The devs cannot refund a subscription that a user forgot to cancel.
rideontime 6y ago
Worked on an app that tried the same thing - new users were immediately granted a free month of the "premium" membership on our own backend. The exec who came up with the idea literally called it the "drug dealer" approach - "the first hit is free" - and the user couldn't see the pricing until their trial expired and they tried to enable one of those premium features again, at which point they'd see the subscription purchase screen. That functionality was live for a few versions before we got an App Store reviewer who noticed and rejected us for it. At the time I couldn't find a specific guideline that disallowed the practice, but anyone who's spent a few years releasing iOS apps knows that's not necessary for a rejection. The guidelines now include these lines, mentioned by the OP's rejection: > Auto-renewing subscription apps may offer a free trial period to customers by providing the relevant information set forth in App Store Connect. > Apps that attempt to scam users will be removed from the App Store. This includes apps that attempt to trick users into purchasing a subscription under false pretenses or engage in bait-and-switch and scam practices will be removed from the App Store and you may be removed from the Apple Developer Program. Learn more about Subscription Free Trials. Our approach did alert the user that they were on a free trial, but the pricing wasn't related in that alert, nor were the premium features easily identifiable during the trial. I think "bait-and-switch" would be a fair appraisal.
- radley 6y ago
  Bait and switch would only apply if the app claimed to be "free" instead of "free trial", or if the "trial" part was obfuscated.
- taurath 6y ago
  One other reason is it gives people an opportunity to pay for the product off of the app store platform. Apple wants to be the one to manage your free trials on their platform, otherwise people could implement paywalls to sign up through a site that doesn't give apple 30% of revenue.
- xsmasher 6y ago
  > the user couldn't see the pricing until their trial expired I assume that is what apple is avoiding here.
j45 6y ago
I wonder how well this works to boost the revenues of app developers that don't end up making enough income and abandon their app.
exabrial 6y ago
I'm very happy to see anti-trust regulation coming down the pipe for FAANG companies for precisely like this
soco 6y ago
I believe such a business decision should belong to the subscription SELLER, as it's their business in line.
jkaplowitz 6y ago
Quebec's Consumer Protection Act makes it outright illegal to auto-bill after free trials for non-business individual customers based here, regardless of what legalese those consumers agree to. How does Apple's policy allow for that? They can't claim they can ignore Quebec law, as they have both an Apple Store and a corporate office in Montreal and already acknowledge another provision of the same Quebec law on their Canadian online store website. (Quebec has no problem with requiring payment information at the time of sign-up, per se, whether as an anti-fraud measure or to make it easy for the customer to subsequently opt in for paid service.)
- Marsymars 6y ago
  I don't know about the App Store in particular, but the approach of most companies in Quebec is to simply not have free trials. (e.g. and to have the fist 13 months of service cost the same as the first 12 months of service in other locales.)
  - jkaplowitz 6y ago
    What companies based in Quebec do the "add an extra month to the first subscription cycle" approach? I haven't experienced that from any local company. I've only seen foreign companies use that as an attempt to hand-wave past Quebec public policy here without having to program anything different, by simply rephrasing the fine print. For example, even though Amazon's systems have plenty of information that my ISP and my main shipping and billing addresses are in Quebec, Amazon markets 30-day Prime free trials to me and then notes in the fine print that Quebec residents get a 13-month first yearly cycle or 2-month first monthly cycle instead. But they also don't charge Quebec consumers for the 13-month or 2-month subscription until the end of the first month, and they don't charge us at all if we cancel during the first month. Smells just like a rebranded free trial with auto-billing. I'm not convinced Quebec courts would uphold that as legitimately different from a free trial with auto-billing if challenged. The law isn't in place just to force a change in language, it's to force a change in billing or pricing behaviour. This isn't that. Do you know if the compliance of this approach has already been ruled on? Additionally, the same law covers cancellation penalties and Amazon is noncompliant. Even after the free trial, Amazon is not supposed to charge a cancellation penalty more than the lesser of C$50 or 10% of the pro-rata remainder contract amount. So, with the annual plan here still costing C$79/year, cancelling right after the first charge should cost Quebec residents at most C$7.90, possibly less since part of the first charge is officially allocated by the fine print to the initial month for Quebec residents. In practice Amazon keeps 100% of the cost in this scenario. Article from 2015 discussing this: https://ricochet.media/en/519/amazons-quebec-users-could-face-surprise-bills https://ricochet.media/en/519/amazons-quebec-users-could-fac...
diebeforei485 6y ago
I find their "weekly subscriptions" to be shady at best. There was a good discussion of App Store billing practices and how they're abused in this podcast episode: https://www.relay.fm/radar/176 https://www.relay.fm/radar/176
subsubzero 6y ago
My experience was rather different. I purchased a constellation app (full price no subscription) and after owning it for a year the developer decided to go to a subscription model. I was never told about this until I noticed a monthly charge from apple. Super slimy behavior, I was pretty frustrated. I sent a request to have my charge refunded which apple obliged. In general I really dislike this type of auto-charging and it seems like it preys on customers who are not watching their statements very closely. But Apple is not incentivized as they get a cut of this money.
- JimDabell 6y ago
  That sounds extremely unlikely – apps don’t have the ability to do that. The only way an app can charge an in-app subscription is by asking iOS to prompt the user. This shows a system-controlled prompt telling you the price and that it is a recurring subscription. The prompt only allows you to purchase if you authenticate via Touch ID / Face ID / password, or if you have recently authenticated and have enabled the setting that skips this. Additionally, the App Store rules require that the screen that triggers the subscription also includes details on the subscription. Apple can and do reject submissions to the App Store if apps don’t comply with this. There simply isn’t an API that lets apps set up an in-app subscription without going through the system-controlled prompt. There isn’t an API that lets apps "convert" a one-off payment to a recurring payment. Apps have no access to set up payments themselves, everything has to go through Apple-controlled, user-visible prompts. If somebody is being charged unexpectedly for a subscription, there’s something else happening, e.g. a partner who knows your password set it up, or you just forgot. As far as Apple’s motives are concerned, they put a lot of effort into enforcing the rules around in-app purchases, reject a lot of apps on that basis, and err on the side of caution. I’v seen a lot of incorrect and overly strict rejections for apps that follow the rules. If Apple were in any way keen on accidental subscriptions, this would not be the case. They go out of their way in the opposite direction.
