23 ms·

This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

202 points by tiagoleifert 5y ago

CodeWriter23 5y ago
Modal before the Modal: “we are about to display a message required by Apple. We use a non-Apple payment provider that is also private and secure. Please tap Proceed to continue”
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- MBCook 5y ago
  That would never pass app review.
  - CodeWriter23 5y ago
    Are you hand waving or actually tried it?
- Lammy 5y ago
  This is a somewhat common pattern in the world of game console homebrew where the hardware boot process requires a specific “produced by or under license” screen to be displayed, e.g. https://i.imgur.com/PN3QQE4.jpg https://i.imgur.com/PN3QQE4.jpg
tiagoleifert 5y ago
From "Distributing dating apps in the Netherlands" (https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement/ https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl...) section "Displaying the in-app modal sheet".
- simion314 5y ago
  I did not know about this. Clearly shows how Apple will fight to keep it's abuses on each country individually and each sector individually, EU needs to intervene and make this global for EU.
  - sashenka 5y ago
    No thanks, keep this garbage in the Netherlands.
    - simion314 5y ago
      You are one that has issues coping with a choice screen? Pay with Apple or Pay with X, what should I do ??? "BrainException, more then one choice presented, plkease call Apple or GNOME you are using software wrong"
rvz 5y ago
Apple knows it is a scam and they are getting away with it by making the user experience painful for the user and developers, whilst still being 'compliant'. (And also collecting the 27% regardless. 3% goes to the payment processors) Quite an unsurprising string of negatives for everyone which frustrates the user to choose in-app purchases in the end. Deliberately making outside payments not worth it for everyone.
sschueller 5y ago
It's really time to do what needs to be done. I want the EU to force Apple and Google to allow 3rd party app stores with the exact same rights as theirs (auto updated etc.). Just like back in the day when Microsoft was forced to let users allow other browser when it wasn't even being blocked. Just theirs was pre-installed! The security excuse doesn't cut it, sorry. 3rd party app stores can be just as secure if not even more being smaller and able to properly vet apps. This closed eco-system hinders innovation. Apps that compete with apple or google routinely get blocked or removed.
- Arnt 5y ago
  A fine goal, and I approve strongly, but I worry that without a real understanding of what has happened in China, the outcome might be prices like China's (50% cut being typical, https://archive.fo/5dvsz https://archive.fo/5dvsz). And IMO, anyone who says "well, obviously the only reason…" doesn't really understand.
  - sschueller 5y ago
    I don't think so and this is where unregulated markets (although I am not a fan at all) would push the prices down. If anyone can provide an app store and that app stores fees are lower people will move. What Apple and Google need to do is work on assuring that Apps can be uniquely identified (which the can already) and validated so that you don't have a clone of an App in another app store.
    - Arnt 5y ago
      AIUI China has many mobile phone builders that all use android with minimal customisation, so they're basically interchangeable except for the prices of the vendor-provided app store on each. And apparently none of them use app pricing to undercut the others, unless I've overlooked recent developments? It's not clear to me why the Chinese competition fails at undercutting Apple/Google and the proposed app store competition would achieve that. I don't see the relevant difference. The unique identifier on Android is easily broken, BTW. I don't know iOS well, but on android it's simple. IIRC you don't even need an android development kit, the java tools will do. This fine web page lets you download a formerly welll-known app; someone downloaded the app, unzipped the executable (which is in zip format), resigned and uploaded. https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/app-quickpic-v4-5-2-classic-version.3204543/ https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/app-quickpic-v4-5-2-class...
curt15 5y ago
Despite Apple's warnings about "security" and "privacy", the 27% commission shows their bottom line is really about getting a cut.
drcongo 5y ago
I'm sure I'm in a minority here, but I think this is good. As a consumer, I want to be warned if there's something that's going to deviate from my system's norms, especially if it could take money from me.
- shultays 5y ago
  I think there are more than one "norms" when it comes to payment. Here in Sweden you can expect to use klarna or swish if you pay something online, i wouldnt be worried if they forward me those payment services.
  - emteycz 5y ago
    The point isn't the payment itself, it's about the management of your purchase. Apple App Store makes you able to easily cancel subscribtions etc - will I be able to cancel a subscribtion paid over klarna or swish as easily as I can cancel these bough through App Store?
- 999900000999 5y ago
  I actually agree with you. On Android, you can side load, but you're warned if you destroy your life via some strange binary you found on the internet, that's on you. On iOS, it's more than a reasonable to say you're using an third-party payment service which is not subject to Apple security. If your tech savvy, you know that this is just fear-mongering on Apple's part. And if you're not tech savvy, then stick to using Apple payments for everything
  - ninkendo 5y ago
    > If your tech savvy, you know that this is just fear-mongering on Apple's part. Apple has a policy where every subscription model that is paid for via the app store needs to be one-click cancelable, and from a single system menu that shows all of your subscriptions. That's an actual protection that the app store gives me, the customer, and which I might not receive from other payment processors... so it's not really as much "fear mongering" as you're making it out to be.
throwaway22032 5y ago
