3 ms·

I don't develop apps for the App Store so I don't know what it's like to go up against the beast. But Apples logic makes sense to me. If developers want their 3

I don't develop apps for the App Store so I don't know what it's like to go up against the beast. But Apples logic makes sense to me. If developers want their 30% back then they should develop a marketing pipeline that funnel users to their preferred payment method. If the 30% is at all worth it then it make sense to devise a way to capture as much of it as possible. On the flip side, it's not a free lunch. Developers will have to spend money to get users on boarded outside of the App store. With that said, I agree that 30% is too much and makes Apple look greedy.

Dah00n 5y ago
You mean like a subscription or selling in-app add-ons? Apple take 30% of that too. Trying to circumvent it by pointing to an outsider payment service is a banable offence. In the Epic games Vs. Apple mails have been shown that shows they even talked about banning Netflix because they let you pay on netflix.com. Someone smaller than Netflix would have been removed from the AppStore.
- threatofrain 5y ago
  You can have subscriptions without Apple taking a cut.
  - irq 5y ago
    True, but those subscriptions can’t be purchased through an iOS app. Nor can you direct users from an iOS app to your web site to purchase the subscription there. Both are against Apple’s rules. You have to just hope users figure out how to subscribe on their own. Or give Apple their 30%.
    - threatofrain 5y ago
      And the difference appears to be one of whether customer subscriptions were negotiated on Apple’s platform or yours.
  - Dah00n 5y ago
    Sure, but you are not allowed to say so. "Go to ourwebsite.com to subscribe" will get you banned.
- throwbacktictac 5y ago
  For example, ACME Developer could post ads that lead to a web-based signup flow (optionally collect payment info), then provide an App store link. Until the user provides payment info (via in App or payment site), use an semi-aggressive email drip campaign to steer users to the payment website. Some percentage of user will find (and use) the App Stores payment process. The hope is that those that due use the website make the campaign payoff in the long term.

Dah00n 5y ago

You mean like a subscription or selling in-app add-ons? Apple take 30% of that too. Trying to circumvent it by pointing to an outsider payment service is a banable offence. In the Epic games Vs. Apple mails have been shown that shows they even talked about banning Netflix because they let you pay on netflix.com. Someone smaller than Netflix would have been removed from the AppStore.

threatofrain 5y ago
You can have subscriptions without Apple taking a cut.
- irq 5y ago
  True, but those subscriptions can’t be purchased through an iOS app. Nor can you direct users from an iOS app to your web site to purchase the subscription there. Both are against Apple’s rules. You have to just hope users figure out how to subscribe on their own. Or give Apple their 30%.
  - threatofrain 5y ago
    And the difference appears to be one of whether customer subscriptions were negotiated on Apple’s platform or yours.
- Dah00n 5y ago
  Sure, but you are not allowed to say so. "Go to ourwebsite.com to subscribe" will get you banned.
throwbacktictac 5y ago
For example, ACME Developer could post ads that lead to a web-based signup flow (optionally collect payment info), then provide an App store link. Until the user provides payment info (via in App or payment site), use an semi-aggressive email drip campaign to steer users to the payment website. Some percentage of user will find (and use) the App Stores payment process. The hope is that those that due use the website make the campaign payoff in the long term.