silviogutierrez 6y ago
Happened to my app[1] in the last couple of weeks. No big new features, it was just blocked for a minor update. So now, I lose control over the process and can't even refund the customer if they forget. And people won't try the app. People who try my app end up liking it, but needing to provide payment up front is a deal breaker for most. Moreover, technically it requires quite a bit of rework, as you need a user + IAP record together. And testing IAP is a huge PITA. I'm slightly encouraged to see this happen to a major app[2], to see if Apple responds or rethink this. It's terrible. [1] https://www.joyapp.com https://www.joyapp.com [2] Which, incidentally I used and love. And only tried because of the free billing-less trial!
cbhl 6y ago
One of the things I really like about the iOS subscription billing ecosystem is that there is one centralized place to see all my subscriptions. I hate that it's hidden behind four clicks in "Settings", but, once you find it, it's very nice to be able to have one place to go "oh yeah I should unsubscribe from that crossword app I haven't opened in three months". By comparison, for other sites, I have to go find my username/password in a login manager...
- unmole 6y ago
  Isn't it exactly the same with Google/Android?
  - Kique 6y ago
    Open the Play Store app and there's a Subscriptions page on the sidebar.
- machello13 6y ago
  For me, it's top-level in the "Apple ID" section in Settings — AKA just one level below the main Settings interface. Is that not the case for you?
newbie578 6y ago
Another day, another Apple anti-developer policy. It is interesting to see how quick the Apple fanboys are to react, and explain how every move Apple makes is "user-friendly" and incorruptible. I am just patiently sitting in the corner and hoping Microsoft enters the market so that developers have more alternatives. Would love to see developers abandon iOS, and then for people to see how "user-friendly" Apple is with only Safari and Facebook on iPhone :)
- machello13 6y ago
  The title is extremely misleading here. Apple isn't forcing the developer to "implement auto-billing", they're forcing them to use the system API for trials and in-app purchases (a feature of which is auto-billing). I won't argue auto-billing is user-friendly, but users being able to manage their subscriptions in a single place, not to mention having the subscriptions explained with a consistent language, and presented with consistent UI across every app, is definitely user-friendly.
BilalBudhani 6y ago
I think comments saying "Apple is doing this to provide a better experience" completely misses the point. If I'm creating an app (like a business) I should be incharge of deciding when I would like to charge my customers because I understand my target audience better than Apple at least. Apple is not just dictating how customers will pay but when they should be charged which is ridiculous.
- threeseed 6y ago
  As a consumer what you want is not important to me. What's important to me above all is a consistent billing experience. And no you don't understand consumers better than Apple since I spent thousands on the phone and a few dollars on your app.
zaroth 6y ago
I think there are valid technical and usability reasons for demanding that all products within a store all conform to the same billing policies. For Apple, providing a consistent user experience is absolutely paramount. They want all apps to act the same and bill the same. If the baseline/standard experience is sub-optimal, then they would say let us fix or improve the baseline experience for everyone, not deal with it piecemeal and leave the user guessing how an app will end up billing them. In this case I think some users are looking for a double opt-in in the case of a free trial, or at least a native reminder in the iOS user interface that a trial is ending and the first subscription charge is about to be run. For example, if the day before a trial expired, you could receive a push notification from Apple notifying you that the trial period is about to expire, and how much you will be billed if you do not cancel before the end of the day. Alternatively, the push notification could require active user consent before allowing the trial to convert to a paid subscription. The first option could be done by Apple with zero required action by developers, but since it's definitely going to increase the cancellation rate, probably developers aren't going to be very happy. It is customer-focused which Apple claims to be, but it's also messy/cluttered to be getting billing notifications The problem with the second option is that it opens up a new state in the state machine, and three new transition functions. Going from trial -> pending approval is a mid-state which would require some sort of shutting off functionality in the app or even preventing the app from opening, or reverting back to the unpaid / non-trial state. Now the user is in a new limbo 'pending approval' state. Then from there somehow the user has to either approve the charge or indicate that they do in fact want to cancel, so going from pending -> unsubscribed or pending -> subscribed are new transitions that would have to be coded for every app. The current solution is to simply provide a centralized place to see all your subscriptions and when they will renew and how much they cost, and making it single-tap simply to cancel them. I'm not sure a better way they can surface the Subscriptions UI other than within the App Store settings. That top option within 'Settings' always seemed misplaced to me, it looks more like a header than a button, and especially as it is encompassing "Apple ID, iCloud, iTunes & App Store" it's kind of a jumble. They added it into the App Store app as well on the top-right profile-picture button which leads to 'Account' and then 'Subscriptions'.
qwerty456127 6y ago
Trialware is broken by design anyway. While auto-billing is plain fraud (and is outlawed in some countries like Germany AFAIK), letting people to use a product for free during a single month is pointless - 90% times I install a trial version, forget about it, come back some months later when I have time just to find out I'm not allowed to try it any more because the trial has expired as a month since the installation has passed.
aabbcc1241 6y ago
Apple is a proprietary company. If you don't like their rules, you can vote with your feet.
CodeWriter23 6y ago
IMO this is a misread of the guidelines by the review associate. Ask for escalation.