The whole ecosystem around Apple products seems to be a commitment to producing e-waste in the short-term. It's really bizarre. A 20 year old PC still works. It might be slow, but as long as it's 64-bit, you can run modern software. If it's older and 32-bit you might be struggling but it's at least theoretically possible. By contrast Apple seem hell-bent on creating this environment in which they control the software environment so completely that as soon as they stop supporting it, that's it, you now have a brick. I feel like this is the angle that needs to be pushed on harder. The payment processing thing is just one aspect of a wider system which is that they're selling a subscription to a device rather than the device itself because they attempt to control your use of the device end-to-end and will eventually remove your ability to meaningfully use it.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > A 20 year old PC still works A horse and buggy still work, that doesn’t mean the only purpose of cars is creating waste.
  - throwaway22032 5y ago
    Well, my 20 year old car still works. There are 50 year old cars on my road - our cars could probably go on forever (though they won't, within 10 or 20 years my city will probably mandate electric drivetrains). I think that newer cars are more likely to create waste for many of the same reasons. Of course we can't extend the timeline out forever, but we can at least take steps to not _artificially_ cause obsolescence, this is distinct from the way in which a car is inherently far more useful than a horse and buggy.
    - amcoastal 5y ago
      Planned obsolescence is the entire backbone of the American economy. We could get rid of it in one fell swoop, but then basically every company in the country would go bankrupt and then the world. A sad state of affairs. Perhaps incremental improvements and clawing back of Right-to-Repair etc. can give us some semblence of not being facebooters, but also allow our shit-tier companies to adjust.
xlii 5y ago
I think that the best way for Apple to conform to all those regulations would be dual-tiering the iPhone (which I know they avoided for years) in software or even by two box designs. One would be "casual" iPhone (called just iPhone or iPhone Family), that'd have all the safety warnings, walled garden exits notification etc. etc., and then there would be "expert" edition or whatever, where there would be minimal notifications + link to menu where one could disable those notification/customize more/allow for more unsafe automations and such. Maybe even with swapping one to another in a hard way (for example requiring resetting full phone and re-linking it again - so it cannot be casually by convincing someone to). I understand that for some people Apple is monopolist and closed garden, but for me my family this is exactly what I want. They don't care for security, 3rd party providers, iCloud storage options or how to not lose their photos and videos - and I don't want to be made to care for them for updates, configuration, security etc, and receive a call phone very single time they are confused by dialog (with state-mandated COVID app I spent ~40m with multiple people each on phone clicking them through the app). I always believed that if someone wanted to tinker and hack around Android was the choice, if someone didn't care and wanted a phone that "just works" with sensible defaults and lack of knobs they'd go for iPhone. What's the dumb option now?
- simion314 5y ago
  >I understand that for some people Apple is monopolist and closed garden, but for me my family this is exactly what I want. They don't care for security, 3rd party providers, iCloud storage options or how to not lose their photos and videos - and I don't want to be made to care for them for updates, configuration, security etc, and receive a call phone very single time they are confused by dialog (with state-mandated COVID app I spent ~40m with multiple people each on phone clicking them through the app). But don't be selfish. You and your family are fine today but tomorrow some Apple decision will affect you and only then will you start complaining. You need to just the option to leave the garden , nobody is forcing you , say if buying an audio book and paying with PayPal is 25% cheaper but you love Apple so, so much you want o pay more nobody would force you not to pay with Apple(Apple could demand an Apple payment option but should not force that they get the smaller prices like Amazon do). Same with applications, nobody forces you to install a third party App Store, Apple can make this setting hidden, make a clear video on why this is bad (they should be honest though and not spread FUD). The truth is that on OSX you don't see the MAc users installing like retards malware and on Android I did not see any major app refusing to publish in the Google Play Store, Unfortunetly the reverse is true, you can't find most apps directly on the source website but you are forced to install the Google Store. TL:DR 1 is not about security, it is about money. 2 nobody is forced to use anything else then Apple(no FB will not move their app from the store, they did not do it in Android and there is no intelligent argument they would do it for iOS)
dariosalvi78 5y ago
I wonder what's their reasoning here, it is obvious that this is will not satisfy anybody. Are they buying time? Or do they want to show that they are above everybody and don't try to mess with us (except if you're China of course)? We used to hate Microsoft for much less than this. I wonder how Apple can still have so many fans, even on this forum.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > We used to hate Microsoft for much less than this. I wonder how Apple can still have so many fans, even on this forum. Right. I mean I am an Apple kit user (albeit mostly the cheap/secondhand stuff these days), but you're right -- this is a ghastly display of entitlement and I hope it costs them.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  > We used to hate Microsoft for much less than this. I wonder how Apple can still have so many fans, even on this forum. If you build a lifestyle product, people can and will struggle to separate their own identity from the products they own. People take an insult on Apple like it's an insult on them, which is not a basis for healthy discourse in the slightest. We end up with apologist takes like "I actually like having 30% of my revenue forfeited to Apple because [they deserve it | I would have given it to them anyways | it's not that much | (YOUR EXCUSE HERE)]" that don't really do anything to diffuse the situation. Unfortunately, this dysfunction is not exclusive to technology, it's a problem with capitalism as a whole. The same "thought guards" exist with other lifestyle brands like Disney, Gucci, Ferrari, and anyone else who sells the idea of elitism to people who lack self-respect.
