4 ms·

Yeah exactly. If it’s such a great payment experience they don’t need to ban others.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> If it’s such a great payment experience they don’t need to ban others It’s great for consumers. It isn’t great for companies developing apps.
- andreareina 5y ago
  What's lost from requiring that Apple's system is an option without banning others? If needed, add some language about how you can't make it difficult for someone to cancel, and cancelling service effective immediately (as opposed to at the end of the billing cycle) requires a pro-rated refund. I'm generally pretty critical of what I would call Apple's paternalistic attitude, but I'm perfectly fine with something along those lines. And we'll see how many people are willing to pay how much of a premium for the Apple experience and guarantees.
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > What's lost from requiring that Apple's system is an option without banning others? Not much. While I defend the App Store monopoly, I see no reason for Apple to have a monopoly on in-app payments. I think it's atrocious that they aim to take a cut out of every subscription payment (versus, e.g., an up-front commission). Was just pushing back on the claim that what's best for consumers would win in a payments free-for-all where app-developing companies (note: not necessarily developers) choose the payment provider.
    - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
      Nobody in my country uses creditcards because they're expensive and there are free alternatives. Competition does bring prices down we have much proof.
    - andreareina 5y ago
      > Was just pushing back on the claim that what's best for consumers would win in a payments free-for-all where app-developing companies (note: not necessarily developers) choose the payment provider. That's fair, and FWIW I agree.
- Hamuko 5y ago
  I'd be willing to bet that most consumers would appreciate lower prices more than the convenience of Apple's in-app purchases.

> If it’s such a great payment experience they don’t need to ban others It’s great for consumers. It isn’t great for companies developing apps.

andreareina 5y ago
What's lost from requiring that Apple's system is an option without banning others? If needed, add some language about how you can't make it difficult for someone to cancel, and cancelling service effective immediately (as opposed to at the end of the billing cycle) requires a pro-rated refund. I'm generally pretty critical of what I would call Apple's paternalistic attitude, but I'm perfectly fine with something along those lines. And we'll see how many people are willing to pay how much of a premium for the Apple experience and guarantees.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > What's lost from requiring that Apple's system is an option without banning others? Not much. While I defend the App Store monopoly, I see no reason for Apple to have a monopoly on in-app payments. I think it's atrocious that they aim to take a cut out of every subscription payment (versus, e.g., an up-front commission). Was just pushing back on the claim that what's best for consumers would win in a payments free-for-all where app-developing companies (note: not necessarily developers) choose the payment provider.
  - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
    Nobody in my country uses creditcards because they're expensive and there are free alternatives. Competition does bring prices down we have much proof.
  - andreareina 5y ago
    > Was just pushing back on the claim that what's best for consumers would win in a payments free-for-all where app-developing companies (note: not necessarily developers) choose the payment provider. That's fair, and FWIW I agree.
Hamuko 5y ago
I'd be willing to bet that most consumers would appreciate lower prices more than the convenience of Apple's in-app purchases.