302 points by benologist 6y ago

dave84 6y ago

This has been a rule from day one as far as I can remember. Nothing new here.

programAgaib 6y ago
So Apple has always been anti consumer and anti developer. Right, nothing new here.
- thoraway1010 6y ago
  Uh - you realize they charge a PREMIUM and have some of the highest margins because they are FAR FAR more trusted than most android and other phone mfgs? You realize samsung is pumping ads directly to your handset - and these other folks never update their old devices. So interesting to read the HN folks trashing apple relative to their competitors even though they are almost certainly a leader on almost every trust based metric that matters to the average user.

Y_Y 6y ago

At this point Apple is like Walter White at the end of Breaking Bad. It's absurdly wealthy, but doesn't seem to have any purpose left apart from shoveling out more meth or iPhones to get more useless cash.

wildchild 6y ago

Apple is a scam.

TYPE_FASTER 6y ago

I would love it if subscription services would give me a heads up a day or two before the trial period ends, with a link to cancel.

blendergeek 6y ago

Here is the original Twitter thread that is screenshotted in that Reddit post: https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/1278048862746234883 https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/127804886274623...

thomasedwards 6y ago

Meanwhile... I’m fairly certain I’ve read that the EU and both Visa and MasterCard are looking at ways to prevent auto-billing without secondary confirmation.