  - scarface74 5y ago
    So 60% of the US population have iPhones because it’s a “lifestyle product”?
    - smoldesu 5y ago
      Sure. The "blue bubble" effect is strongest in the United States, and Apple's most iconic catchphrase under Steve Jobs was "it just works". If that's not the hallmark of a technology product being adapted to a lifestyle product, I'm really not sure what is.
huhtenberg 5y ago
But, wait! It gets even better [1]: - Cannot also support IAP - Website links are all to a single URL specified in Info.plist with no parameters <-- !!! - Must submit monthly report to Apple listing EVERY external transaction All for measly 27% of the sales proceeds. A total steal. Apple's really jerking on the regulators' chain. I sure hope they continue in the same vein, because the fallout will be spectacular. [1] https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489599440667168768 https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489599440667168768
- jamil7 5y ago
  They also don't provide a view controller or something you can present to display the warning as they do with other things like this, you have to build the view yourself according to their silly specs... Phil Schiller needs to go.
  - sircastor 5y ago
    Hasn’t Phil Schiller gone already? I think Greg Joswiak is the VP in charge of the store now.
    - jamil7 5y ago
      Oh you might right, I thought he was still there.
  - bogwog 5y ago
    Replacing execs won’t solve this. Even if you put someone in place that isn’t an asshole, they’re still accountable to Apple shareholders and need to act in the interests of the company. If they don’t, they’ll just be fired (or maybe even sued for violating their fiduciary duties or something like that) Stuff like this is in the interests of the company. The only way to prevent it is for regulators to make it no longer in their best interests.
  - JimDabell 5y ago
    That’s totally reasonable. A new view controller would require a new version of iOS to provide that view controller, which would lock out all the people on older versions of iOS from the alternative payment methods. Any iOS developer can put together a screen like that in no time, it’s not a meaningful hurdle and it means more people can get the alternative payment method.
unfocussed_mike 5y ago
I am puzzled that he really appears to find it funny. I am a long-time Mac user and I find myself fervently hoping that Apple has made the completely unnecessary self-own that will finally help people forget the whole keyboard fiasco. This is the most staggering example of deliberate, bad-faith arrogance that they could have come up with. If Apple is now the kind of business that joyfully thumbs its nose at regulators like Facebook did, we are in the bad timeline. [edit to add: I don't expect them to like dealing with regulators, and I do expect them to loudly complain in press releases and in the FT and WSJ and on every business TV programme in the world. I then expect them to comply in a way that is productive, whereas this is just aggression, and it'll only leave a bad taste with developers and customers. If they want the same instinctive response as RyanAir, this is the way to go about it]
- _zooted 5y ago
  IMO the goal is to add friction to the external payment methods so that people just give up and use the built-in Apple payment method that they make insane margins on.
  - falcolas 5y ago
    Well, their "commission" on out-of-app purchases is 27%, so adding friction doesn't make a ton of sense. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30204604 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30204604 Apple's just being a dick here. - Written from my MacBook Pro -
- Grustaf 5y ago
  Because it can't just be that they actually want to be very clear to the user that Apple is not responsible for the experience?
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    When I buy an iPhone, I buy an iPhone using a third party payment provider. Apple do not smirk and infer that those payments are made through a provider they don't control. They take my money. They aren't just being "very clear", they are thumbing their nose at the regulator, and joyfully pissing in customer and developer chips as they do so. They are trolling the process. That is very clear.
jdrc 5y ago
Not bad, although it should be automatic, not like forcing the devs to do it, but i guess ios devs don't have any ego left. This will also train people to dismiss these dialogs blindly like they do with cookie dialogs.
evolveyourmind 5y ago
Imagine what average users will do after reading "This app does not support (Apple's) secure and private payments system". Clearly they would cancel the payment and probably uninstall the "insecure" app
alistairSH 5y ago
Meh, mixed feelings about this. I like Apple's payment system. It works, it's consistent, I can cancel things from a single menu. There are real benefits to me, the consumer, to using Apple's system. On the flip side, other payment systems can be a hodgepodge of unsecured, user hostile (cancellations), and inconsistent. There can be real negatives to using other systems. More so some systems that don't have a consistent UX (ie, don't bump me into PayPal's UX or similar and have a branded payment page instead). Basically, I'm not a fan of Apple being this heavy-handed. There has to be a happy middle ground. But, I also hate inconsistent payment workflows and loathe cancelling subscriptions elsewhere. Not sure what the right answer is, but as a consumer, I'm finding it hard to care about this.
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  The thing is, you don't _have_ to buy things through a third party and you don't _have_ to buy anything if you don't like the payment processor. The market will correct itself when shitty applications with shitty UX don't get any sales, unless it turns most customers don't care and people like you are the minority. In a perfect world, there'd be a "pay with Apple Pay (€2,60)" button right next to the "pay with iDeal (€2,25)" button, just like on most web shops. If you prefer to use Apple's services, you can pay the extra costs for the 30% Apple tax and lose nothing you have now. Apple are the ones putting extra restrictions on app developers, I'm sure devs would love to have the easy Apple option available right next to the cheaper option! To me, Apple's behaviour reads like they know they can't compete in an open market with their payment processor fees so they'll fight tooth and nail to keep any form of competition out. Their cut is simply unreasonable compared to any other payment provider, but of course they'll try to fight their billions in profits whenever they can. They go so far to force developers to increase their prices and even forbid them from showing the transaction costs in the checkout screen.
