9 ms·

I’m generally on Apple’s side in this debate, but on this point specifically I think Apple is in the wrong. It’s just silly that apps which don’t route payments

I’m generally on Apple’s side in this debate, but on this point specifically I think Apple is in the wrong. It’s just silly that apps which don’t route payments through the App Store aren’t allowed to say so. And further, it degrades the user experience when you download an app, which Apple has reviewed and approved, but that app doesn’t work without a subscription etc. which you have to just “figure out” how to buy outside the app. That rule has always felt over the top to me.

hokumguru 5y ago
Why would any store allow its products to advertise a cheaper price outside the establishment? What would be the point of even offering those products?
- kemayo 5y ago
  Well, in Apple's case, it's because having e.g. Netflix available on iOS devices makes people more likely to buy their very-expensive hardware. If people couldn't get the assorted free service-client apps on iOS, that'd be a problem for Apple. Even with the store metaphor, "loss leaders" to draw people in so they'll spend money on other things are a popular technique.
- PeterisP 5y ago
  Manufacturers can and do print some 'manufacturer's suggested retail price' on their products, and (in the absence of a specific contract prohibiting so) retailers can and do sell them for a higher price despite the company and product advertising that in general they are available cheaper.
- justapassenger 5y ago
  A lot of products you buy (especially ones that are huge recurring purchases, like lots of baby stuff) include coupons that direct you to the website to buy more via direct subscription. It’s insane that in my product I cannot tell people about ways you can purchase it. Defending this rule seems like Stockholm syndrome.
  - eigen 5y ago
    > A lot of products you buy (especially ones that are huge recurring purchases, like lots of baby stuff) include coupons that direct you to the website to buy more via direct subscription. is there a 15/30% fee for physical goods such as DoorDash, Amazon, etc? thought it was just for digital goods, subscriptions, etc.
- kwyjobojoe 5y ago
  Apps are not Apple products.
  - vineyardmike 5y ago
    And the products on the shelves of stores are not the store's products. Apple sells apps. Apps that were made by others. Walmart sells X. X that was made by others.
    - lexs 5y ago
      Apple didn't buy the apps from the developers, they provide a marketplace. Don't most supermarkets own their inventory?
      - vineyardmike 5y ago
        I think a lot of businesses "borrow" the inventory from the supplier and only pay them once the inventory is sold. It's not the same as a marketplace, per-se but considering you pay apple, download from apple servers, after apple does "QA" and follows apple rules, i'd say its pretty similar to a store that sources select products and provides the checkout infrastructure and distribution logistics.
mikehearn 5y ago
My 100% selfish take on this is that Apple's in-app payment flow is a pretty incredible user experience (double-tap a button + FaceID scan, and you're done), whereas being directed to a website and having to manually enter card details is a legitimate pain. I haven't pulled my credit card out of my wallet to enter my details on a phone in a long time. Haven't had to type my billing address, haven't had to find my CVC number. It's been nice! I'm sure Apple is very pleased with the profit margins they get on in-app payments, but I'm equally certain that Apple's desire to keep people using their payment system is just as much about maintaining a great user experience for users. Obviously the flip side is that some companies - Netflix! - then decide just not to offer payment in-app at all. That's also bad! But I don't know how to compromise on allowing apps to direct users to payment systems outside the app store without opening the floodgates to a million different payment experiences, which I (again, selfishly) would love to avoid.
- jollybean 5y ago
  "but I'm equally certain that Apple's desire to keep people using their payment system is just as much about maintaining a great user experience for users" It's absolutely and fundamentally first about the platform-monopoly and control. Apple has a considerable number of other 'bad users experiences' to point at to suggest that this issue, while might be a part of their legit product strategy, is way second tier to their control of the distribution. Finally, there's also a fairly heavy 'bad user experience' in blocking from doing the things the want to do. The answer to your question is actually in the economics: Apple should be able to charge a premium to using their 'great experience' commensurate with the likelihood that vendors will use it, given that premium. With a 15%/30% cut, vendors will not use the service. With an 8% cut (assuming they'd have to pay Stripe 4% or whatever), then it may very well be worth it for vendors. i.e. if the 'Apple Checkout' were forced to compete as an actual produced (even with it's entrenched position in the platform), the profits would be a measure of the value at least on some level.
- mikepurvis 5y ago
  I mean, the obvious answer here is that Apple needs to offer companies a reasonable revenue split (like, 5% or something) for these recurring subscription scenarios where it’s obvious Apple did nothing to drum up the business and is purely functioning as a (very convenient, admittedly) credit card processor.
dvcrn 5y ago
It's silly that when I want to watch something on Prime Video, I can see the title in the Prime app on AppleTV but can't rent it. I have to go to amazon.com on a different device, search the title, rent it, then it becomes available on the TV app. As a person working in tech I understand it, but it's still silly.
- late2part 5y ago
  I think it used to be this way, but now I can rent/buy things from Prime within AppleTV. https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-video-ios-in-app-purchases-iphone-ipad-apple-tv-change https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-vide...
tomjen3 5y ago
As a user I don't want to have to subscribe through anything but the app/play store. Whenever that happens I have no guarantee, at all, how easy it is to cancel, etc.
- benhurmarcel 5y ago
  I'm sure most services would have no problem letting you do that, if they could also inform you that you're paying 30% extra when choosing that method.