Jnr 6y ago
I thought this was already illegal in EU. I guess there are still some things to be fixed. :)

kemayo 6y ago

Apple's approach isn't as bad as this title makes it sound. Mostly because they're aggressive communicators about subscription billing -- they send emails well in advance of any subscription renewal, telling you when you'll be billed, how much for, and giving you a link to cancel the subscription. Makes me feel this isn't them hoping you'll just forget and be billed. In fact, I'd suspect this is intended as a user-friendly feature. It means you had to be presented with the cost up-front before you began the trial, avoiding letting shadier developers do a bait and switch when the trial expires and the user needs to sign up again. (Not saying there aren't other ways this could be done, but...)

itsdrewmiller 6y ago
I don't think this passes the sniff test - if their trial doesn't require providing a payment method, how is Apple possibly protecting anyone?
- bluesign 6y ago
  Cause the consumer thinks app is free or one time purchase, they may even not say anything about payment, till your trial is over. And you invested your time on a training, later surprised by the cost, but as you were invested timewise, you are more likely to pay.
  - Frost1x 6y ago
    I wonder which you're more likely to pay for: a subscription you intend to cancel or having something free shift to an expense? From my experience, even with due diligence and setting up calendar event notifications, I've missed a few subscription cancelations I intended. On the other hand, whenever I use something free, I always proceed under the assumption it can shift to a pay for service/product at some point in the future of unknown cost and assess risk accordingly. I don't think I've ever been surprised by a fee or lost time investment because of this. As far as one time purchases vs subscription charges, I think there's a better argument for this case. It should be made very clear up front during the purchase that there's a time subscription model and what services are or aren't included in that service. The model used in Google Play makes it pretty difficult to confuse what services are or aren't subscription based from my experience which seems reasonable (can't say I've looked into the details, just know I haven't been surprised by what is or isn't a monthly subscription).

numbers 6y ago

I don’t see why this is even a complaint... Apple sends users notifications before the trial ends and you can easily just cancel. I guess apps I’ve used already have this auto-billing implemented because I don’t think I’ve confirmed my subscription after the free trial ended and billing began.

mariopt 6y ago
How about using a trial and not having to worry about forgetting to cancel?
- jquery 6y ago
  Nah, I don’t want an app nagging me to subscribe after I’ve already subscribed. That’s not a very “Apple” experience, goes against their philosophy of simple, clean design. Make it easy to cancel (which they’ve done). Perfect.

iandanforth 6y ago

The comments here read like people with Stockholm syndrome.

berkes 6y ago
There certainly seems a bias for Apple in here. What I really don't understand is why Some Random Hacker feels the need to jump into a thread and defend Apple, one of the wealthiest companies in the world.
- mtnGoat 6y ago
  Wealth does not dictate right or wrong nor the need to defend it. Why would someone's income matter anymore then race or religion when it comes to choosing a side in a billing related conversation?
  - berkes 6y ago
    I mentioned "wealthiest" as indication for how powerful the company is. It can very well defend itself. Wealthy people can too. As opposed to minorities (race religion) or people without any means (poor, non-wealthy). But why do you bring race or religion in here? I was talking about a company. A company has no race. It has no religion. Well, maybe, seeing people in HN threads defending apple, it does have similarities with religions.
- hellofunk 6y ago
  It’s because without the voice of reason to help balance things out, there would be a strong misleading conception that everything about being a developer on Apple’s platforms is 100 percent negative, but this is certainly far from the truth. There are pros and cons, I don’t think it’s necessarily better or worse than developing on other platforms. The advantages outweigh the negatives much of the time.
  - berkes 6y ago
    That explains one or two comments countering an attack on Apple with arguments. I see those too. But it does not explain all the anecdotal (I've never had o cancel. For me X is not an issue. I don't know anyone ever coplaining about Y) arguments. Or personal attacks. And so on. It really reeks like a tribal war. The scorched smell of flamewars.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

bluesign 6y ago

To be honest this rule is for a reason. Onboarding people without price, then telling them about price certainly will increase your retention, but not the best case from consumer side. From twitter they say: “ We've experimented with auto-charging trials in the past and they lead to (1) fewer users trying the product (2) a huge number of refund requests by users who forget to cancel and (3) complete disbelief from those users when we explain that Apple won't allow us to issue refunds.” By they are also not showing any pricing in the beginning. If they would show try for 15 days free then it is X usd / month. It would be more honest.