  - alistairSH 5y ago
    100% agreement on their 30% cut. I was speaking strictly from the consumer's perspective, assuming they would never be shown two different prices.
breakfastduck 5y ago
Not sure I see the issue here - if I'm subscribing to something on iOS I expect to be able to cancel it in 1 click from my subscription settings. But apparently it should be fine to circumvent that AND not alert the user to the fact that's happening.
- criddell 5y ago
  Is there a technical reason third part payments cannot co-exist with the requirement that subscriptions register with the iOS subscription manager?
  - breakfastduck 5y ago
    There's no technical reason. But why would anyone use it if apple didn't require it? That's a loss to me as a consumer.
    - criddell 5y ago
      It’s the exact opposite for me. I don’t care what payment processor I use but I 100% want the ability to cancel any subscriptions with a single click from the control panel.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
I think all the verbiage and display of these types of regulatory-enforced modals should be specifically defined by the regulations. Why are these any different from nutrition labels? In the US, nutrition labels always look pretty much exactly the same, down to the font. I don't have to look in 30 different places to find the calorie count. Compare that with cookie dialogs, where each website has its own different version so you've got to figure out which of 10 different options means "no, don't track me".
- jaywalk 5y ago
  This is not a "regulatory-enforced" modal. Nothing in the regulations said they had to add this nonsense, Apple chose to add it to make third-party payments as painful as possible.
AMD_DRIVERS 5y ago
Can we also acknowledge that Apple says that you must use a Payment Service Provider that also supports Apple Pay? "Your PSP will need to offer the following:[...] - Broad payment support including cards, iDEAL, and Apple Pay." This just seems evil.
- thesimon 5y ago
  And it needs to support iDEAL, with Apple doesn't even support for IAP. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631
  - AMD_DRIVERS 5y ago
    Oh my god it just gets better and better.
skrebbel 5y ago
To make matters worse, the Dutch translation of the mandated text has awkward style. It feels grammatically incorrect to me although I can't pin-point why. It feels a bit like This app does not supporting App Store's privately and secure-payment system I think they just ran it through Google Translate or something?
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  For the added insult.
disgu 5y ago
I'm probably in the minority here but I'm at a point where I'll simply not purchase any service if I cannot use the in app form of payment. I'm just done with everything else. If I miss out on something then so be it. Have you ever bought an Adobe subscription, ever tried to cancel a New York Times subscription? Or Audible where they say "Well, you can cancel but then we'll also take the tokens you've already paid for"? It's completely ridiculous. I'm so sick of 14,000 variations on cancelling things, having to click through menus, five hundred different things I have to take care of and all that crap. On iOS I can cancel anything and everything - without exception - the same way and in a few clicks. I like that and it's just something I got used to.
- tjpnz 5y ago
  You can get similar functionality to what Apple is offering through a disposable credit card (privacy.com and alike). Worst case you can take the matter up with your credit card company. How many times in a year do you cancel something?
  - cute_boi 5y ago
    Can't companies ban such cards? I think there are some BIN code etc… that can be used to identify them.
  - krageon 5y ago
    If you do this, your account will be sent to collections (because yes, you still have a payment obligation if you do not cancel). Those are people whose job it is to be so unpleasant to you you'd rather pay them and not eat, so this is terrible advice.
  - jim180 5y ago
    I had a situation where New Yorker was able to charge me, after I used one-time credit card (and thus invalid) that was issued by Revolut. The explanation was like this that, it was an “offline“ charge, which they let thru.
- vanilla_nut 5y ago
acd10j 5y ago
I do not want Apple to enable side loading, as it will enable people like employers, Government shady companies to build apps and mandate it to install for accessing some very important functionality, also will trigger, carriers provided phones to have non app store crap installed like in Android phones. At the same time i think Apple is sabotaging all of us by insisting on getting this steep 30% cut. As no government will allow such a huge additional tax on its companies apart from its national tax in long run. This is becoming a lose-lose situation for us.
- gruez 5y ago
  >as it will enable people like employers, Government shady companies to build apps and mandate it to install for accessing some very important functionality 1. can't tell already do that with enterprise provisioning profiles? 2. can't you refuse them access to your personal phone and demand that they provide you a work phone?
  - acd10j 5y ago
    Most of them don’t bother with employee provisioning profiles, also not everyone has sufficient leverage to demand a iphone with their employer.
aurizon 5y ago
Is Apple a virtual millipede? Does it have any unshot feet left. As Marco says = GOLD. I am sure this whole thing will rebound against Apple, as well it should.
username3 5y ago
If Apple didn’t do this, we would blame Apple for doing nothing to prevent dark patterns.
gigel82 5y ago
Who's your "evil empire" now? :)
ecf 5y ago
Consider the situation if Apple didn’t require this in some way, shape, or form. There’d be dozens of articles about your tech-unsavvy grandma and how they couldn’t unsubscribe the way they normally do, and would blame Apple for it. I, for one, would not want to deal with the trouble of teaching my parents that some purchases in the App Store are through the App Store, and some aren’t.