hokumguru 5y ago

Why would any store allow its products to advertise a cheaper price outside the establishment? What would be the point of even offering those products?

kemayo 5y ago
Well, in Apple's case, it's because having e.g. Netflix available on iOS devices makes people more likely to buy their very-expensive hardware. If people couldn't get the assorted free service-client apps on iOS, that'd be a problem for Apple. Even with the store metaphor, "loss leaders" to draw people in so they'll spend money on other things are a popular technique.
PeterisP 5y ago
Manufacturers can and do print some 'manufacturer's suggested retail price' on their products, and (in the absence of a specific contract prohibiting so) retailers can and do sell them for a higher price despite the company and product advertising that in general they are available cheaper.
justapassenger 5y ago
A lot of products you buy (especially ones that are huge recurring purchases, like lots of baby stuff) include coupons that direct you to the website to buy more via direct subscription. It’s insane that in my product I cannot tell people about ways you can purchase it. Defending this rule seems like Stockholm syndrome.
- eigen 5y ago
  > A lot of products you buy (especially ones that are huge recurring purchases, like lots of baby stuff) include coupons that direct you to the website to buy more via direct subscription. is there a 15/30% fee for physical goods such as DoorDash, Amazon, etc? thought it was just for digital goods, subscriptions, etc.
kwyjobojoe 5y ago
Apps are not Apple products.
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  And the products on the shelves of stores are not the store's products. Apple sells apps. Apps that were made by others. Walmart sells X. X that was made by others.
  - lexs 5y ago
    Apple didn't buy the apps from the developers, they provide a marketplace. Don't most supermarkets own their inventory?
    - vineyardmike 5y ago
      I think a lot of businesses "borrow" the inventory from the supplier and only pay them once the inventory is sold. It's not the same as a marketplace, per-se but considering you pay apple, download from apple servers, after apple does "QA" and follows apple rules, i'd say its pretty similar to a store that sources select products and provides the checkout infrastructure and distribution logistics.

mikehearn 5y ago

My 100% selfish take on this is that Apple's in-app payment flow is a pretty incredible user experience (double-tap a button + FaceID scan, and you're done), whereas being directed to a website and having to manually enter card details is a legitimate pain. I haven't pulled my credit card out of my wallet to enter my details on a phone in a long time. Haven't had to type my billing address, haven't had to find my CVC number. It's been nice! I'm sure Apple is very pleased with the profit margins they get on in-app payments, but I'm equally certain that Apple's desire to keep people using their payment system is just as much about maintaining a great user experience for users. Obviously the flip side is that some companies - Netflix! - then decide just not to offer payment in-app at all. That's also bad! But I don't know how to compromise on allowing apps to direct users to payment systems outside the app store without opening the floodgates to a million different payment experiences, which I (again, selfishly) would love to avoid.

jollybean 5y ago
"but I'm equally certain that Apple's desire to keep people using their payment system is just as much about maintaining a great user experience for users" It's absolutely and fundamentally first about the platform-monopoly and control. Apple has a considerable number of other 'bad users experiences' to point at to suggest that this issue, while might be a part of their legit product strategy, is way second tier to their control of the distribution. Finally, there's also a fairly heavy 'bad user experience' in blocking from doing the things the want to do. The answer to your question is actually in the economics: Apple should be able to charge a premium to using their 'great experience' commensurate with the likelihood that vendors will use it, given that premium. With a 15%/30% cut, vendors will not use the service. With an 8% cut (assuming they'd have to pay Stripe 4% or whatever), then it may very well be worth it for vendors. i.e. if the 'Apple Checkout' were forced to compete as an actual produced (even with it's entrenched position in the platform), the profits would be a measure of the value at least on some level.
mikepurvis 5y ago
I mean, the obvious answer here is that Apple needs to offer companies a reasonable revenue split (like, 5% or something) for these recurring subscription scenarios where it’s obvious Apple did nothing to drum up the business and is purely functioning as a (very convenient, admittedly) credit card processor.

dvcrn 5y ago

It's silly that when I want to watch something on Prime Video, I can see the title in the Prime app on AppleTV but can't rent it. I have to go to amazon.com on a different device, search the title, rent it, then it becomes available on the TV app. As a person working in tech I understand it, but it's still silly.

late2part 5y ago
I think it used to be this way, but now I can rent/buy things from Prime within AppleTV. https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-video-ios-in-app-purchases-iphone-ipad-apple-tv-change https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/1/21203294/amazon-prime-vide...

tomjen3 5y ago

As a user I don't want to have to subscribe through anything but the app/play store. Whenever that happens I have no guarantee, at all, how easy it is to cancel, etc.

benhurmarcel 5y ago
I'm sure most services would have no problem letting you do that, if they could also inform you that you're paying 30% extra when choosing that method.