gizmo 6y ago
If the issue is that app developers are not upfront about pricing then the solution is to tell app developers to be more upfront about pricing.
- gumby 6y ago
  Exactly!
- wool_gather 6y ago
  Apple does indeed have rules they enforce about this. Anecdotally, I see quite a bit of chatter/questions about App Store review rejections due to the wording or lack of billing copy, compared to other reasons.
- bluesign 6y ago
  how they will manage? they will check every day your app behaving correctly? or is it easier to force trials to be on apple subscriptions, and don't have any problem.

dnissley 6y ago

I think I can give Apple the benefit of the doubt on this one -- it kind of seems like they just didn't even think of this particular use case (not auto billing at the end of a trial period), since almost all companies would prefer to auto bill at the end of a trial. That said, they should definitely allow this, especially if (as claimed in the twitter thread[1]) they don't allow apps to refund accidental subscriptions. [1] - https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/1278048862746234883 https://mobile.twitter.com/downdogapp/status/127804886274623...

happytoexplain 6y ago
>they just didn't even think this particular use case (not auto billing at the end of a trial period) I don't think Apple's auto-billing practices are predatory, like many other companies are, but I'm not sure I can agree that they didn't even think of this possibility.

rgovostes 6y ago

Is it really that they are forcing them to implement auto-billing, or that they are forcing the trial to go through standard App Store mechanisms? Is it anti-consumer to make all subscriptions behave the same? Suppose half of apps managed their own trial period and half of them used auto-renewing App Store trials. Also worth noting it is really, really trivial to cancel an app subscription from within your Settings, and to see much of the trial period is remaining.

warp 6y ago
> Also worth noting it is really, really trivial to cancel an app subscription from within your Settings, and to see much of the trial period is remaining. I think for most people it's pretty hard to find. It's not actually in Settings. You have to open the App Store, click your face, and that screen has a "Subscriptions >" menu item. I don't subscribe/purchase that much stuff on iOS, so it always takes me a while to find it. EDIT: thanks for the reply, TIL it's _also_ in Settings :)
- igorlp 6y ago
  You can also access subscriptions via “Settings > AppleID Banner > Subscriptions”
  - ascagnel_ 6y ago
    I think this was only added in the latest iOS release. That said, most iOS devices that can run the latest version are running some variant of v13.
    - ballenf 6y ago
      Every release since trials were implemented seem to have made cancellations easier and subscription status review more prominent. It's now to the point of almost being annoying in how many different places take you to subscriptions. But great for casual users, so I don't complain (except here).
- 6y ago

codetrotter 6y ago

I support Apple all the way on this one. Having all trials work the same way is a huge plus in my book as an iOS device user. It’s not about whether this one developer would do totally free trial or not, it’s about complete confidence for the user that all apps work the same wrt trials.

hombre_fatal 6y ago
If that's all you wanted, then Apple could have defaulted to a customer-friendly option across the board like requiring a 2nd opt-in to transition into the recurring billing at the end of the trial. That would be superior in every way.
- occamrazor 6y ago
  Maybe in some ways, but not in every way. Apple’s approach presents the subscription conditions in a standardized way at the beginning of the trial period and not at the end, i.e. before the user invests time in the app.

gardaani 6y ago

Apple has introduced an appeal process for these kind of rejections. They could challenge the guideline. "Additionally, two changes are coming to the app review process and will be implemented this summer. First, developers will not only be able to appeal decisions about whether an app violates a given guideline of the App Store Review Guidelines, but will also have a mechanism to challenge the guideline itself." https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-reveals-new-developer-technologies-to-foster-the-next-generation-of-apps/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-reveals-new-dev...

saagarjha 6y ago
I’m curious when that is going to roll out; at WWDC it didn’t seem to look like anyone knew how it worked. Probably because it was a new change?

