3 ms·

>Developers can communicate directly with customers about alternative payment options. Customers have to consent and be given the right to opt-out. >Apple cede

>Developers can communicate directly with customers about alternative payment options. Customers have to consent and be given the right to opt-out. >Apple ceded some ground on issues of interest to developers but gets to keep (at least for now) key structures of its App Store, including the overall commission structure of the store as well as its prohibition against using rival app stores or in-app payment mechanisms So are alternative payment methods going to work? Or is it that this is only allowed after you direct a user to an external URL? Would embedded browsers be ok to process the IAPs?

Daedren 5y ago
It'll be as it has always been. Apps can't show or hint at alternative payment options. This is in regards to letting users know about such options outside the iPhone's scope (email for instance)
- TheJoeMan 5y ago
  I was hoping Apple was ceding some ground in this, it’s what puts the dirtiest taste in my mouth. If you go to even Walmart (a company very strict on their suppliers) and pick up some object, on the back of the packaging will be www.exampleproduct dot com. And on that website you could theoretically sell your product directly. What does Apple do? “Oh on that privacy policy we mandated you could click here and then here and then pay online - REJECT” So now people only know that Netflix can be paid online, but few think to sign up for DuoLingo or the like online :/
  - collaborative 5y ago
    Seems like a massive PR trick then. The only difference is that they will set up $100M for US devs. Probably the ones that brought the court case?
  - iNate2000 5y ago
    But Walmart wouldn’t let a vendor set up a kiosk in the middle of the store and accept payments with a Square reader on a phone, would they?
    - horsawlarway 5y ago
      Walmart has already purchased the items they're selling in their stores - in most situations. That's how distributers work - They purchase an order of items up front and then sell them at a price point of their choosing. Not to mention - In the walmart case, the user is free to go shop at safeway/publix/kroger/target/etc if they want. Where as with Apple you can only shop at the company store.

Daedren 5y ago

It'll be as it has always been. Apps can't show or hint at alternative payment options. This is in regards to letting users know about such options outside the iPhone's scope (email for instance)

TheJoeMan 5y ago
I was hoping Apple was ceding some ground in this, it’s what puts the dirtiest taste in my mouth. If you go to even Walmart (a company very strict on their suppliers) and pick up some object, on the back of the packaging will be www.exampleproduct dot com. And on that website you could theoretically sell your product directly. What does Apple do? “Oh on that privacy policy we mandated you could click here and then here and then pay online - REJECT” So now people only know that Netflix can be paid online, but few think to sign up for DuoLingo or the like online :/
- collaborative 5y ago
  Seems like a massive PR trick then. The only difference is that they will set up $100M for US devs. Probably the ones that brought the court case?
- iNate2000 5y ago
  But Walmart wouldn’t let a vendor set up a kiosk in the middle of the store and accept payments with a Square reader on a phone, would they?
  - horsawlarway 5y ago
    Walmart has already purchased the items they're selling in their stores - in most situations. That's how distributers work - They purchase an order of items up front and then sell them at a price point of their choosing. Not to mention - In the walmart case, the user is free to go shop at safeway/publix/kroger/target/etc if they want. Where as with Apple you can only shop at the company store.