4 ms·

The ruling stops short of opening up iphone to third party stores so not a complete victory for Epic. It is balanced take on the issue Apple is illegally restr

The ruling stops short of opening up iphone to third party stores so not a complete victory for Epic. It is balanced take on the issue Apple is illegally restricting customer choice while not being monopolistic seems about right. Apple will of course appeal this, however this is going to be massive for iOS store revenue, apple will be forced to drop rates or stand to loose a lot of developers from their payment system

Sylamore 5y ago
Honestly, I appreciate that I will finally be able to browse videos to watch in Amazon and actually be able to have at least a link to the Amazon site to buy them directly instead of having to jump through hoops like I would now where I go and search for what I was just looking at in a browser to buy or rent it.
- mintone 5y ago
  I think this is part of the case isn’t it? Amazon has been given a special deal whereby you can currently do exactly that on their prime app. I think it changed a year or so ago to allow that
  - waspight 5y ago
    Maybe on Audible as well? Seems to be possible to buy credits within the app, and I dont think I am using Apple Pay for that.
silisili 5y ago
Can people put 'free' apps on the app store, that then essentially ask for payment in app to proceed? Or perhaps, 'upgrade'? That would seem really annoying if every app started doing that.
- alex_young 5y ago
  Like they already do? This is basically Netflix's model I think...
  - rurp 5y ago
    What, you want small companies to have the same rights as big ones?! I personally think this ruling is great and that the fears about all apps switching to bait and switch models are overblown. There are advantages to using Apple's IAP and it will still be the preferred method for many/most customers and so most companies will still want to support it. The biggest effect will be putting downward pressure on the current fees. There's a lot of room to move between 30% and 3%.
- RandallBrown 5y ago
  Apple already restricts you from doing this in the App Store. Free apps need to have at least some functionality without paying. I don't think this ruling will change that.
- CivBase 5y ago
  I don't see why this ruling would stop Apple from requiring app devs to disclose when their apps require payments.
- cheschire 5y ago
  Exactly my problem with this ruling. What we'll probably end up seeing now is a million "free" apps for things with lots of hidden fees and costs, and now you won't have the apples-to-apples comparison directly on the search page. Awesome.
  - WA 5y ago
    This is already the reality anyways. Most apps have some kind of subscription with wildly different terms. They are not easily comparable anyways.
  - ilikehurdles 5y ago
    I've said this in a previous topic about the lawsuit, but with developers using third party payment methods, consumers like me lose out on iClouds convenient and simple subscription management. Being able to cancel services like HBO Now, Strava, or whatever I'm trying out for a bit of time with a consistent interface is a big win for consumers. Instead, I know the developers celebrating in the comments will happily adopt the trash UI patterns implemented by legacy media, like newspapers and satellite radio, where subscribers have to go through a form and then get in contact with support on the phone to process a cancellation. Apple's payment system puts the end-user experience first. I'm sure abandoning that will pad subscriber retention for the developers here, but I'm really, really not looking forward to this.
  - manquer 5y ago
    There is nothing stopping apps doing so already, only difference is Apple get a 30% of IAP or not. A lot of games and many apps do this already, download and perhaps few features are free, however advanced features/ removing ads / buying skins or mods in game requires you to pay . This is nothing new.
- ars 5y ago
  i.e. go back to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareware ? It seemed to work quite well back in the day.
sosborn 5y ago
This will be interesting to watch. I think this is a necessary and welcome development - but I also believe it will handicap smaller teams and reward the big players. The companies that have the resources to stand up payment systems will do so and reap the benefits, while the smaller teams will likely continue eating the 30%.
- bogwog 5y ago
  Why? A small developer could use something like Stripe or Paypal to collect payments, and enjoy fees significantly lower than 30%. They wont even need to roll their own auth system, as they could use sign in with Apple. What i dont understand is how this checkout process will look. As I understood it, devs would only be allowed to “steer” users to other payment options. Does this mean they cant include a non-Apple payment SDK in their app? So they’ll need to open a modal browser window to complete the checkout process? If devs cant ship a payments SDK, they’ll be at a disadvantage with Apple Pay, because the checkout experience will always be slightly worse. Maybe most users won’t care?
bogwog 5y ago
> apple will be forced to drop rates or stand to loose a lot of developers from their payment system In other words, they’ll be forced to compete.