jasonpbecker 6y ago

Most apps I use that have free trials implement it as a one time, in app purchase for $0. This doesn't have the subscription implication or the auto-charge, and has been entirely acceptable under the rules.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

jgoewert 6y ago

Switch to Android?

m3kw9 6y ago
Into the fire

ryukafalz 6y ago

Is it just me or does this seem like it might be a blow back at Hey? They got their app into the app store by creating temporary trial accounts[0], but they still don't bill through Apple or accept signups through the app. This seems like a way to force them to do so. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/22/21298552/apple-hey-email-app-approval-rules-basecamp-launch https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/22/21298552/apple-hey-email-...

burlesona 6y ago
It feels to me more like a publicity grab by the app developer. “Hey” got an enormous amount of attention and 10 times the number of sign-ups they were expecting because they picked a fight with Apple and screamed about it really loud. Not surprising to see more developers try this approach.

m3kw9 6y ago

So you promised a 1 month free trial, and after one month you either disable the app, or not charge and let them continue their free trial. Either is allowed or makes sense.

ryandrake 6y ago
Does Apple now allow an app to start up but do nothing? Back when I was a developer, that was against the AppStore guidelines.
john-shaffer 6y ago
The developers can't choose to not charge or to cancel a subscription. The user must cancel. The devs cannot refund a subscription that a user forgot to cancel.

rideontime 6y ago

Worked on an app that tried the same thing - new users were immediately granted a free month of the "premium" membership on our own backend. The exec who came up with the idea literally called it the "drug dealer" approach - "the first hit is free" - and the user couldn't see the pricing until their trial expired and they tried to enable one of those premium features again, at which point they'd see the subscription purchase screen. That functionality was live for a few versions before we got an App Store reviewer who noticed and rejected us for it. At the time I couldn't find a specific guideline that disallowed the practice, but anyone who's spent a few years releasing iOS apps knows that's not necessary for a rejection. The guidelines now include these lines, mentioned by the OP's rejection: > Auto-renewing subscription apps may offer a free trial period to customers by providing the relevant information set forth in App Store Connect. > Apps that attempt to scam users will be removed from the App Store. This includes apps that attempt to trick users into purchasing a subscription under false pretenses or engage in bait-and-switch and scam practices will be removed from the App Store and you may be removed from the Apple Developer Program. Learn more about Subscription Free Trials. Our approach did alert the user that they were on a free trial, but the pricing wasn't related in that alert, nor were the premium features easily identifiable during the trial. I think "bait-and-switch" would be a fair appraisal.

radley 6y ago
Bait and switch would only apply if the app claimed to be "free" instead of "free trial", or if the "trial" part was obfuscated.
taurath 6y ago
One other reason is it gives people an opportunity to pay for the product off of the app store platform. Apple wants to be the one to manage your free trials on their platform, otherwise people could implement paywalls to sign up through a site that doesn't give apple 30% of revenue.
xsmasher 6y ago
> the user couldn't see the pricing until their trial expired I assume that is what apple is avoiding here.

j45 6y ago

I wonder how well this works to boost the revenues of app developers that don't end up making enough income and abandon their app.

exabrial 6y ago

I'm very happy to see anti-trust regulation coming down the pipe for FAANG companies for precisely like this

soco 6y ago

I believe such a business decision should belong to the subscription SELLER, as it's their business in line.

jkaplowitz 6y ago

Quebec's Consumer Protection Act makes it outright illegal to auto-bill after free trials for non-business individual customers based here, regardless of what legalese those consumers agree to. How does Apple's policy allow for that? They can't claim they can ignore Quebec law, as they have both an Apple Store and a corporate office in Montreal and already acknowledge another provision of the same Quebec law on their Canadian online store website. (Quebec has no problem with requiring payment information at the time of sign-up, per se, whether as an anti-fraud measure or to make it easy for the customer to subsequently opt in for paid service.)