202 points by tiagoleifert 5y ago

Modal before the Modal: “we are about to display a message required by Apple. We use a non-Apple payment provider that is also private and secure. Please tap Proceed to continue”

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
MBCook 5y ago
That would never pass app review.
- CodeWriter23 5y ago
  Are you hand waving or actually tried it?
Lammy 5y ago
This is a somewhat common pattern in the world of game console homebrew where the hardware boot process requires a specific “produced by or under license” screen to be displayed, e.g. https://i.imgur.com/PN3QQE4.jpg https://i.imgur.com/PN3QQE4.jpg

tiagoleifert 5y ago

From "Distributing dating apps in the Netherlands" (https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement/ https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl...) section "Displaying the in-app modal sheet".

simion314 5y ago
I did not know about this. Clearly shows how Apple will fight to keep it's abuses on each country individually and each sector individually, EU needs to intervene and make this global for EU.
- sashenka 5y ago
  No thanks, keep this garbage in the Netherlands.
  - simion314 5y ago
    You are one that has issues coping with a choice screen? Pay with Apple or Pay with X, what should I do ??? "BrainException, more then one choice presented, plkease call Apple or GNOME you are using software wrong"

rvz 5y ago

Apple knows it is a scam and they are getting away with it by making the user experience painful for the user and developers, whilst still being 'compliant'. (And also collecting the 27% regardless. 3% goes to the payment processors) Quite an unsurprising string of negatives for everyone which frustrates the user to choose in-app purchases in the end. Deliberately making outside payments not worth it for everyone.

sschueller 5y ago

It's really time to do what needs to be done. I want the EU to force Apple and Google to allow 3rd party app stores with the exact same rights as theirs (auto updated etc.). Just like back in the day when Microsoft was forced to let users allow other browser when it wasn't even being blocked. Just theirs was pre-installed! The security excuse doesn't cut it, sorry. 3rd party app stores can be just as secure if not even more being smaller and able to properly vet apps. This closed eco-system hinders innovation. Apps that compete with apple or google routinely get blocked or removed.

Arnt 5y ago
A fine goal, and I approve strongly, but I worry that without a real understanding of what has happened in China, the outcome might be prices like China's (50% cut being typical, https://archive.fo/5dvsz https://archive.fo/5dvsz). And IMO, anyone who says "well, obviously the only reason…" doesn't really understand.
- sschueller 5y ago
  I don't think so and this is where unregulated markets (although I am not a fan at all) would push the prices down. If anyone can provide an app store and that app stores fees are lower people will move. What Apple and Google need to do is work on assuring that Apps can be uniquely identified (which the can already) and validated so that you don't have a clone of an App in another app store.
  - Arnt 5y ago
    AIUI China has many mobile phone builders that all use android with minimal customisation, so they're basically interchangeable except for the prices of the vendor-provided app store on each. And apparently none of them use app pricing to undercut the others, unless I've overlooked recent developments? It's not clear to me why the Chinese competition fails at undercutting Apple/Google and the proposed app store competition would achieve that. I don't see the relevant difference. The unique identifier on Android is easily broken, BTW. I don't know iOS well, but on android it's simple. IIRC you don't even need an android development kit, the java tools will do. This fine web page lets you download a formerly welll-known app; someone downloaded the app, unzipped the executable (which is in zip format), resigned and uploaded. https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/app-quickpic-v4-5-2-classic-version.3204543/ https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/app-quickpic-v4-5-2-class...

curt15 5y ago

Despite Apple's warnings about "security" and "privacy", the 27% commission shows their bottom line is really about getting a cut.

drcongo 5y ago

I'm sure I'm in a minority here, but I think this is good. As a consumer, I want to be warned if there's something that's going to deviate from my system's norms, especially if it could take money from me.

shultays 5y ago
I think there are more than one "norms" when it comes to payment. Here in Sweden you can expect to use klarna or swish if you pay something online, i wouldnt be worried if they forward me those payment services.
- emteycz 5y ago
  The point isn't the payment itself, it's about the management of your purchase. Apple App Store makes you able to easily cancel subscribtions etc - will I be able to cancel a subscribtion paid over klarna or swish as easily as I can cancel these bough through App Store?
999900000999 5y ago
I actually agree with you. On Android, you can side load, but you're warned if you destroy your life via some strange binary you found on the internet, that's on you. On iOS, it's more than a reasonable to say you're using an third-party payment service which is not subject to Apple security. If your tech savvy, you know that this is just fear-mongering on Apple's part. And if you're not tech savvy, then stick to using Apple payments for everything
- ninkendo 5y ago
  > If your tech savvy, you know that this is just fear-mongering on Apple's part. Apple has a policy where every subscription model that is paid for via the app store needs to be one-click cancelable, and from a single system menu that shows all of your subscriptions. That's an actual protection that the app store gives me, the customer, and which I might not receive from other payment processors... so it's not really as much "fear mongering" as you're making it out to be.