Sylamore 5y ago

Honestly, I appreciate that I will finally be able to browse videos to watch in Amazon and actually be able to have at least a link to the Amazon site to buy them directly instead of having to jump through hoops like I would now where I go and search for what I was just looking at in a browser to buy or rent it.

mintone 5y ago
I think this is part of the case isn’t it? Amazon has been given a special deal whereby you can currently do exactly that on their prime app. I think it changed a year or so ago to allow that
- waspight 5y ago
  Maybe on Audible as well? Seems to be possible to buy credits within the app, and I dont think I am using Apple Pay for that.

silisili 5y ago

Can people put 'free' apps on the app store, that then essentially ask for payment in app to proceed? Or perhaps, 'upgrade'? That would seem really annoying if every app started doing that.

alex_young 5y ago
Like they already do? This is basically Netflix's model I think...
- rurp 5y ago
  What, you want small companies to have the same rights as big ones?! I personally think this ruling is great and that the fears about all apps switching to bait and switch models are overblown. There are advantages to using Apple's IAP and it will still be the preferred method for many/most customers and so most companies will still want to support it. The biggest effect will be putting downward pressure on the current fees. There's a lot of room to move between 30% and 3%.
RandallBrown 5y ago
Apple already restricts you from doing this in the App Store. Free apps need to have at least some functionality without paying. I don't think this ruling will change that.
CivBase 5y ago
I don't see why this ruling would stop Apple from requiring app devs to disclose when their apps require payments.
cheschire 5y ago
Exactly my problem with this ruling. What we'll probably end up seeing now is a million "free" apps for things with lots of hidden fees and costs, and now you won't have the apples-to-apples comparison directly on the search page. Awesome.
- WA 5y ago
  This is already the reality anyways. Most apps have some kind of subscription with wildly different terms. They are not easily comparable anyways.
- ilikehurdles 5y ago
  I've said this in a previous topic about the lawsuit, but with developers using third party payment methods, consumers like me lose out on iClouds convenient and simple subscription management. Being able to cancel services like HBO Now, Strava, or whatever I'm trying out for a bit of time with a consistent interface is a big win for consumers. Instead, I know the developers celebrating in the comments will happily adopt the trash UI patterns implemented by legacy media, like newspapers and satellite radio, where subscribers have to go through a form and then get in contact with support on the phone to process a cancellation. Apple's payment system puts the end-user experience first. I'm sure abandoning that will pad subscriber retention for the developers here, but I'm really, really not looking forward to this.
- manquer 5y ago
  There is nothing stopping apps doing so already, only difference is Apple get a 30% of IAP or not. A lot of games and many apps do this already, download and perhaps few features are free, however advanced features/ removing ads / buying skins or mods in game requires you to pay . This is nothing new.
ars 5y ago
i.e. go back to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareware ? It seemed to work quite well back in the day.

sosborn 5y ago

This will be interesting to watch. I think this is a necessary and welcome development - but I also believe it will handicap smaller teams and reward the big players. The companies that have the resources to stand up payment systems will do so and reap the benefits, while the smaller teams will likely continue eating the 30%.

bogwog 5y ago
Why? A small developer could use something like Stripe or Paypal to collect payments, and enjoy fees significantly lower than 30%. They wont even need to roll their own auth system, as they could use sign in with Apple. What i dont understand is how this checkout process will look. As I understood it, devs would only be allowed to “steer” users to other payment options. Does this mean they cant include a non-Apple payment SDK in their app? So they’ll need to open a modal browser window to complete the checkout process? If devs cant ship a payments SDK, they’ll be at a disadvantage with Apple Pay, because the checkout experience will always be slightly worse. Maybe most users won’t care?

bogwog 5y ago

> apple will be forced to drop rates or stand to loose a lot of developers from their payment system In other words, they’ll be forced to compete.