Marsymars 6y ago
I don't know about the App Store in particular, but the approach of most companies in Quebec is to simply not have free trials. (e.g. and to have the fist 13 months of service cost the same as the first 12 months of service in other locales.)
- jkaplowitz 6y ago
  What companies based in Quebec do the "add an extra month to the first subscription cycle" approach? I haven't experienced that from any local company. I've only seen foreign companies use that as an attempt to hand-wave past Quebec public policy here without having to program anything different, by simply rephrasing the fine print. For example, even though Amazon's systems have plenty of information that my ISP and my main shipping and billing addresses are in Quebec, Amazon markets 30-day Prime free trials to me and then notes in the fine print that Quebec residents get a 13-month first yearly cycle or 2-month first monthly cycle instead. But they also don't charge Quebec consumers for the 13-month or 2-month subscription until the end of the first month, and they don't charge us at all if we cancel during the first month. Smells just like a rebranded free trial with auto-billing. I'm not convinced Quebec courts would uphold that as legitimately different from a free trial with auto-billing if challenged. The law isn't in place just to force a change in language, it's to force a change in billing or pricing behaviour. This isn't that. Do you know if the compliance of this approach has already been ruled on? Additionally, the same law covers cancellation penalties and Amazon is noncompliant. Even after the free trial, Amazon is not supposed to charge a cancellation penalty more than the lesser of C$50 or 10% of the pro-rata remainder contract amount. So, with the annual plan here still costing C$79/year, cancelling right after the first charge should cost Quebec residents at most C$7.90, possibly less since part of the first charge is officially allocated by the fine print to the initial month for Quebec residents. In practice Amazon keeps 100% of the cost in this scenario. Article from 2015 discussing this: https://ricochet.media/en/519/amazons-quebec-users-could-face-surprise-bills https://ricochet.media/en/519/amazons-quebec-users-could-fac...

diebeforei485 6y ago

I find their "weekly subscriptions" to be shady at best. There was a good discussion of App Store billing practices and how they're abused in this podcast episode: https://www.relay.fm/radar/176 https://www.relay.fm/radar/176

subsubzero 6y ago

My experience was rather different. I purchased a constellation app (full price no subscription) and after owning it for a year the developer decided to go to a subscription model. I was never told about this until I noticed a monthly charge from apple. Super slimy behavior, I was pretty frustrated. I sent a request to have my charge refunded which apple obliged. In general I really dislike this type of auto-charging and it seems like it preys on customers who are not watching their statements very closely. But Apple is not incentivized as they get a cut of this money.

JimDabell 6y ago
That sounds extremely unlikely – apps don’t have the ability to do that. The only way an app can charge an in-app subscription is by asking iOS to prompt the user. This shows a system-controlled prompt telling you the price and that it is a recurring subscription. The prompt only allows you to purchase if you authenticate via Touch ID / Face ID / password, or if you have recently authenticated and have enabled the setting that skips this. Additionally, the App Store rules require that the screen that triggers the subscription also includes details on the subscription. Apple can and do reject submissions to the App Store if apps don’t comply with this. There simply isn’t an API that lets apps set up an in-app subscription without going through the system-controlled prompt. There isn’t an API that lets apps "convert" a one-off payment to a recurring payment. Apps have no access to set up payments themselves, everything has to go through Apple-controlled, user-visible prompts. If somebody is being charged unexpectedly for a subscription, there’s something else happening, e.g. a partner who knows your password set it up, or you just forgot. As far as Apple’s motives are concerned, they put a lot of effort into enforcing the rules around in-app purchases, reject a lot of apps on that basis, and err on the side of caution. I’v seen a lot of incorrect and overly strict rejections for apps that follow the rules. If Apple were in any way keen on accidental subscriptions, this would not be the case. They go out of their way in the opposite direction.

silviogutierrez 6y ago

Happened to my app[1] in the last couple of weeks. No big new features, it was just blocked for a minor update. So now, I lose control over the process and can't even refund the customer if they forget. And people won't try the app. People who try my app end up liking it, but needing to provide payment up front is a deal breaker for most. Moreover, technically it requires quite a bit of rework, as you need a user + IAP record together. And testing IAP is a huge PITA. I'm slightly encouraged to see this happen to a major app[2], to see if Apple responds or rethink this. It's terrible. [1] https://www.joyapp.com https://www.joyapp.com [2] Which, incidentally I used and love. And only tried because of the free billing-less trial!

cbhl 6y ago

One of the things I really like about the iOS subscription billing ecosystem is that there is one centralized place to see all my subscriptions. I hate that it's hidden behind four clicks in "Settings", but, once you find it, it's very nice to be able to have one place to go "oh yeah I should unsubscribe from that crossword app I haven't opened in three months". By comparison, for other sites, I have to go find my username/password in a login manager...