throwaway22032 5y ago

The whole ecosystem around Apple products seems to be a commitment to producing e-waste in the short-term. It's really bizarre. A 20 year old PC still works. It might be slow, but as long as it's 64-bit, you can run modern software. If it's older and 32-bit you might be struggling but it's at least theoretically possible. By contrast Apple seem hell-bent on creating this environment in which they control the software environment so completely that as soon as they stop supporting it, that's it, you now have a brick. I feel like this is the angle that needs to be pushed on harder. The payment processing thing is just one aspect of a wider system which is that they're selling a subscription to a device rather than the device itself because they attempt to control your use of the device end-to-end and will eventually remove your ability to meaningfully use it.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> A 20 year old PC still works A horse and buggy still work, that doesn’t mean the only purpose of cars is creating waste.
- throwaway22032 5y ago
  Well, my 20 year old car still works. There are 50 year old cars on my road - our cars could probably go on forever (though they won't, within 10 or 20 years my city will probably mandate electric drivetrains). I think that newer cars are more likely to create waste for many of the same reasons. Of course we can't extend the timeline out forever, but we can at least take steps to not _artificially_ cause obsolescence, this is distinct from the way in which a car is inherently far more useful than a horse and buggy.
  - amcoastal 5y ago
    Planned obsolescence is the entire backbone of the American economy. We could get rid of it in one fell swoop, but then basically every company in the country would go bankrupt and then the world. A sad state of affairs. Perhaps incremental improvements and clawing back of Right-to-Repair etc. can give us some semblence of not being facebooters, but also allow our shit-tier companies to adjust.

xlii 5y ago

I think that the best way for Apple to conform to all those regulations would be dual-tiering the iPhone (which I know they avoided for years) in software or even by two box designs. One would be "casual" iPhone (called just iPhone or iPhone Family), that'd have all the safety warnings, walled garden exits notification etc. etc., and then there would be "expert" edition or whatever, where there would be minimal notifications + link to menu where one could disable those notification/customize more/allow for more unsafe automations and such. Maybe even with swapping one to another in a hard way (for example requiring resetting full phone and re-linking it again - so it cannot be casually by convincing someone to). I understand that for some people Apple is monopolist and closed garden, but for me my family this is exactly what I want. They don't care for security, 3rd party providers, iCloud storage options or how to not lose their photos and videos - and I don't want to be made to care for them for updates, configuration, security etc, and receive a call phone very single time they are confused by dialog (with state-mandated COVID app I spent ~40m with multiple people each on phone clicking them through the app). I always believed that if someone wanted to tinker and hack around Android was the choice, if someone didn't care and wanted a phone that "just works" with sensible defaults and lack of knobs they'd go for iPhone. What's the dumb option now?

simion314 5y ago
>I understand that for some people Apple is monopolist and closed garden, but for me my family this is exactly what I want. They don't care for security, 3rd party providers, iCloud storage options or how to not lose their photos and videos - and I don't want to be made to care for them for updates, configuration, security etc, and receive a call phone very single time they are confused by dialog (with state-mandated COVID app I spent ~40m with multiple people each on phone clicking them through the app). But don't be selfish. You and your family are fine today but tomorrow some Apple decision will affect you and only then will you start complaining. You need to just the option to leave the garden , nobody is forcing you , say if buying an audio book and paying with PayPal is 25% cheaper but you love Apple so, so much you want o pay more nobody would force you not to pay with Apple(Apple could demand an Apple payment option but should not force that they get the smaller prices like Amazon do). Same with applications, nobody forces you to install a third party App Store, Apple can make this setting hidden, make a clear video on why this is bad (they should be honest though and not spread FUD). The truth is that on OSX you don't see the MAc users installing like retards malware and on Android I did not see any major app refusing to publish in the Google Play Store, Unfortunetly the reverse is true, you can't find most apps directly on the source website but you are forced to install the Google Store. TL:DR 1 is not about security, it is about money. 2 nobody is forced to use anything else then Apple(no FB will not move their app from the store, they did not do it in Android and there is no intelligent argument they would do it for iOS)

dariosalvi78 5y ago

I wonder what's their reasoning here, it is obvious that this is will not satisfy anybody. Are they buying time? Or do they want to show that they are above everybody and don't try to mess with us (except if you're China of course)? We used to hate Microsoft for much less than this. I wonder how Apple can still have so many fans, even on this forum.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
> We used to hate Microsoft for much less than this. I wonder how Apple can still have so many fans, even on this forum. Right. I mean I am an Apple kit user (albeit mostly the cheap/secondhand stuff these days), but you're right -- this is a ghastly display of entitlement and I hope it costs them.
smoldesu 5y ago
> We used to hate Microsoft for much less than this. I wonder how Apple can still have so many fans, even on this forum. If you build a lifestyle product, people can and will struggle to separate their own identity from the products they own. People take an insult on Apple like it's an insult on them, which is not a basis for healthy discourse in the slightest. We end up with apologist takes like "I actually like having 30% of my revenue forfeited to Apple because [they deserve it | I would have given it to them anyways | it's not that much | (YOUR EXCUSE HERE)]" that don't really do anything to diffuse the situation. Unfortunately, this dysfunction is not exclusive to technology, it's a problem with capitalism as a whole. The same "thought guards" exist with other lifestyle brands like Disney, Gucci, Ferrari, and anyone else who sells the idea of elitism to people who lack self-respect.
- scarface74 5y ago
  So 60% of the US population have iPhones because it’s a “lifestyle product”?
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    Sure. The "blue bubble" effect is strongest in the United States, and Apple's most iconic catchphrase under Steve Jobs was "it just works". If that's not the hallmark of a technology product being adapted to a lifestyle product, I'm really not sure what is.

huhtenberg 5y ago

But, wait! It gets even better [1]: - Cannot also support IAP - Website links are all to a single URL specified in Info.plist with no parameters <-- !!! - Must submit monthly report to Apple listing EVERY external transaction All for measly 27% of the sales proceeds. A total steal. Apple's really jerking on the regulators' chain. I sure hope they continue in the same vein, because the fallout will be spectacular. [1] https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489599440667168768 https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/1489599440667168768

jamil7 5y ago
They also don't provide a view controller or something you can present to display the warning as they do with other things like this, you have to build the view yourself according to their silly specs... Phil Schiller needs to go.
- sircastor 5y ago
  Hasn’t Phil Schiller gone already? I think Greg Joswiak is the VP in charge of the store now.
  - jamil7 5y ago
    Oh you might right, I thought he was still there.
- bogwog 5y ago
  Replacing execs won’t solve this. Even if you put someone in place that isn’t an asshole, they’re still accountable to Apple shareholders and need to act in the interests of the company. If they don’t, they’ll just be fired (or maybe even sued for violating their fiduciary duties or something like that) Stuff like this is in the interests of the company. The only way to prevent it is for regulators to make it no longer in their best interests.
- JimDabell 5y ago
  That’s totally reasonable. A new view controller would require a new version of iOS to provide that view controller, which would lock out all the people on older versions of iOS from the alternative payment methods. Any iOS developer can put together a screen like that in no time, it’s not a meaningful hurdle and it means more people can get the alternative payment method.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago

I am puzzled that he really appears to find it funny. I am a long-time Mac user and I find myself fervently hoping that Apple has made the completely unnecessary self-own that will finally help people forget the whole keyboard fiasco. This is the most staggering example of deliberate, bad-faith arrogance that they could have come up with. If Apple is now the kind of business that joyfully thumbs its nose at regulators like Facebook did, we are in the bad timeline. [edit to add: I don't expect them to like dealing with regulators, and I do expect them to loudly complain in press releases and in the FT and WSJ and on every business TV programme in the world. I then expect them to comply in a way that is productive, whereas this is just aggression, and it'll only leave a bad taste with developers and customers. If they want the same instinctive response as RyanAir, this is the way to go about it]

_zooted 5y ago
IMO the goal is to add friction to the external payment methods so that people just give up and use the built-in Apple payment method that they make insane margins on.
- falcolas 5y ago
  Well, their "commission" on out-of-app purchases is 27%, so adding friction doesn't make a ton of sense. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30204604 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30204604 Apple's just being a dick here. - Written from my MacBook Pro -
Grustaf 5y ago
Because it can't just be that they actually want to be very clear to the user that Apple is not responsible for the experience?
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  When I buy an iPhone, I buy an iPhone using a third party payment provider. Apple do not smirk and infer that those payments are made through a provider they don't control. They take my money. They aren't just being "very clear", they are thumbing their nose at the regulator, and joyfully pissing in customer and developer chips as they do so. They are trolling the process. That is very clear.

jdrc 5y ago

Not bad, although it should be automatic, not like forcing the devs to do it, but i guess ios devs don't have any ego left. This will also train people to dismiss these dialogs blindly like they do with cookie dialogs.

evolveyourmind 5y ago

Imagine what average users will do after reading "This app does not support (Apple's) secure and private payments system". Clearly they would cancel the payment and probably uninstall the "insecure" app

alistairSH 5y ago

Meh, mixed feelings about this. I like Apple's payment system. It works, it's consistent, I can cancel things from a single menu. There are real benefits to me, the consumer, to using Apple's system. On the flip side, other payment systems can be a hodgepodge of unsecured, user hostile (cancellations), and inconsistent. There can be real negatives to using other systems. More so some systems that don't have a consistent UX (ie, don't bump me into PayPal's UX or similar and have a branded payment page instead). Basically, I'm not a fan of Apple being this heavy-handed. There has to be a happy middle ground. But, I also hate inconsistent payment workflows and loathe cancelling subscriptions elsewhere. Not sure what the right answer is, but as a consumer, I'm finding it hard to care about this.

jeroenhd 5y ago
The thing is, you don't _have_ to buy things through a third party and you don't _have_ to buy anything if you don't like the payment processor. The market will correct itself when shitty applications with shitty UX don't get any sales, unless it turns most customers don't care and people like you are the minority. In a perfect world, there'd be a "pay with Apple Pay (€2,60)" button right next to the "pay with iDeal (€2,25)" button, just like on most web shops. If you prefer to use Apple's services, you can pay the extra costs for the 30% Apple tax and lose nothing you have now. Apple are the ones putting extra restrictions on app developers, I'm sure devs would love to have the easy Apple option available right next to the cheaper option! To me, Apple's behaviour reads like they know they can't compete in an open market with their payment processor fees so they'll fight tooth and nail to keep any form of competition out. Their cut is simply unreasonable compared to any other payment provider, but of course they'll try to fight their billions in profits whenever they can. They go so far to force developers to increase their prices and even forbid them from showing the transaction costs in the checkout screen.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  100% agreement on their 30% cut. I was speaking strictly from the consumer's perspective, assuming they would never be shown two different prices.