unmole 6y ago
Isn't it exactly the same with Google/Android?
- Kique 6y ago
  Open the Play Store app and there's a Subscriptions page on the sidebar.
machello13 6y ago
For me, it's top-level in the "Apple ID" section in Settings — AKA just one level below the main Settings interface. Is that not the case for you?

newbie578 6y ago

Another day, another Apple anti-developer policy. It is interesting to see how quick the Apple fanboys are to react, and explain how every move Apple makes is "user-friendly" and incorruptible. I am just patiently sitting in the corner and hoping Microsoft enters the market so that developers have more alternatives. Would love to see developers abandon iOS, and then for people to see how "user-friendly" Apple is with only Safari and Facebook on iPhone :)

machello13 6y ago
The title is extremely misleading here. Apple isn't forcing the developer to "implement auto-billing", they're forcing them to use the system API for trials and in-app purchases (a feature of which is auto-billing). I won't argue auto-billing is user-friendly, but users being able to manage their subscriptions in a single place, not to mention having the subscriptions explained with a consistent language, and presented with consistent UI across every app, is definitely user-friendly.

BilalBudhani 6y ago

I think comments saying "Apple is doing this to provide a better experience" completely misses the point. If I'm creating an app (like a business) I should be incharge of deciding when I would like to charge my customers because I understand my target audience better than Apple at least. Apple is not just dictating how customers will pay but when they should be charged which is ridiculous.

threeseed 6y ago
As a consumer what you want is not important to me. What's important to me above all is a consistent billing experience. And no you don't understand consumers better than Apple since I spent thousands on the phone and a few dollars on your app.

zaroth 6y ago

I think there are valid technical and usability reasons for demanding that all products within a store all conform to the same billing policies. For Apple, providing a consistent user experience is absolutely paramount. They want all apps to act the same and bill the same. If the baseline/standard experience is sub-optimal, then they would say let us fix or improve the baseline experience for everyone, not deal with it piecemeal and leave the user guessing how an app will end up billing them. In this case I think some users are looking for a double opt-in in the case of a free trial, or at least a native reminder in the iOS user interface that a trial is ending and the first subscription charge is about to be run. For example, if the day before a trial expired, you could receive a push notification from Apple notifying you that the trial period is about to expire, and how much you will be billed if you do not cancel before the end of the day. Alternatively, the push notification could require active user consent before allowing the trial to convert to a paid subscription. The first option could be done by Apple with zero required action by developers, but since it's definitely going to increase the cancellation rate, probably developers aren't going to be very happy. It is customer-focused which Apple claims to be, but it's also messy/cluttered to be getting billing notifications The problem with the second option is that it opens up a new state in the state machine, and three new transition functions. Going from trial -> pending approval is a mid-state which would require some sort of shutting off functionality in the app or even preventing the app from opening, or reverting back to the unpaid / non-trial state. Now the user is in a new limbo 'pending approval' state. Then from there somehow the user has to either approve the charge or indicate that they do in fact want to cancel, so going from pending -> unsubscribed or pending -> subscribed are new transitions that would have to be coded for every app. The current solution is to simply provide a centralized place to see all your subscriptions and when they will renew and how much they cost, and making it single-tap simply to cancel them. I'm not sure a better way they can surface the Subscriptions UI other than within the App Store settings. That top option within 'Settings' always seemed misplaced to me, it looks more like a header than a button, and especially as it is encompassing "Apple ID, iCloud, iTunes & App Store" it's kind of a jumble. They added it into the App Store app as well on the top-right profile-picture button which leads to 'Account' and then 'Subscriptions'.

qwerty456127 6y ago

Trialware is broken by design anyway. While auto-billing is plain fraud (and is outlawed in some countries like Germany AFAIK), letting people to use a product for free during a single month is pointless - 90% times I install a trial version, forget about it, come back some months later when I have time just to find out I'm not allowed to try it any more because the trial has expired as a month since the installation has passed.

aabbcc1241 6y ago

Apple is a proprietary company. If you don't like their rules, you can vote with your feet.

CodeWriter23 6y ago

IMO this is a misread of the guidelines by the review associate. Ask for escalation.