breakfastduck 5y ago

Not sure I see the issue here - if I'm subscribing to something on iOS I expect to be able to cancel it in 1 click from my subscription settings. But apparently it should be fine to circumvent that AND not alert the user to the fact that's happening.

criddell 5y ago
Is there a technical reason third part payments cannot co-exist with the requirement that subscriptions register with the iOS subscription manager?
- breakfastduck 5y ago
  There's no technical reason. But why would anyone use it if apple didn't require it? That's a loss to me as a consumer.
  - criddell 5y ago
    It’s the exact opposite for me. I don’t care what payment processor I use but I 100% want the ability to cancel any subscriptions with a single click from the control panel.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

I think all the verbiage and display of these types of regulatory-enforced modals should be specifically defined by the regulations. Why are these any different from nutrition labels? In the US, nutrition labels always look pretty much exactly the same, down to the font. I don't have to look in 30 different places to find the calorie count. Compare that with cookie dialogs, where each website has its own different version so you've got to figure out which of 10 different options means "no, don't track me".

jaywalk 5y ago
This is not a "regulatory-enforced" modal. Nothing in the regulations said they had to add this nonsense, Apple chose to add it to make third-party payments as painful as possible.

AMD_DRIVERS 5y ago

Can we also acknowledge that Apple says that you must use a Payment Service Provider that also supports Apple Pay? "Your PSP will need to offer the following:[...] - Broad payment support including cards, iDEAL, and Apple Pay." This just seems evil.

thesimon 5y ago
And it needs to support iDEAL, with Apple doesn't even support for IAP. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631
- AMD_DRIVERS 5y ago
  Oh my god it just gets better and better.

skrebbel 5y ago

To make matters worse, the Dutch translation of the mandated text has awkward style. It feels grammatically incorrect to me although I can't pin-point why. It feels a bit like This app does not supporting App Store's privately and secure-payment system I think they just ran it through Google Translate or something?

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
For the added insult.

disgu 5y ago

I'm probably in the minority here but I'm at a point where I'll simply not purchase any service if I cannot use the in app form of payment. I'm just done with everything else. If I miss out on something then so be it. Have you ever bought an Adobe subscription, ever tried to cancel a New York Times subscription? Or Audible where they say "Well, you can cancel but then we'll also take the tokens you've already paid for"? It's completely ridiculous. I'm so sick of 14,000 variations on cancelling things, having to click through menus, five hundred different things I have to take care of and all that crap. On iOS I can cancel anything and everything - without exception - the same way and in a few clicks. I like that and it's just something I got used to.

tjpnz 5y ago
You can get similar functionality to what Apple is offering through a disposable credit card (privacy.com and alike). Worst case you can take the matter up with your credit card company. How many times in a year do you cancel something?
- cute_boi 5y ago
  Can't companies ban such cards? I think there are some BIN code etc… that can be used to identify them.
- krageon 5y ago
  If you do this, your account will be sent to collections (because yes, you still have a payment obligation if you do not cancel). Those are people whose job it is to be so unpleasant to you you'd rather pay them and not eat, so this is terrible advice.
- jim180 5y ago
  I had a situation where New Yorker was able to charge me, after I used one-time credit card (and thus invalid) that was issued by Revolut. The explanation was like this that, it was an “offline“ charge, which they let thru.
vanilla_nut 5y ago

acd10j 5y ago

I do not want Apple to enable side loading, as it will enable people like employers, Government shady companies to build apps and mandate it to install for accessing some very important functionality, also will trigger, carriers provided phones to have non app store crap installed like in Android phones. At the same time i think Apple is sabotaging all of us by insisting on getting this steep 30% cut. As no government will allow such a huge additional tax on its companies apart from its national tax in long run. This is becoming a lose-lose situation for us.

gruez 5y ago
>as it will enable people like employers, Government shady companies to build apps and mandate it to install for accessing some very important functionality 1. can't tell already do that with enterprise provisioning profiles? 2. can't you refuse them access to your personal phone and demand that they provide you a work phone?
- acd10j 5y ago
  Most of them don’t bother with employee provisioning profiles, also not everyone has sufficient leverage to demand a iphone with their employer.

aurizon 5y ago

Is Apple a virtual millipede? Does it have any unshot feet left. As Marco says = GOLD. I am sure this whole thing will rebound against Apple, as well it should.

username3 5y ago

If Apple didn’t do this, we would blame Apple for doing nothing to prevent dark patterns.

gigel82 5y ago

Who's your "evil empire" now? :)

ecf 5y ago

Consider the situation if Apple didn’t require this in some way, shape, or form. There’d be dozens of articles about your tech-unsavvy grandma and how they couldn’t unsubscribe the way they normally do, and would blame Apple for it. I, for one, would not want to deal with the trouble of teaching my parents that some purchases in the App Store are through the App Store, and some aren’t.