4 ms·

The reason is that Apple specifically requires all digital only purchases to only use in-app payment and must give Apple 30%. You are not allowed to process dig

The reason is that Apple specifically requires all digital only purchases to only use in-app payment and must give Apple 30%. You are not allowed to process digital purchases through an app with your own payment system. You also can’t tell people that or link them to the website. This does not apply to physical goods. Which is why all the apps you mentioned are fine. This is the same issue that has been talked about for years, the cause of Epic (Fortnite) vs Apple, etc.

VincentEvans 3y ago
Heh, ok. But re-read the above adventure in digital commerce that I have described. Can none of this be made easier if a company gave even a fractional amount of care? Like, for instance - allow searching and requesting a purchase from a child’s Kindle pending an approval action by a parent? That’s just one example I thought of instantaneously - because I used the damn thing. Can none of the, probably thousands, product- and user-experience experts adept in Amazon Principles and commanding six-digit compensations solve this so that I don’t need to post about it on HN?
- lathiat 3y ago
  I agree the Kindle part was silly, and could be much improved. I just wanted to specifically clarify why you started out on the wrong foot with iOS and why the iOS app couldn't even tell you about the option existing elsewhere. However once you started on a browser, the rest of your story I would agree with.
mcphage 3y ago
> The reason is that Apple specifically requires all digital only purchases to only use in-app payment and must give Apple 30%. You are not allowed to process digital purchases through an app with your own payment system. You also can’t tell people that or link them to the website. > This does not apply to physical goods. I don't really get this division other than "it's what Apple could get away with". As far as the payment processing is concerned, it seems like a distinction without a difference.
- kccqzy 3y ago
  According to Apple's logic, they are providing more service than just payment processing.
  - mavhc 3y ago
    It would be a shame if your digital goods were accidentally destroyed by my associates, a fee, of perhaps 30%, would ensure this terrible tragedy would be avoided. They provide no service, hopefully soon it will be illegal.
    - memefrog 3y ago
      Illegal to do what? Charge people fees for what they do using your platform? On what possible basis can you make it illegal? It's Apple's app store for software that runs on Apple's phones. Nobody is forced to use an iPhone. They're expensive luxury products.
      - mavhc 3y ago
        Use your dominance as a platform provider as leverage to extort extra fees for doing nothing. https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/AT.40437 https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/AT.40437
        memefrog 3y ago
        They don't extort anything and they aren't dominant. They're a minority player in the market. If anyone is dominant, it is Google. Despite Apple being more expensive, people still choose them. This isn't lock in, it is because they're the luxury, cool choice.
        mavhc 3y ago
        The Apple App Store led with an estimated revenue of $85.1 billion (roughly £70.5 billion) in 2021, responsible for 63% of total app revenue. In the same year, Google Play Store generated revenues of nearly $47.9 billion (roughly £39.7 billion) through Android apps

VincentEvans 3y ago

Heh, ok. But re-read the above adventure in digital commerce that I have described. Can none of this be made easier if a company gave even a fractional amount of care? Like, for instance - allow searching and requesting a purchase from a child’s Kindle pending an approval action by a parent? That’s just one example I thought of instantaneously - because I used the damn thing. Can none of the, probably thousands, product- and user-experience experts adept in Amazon Principles and commanding six-digit compensations solve this so that I don’t need to post about it on HN?

lathiat 3y ago
I agree the Kindle part was silly, and could be much improved. I just wanted to specifically clarify why you started out on the wrong foot with iOS and why the iOS app couldn't even tell you about the option existing elsewhere. However once you started on a browser, the rest of your story I would agree with.

mcphage 3y ago

> The reason is that Apple specifically requires all digital only purchases to only use in-app payment and must give Apple 30%. You are not allowed to process digital purchases through an app with your own payment system. You also can’t tell people that or link them to the website. > This does not apply to physical goods. I don't really get this division other than "it's what Apple could get away with". As far as the payment processing is concerned, it seems like a distinction without a difference.

kccqzy 3y ago
According to Apple's logic, they are providing more service than just payment processing.
- mavhc 3y ago
  It would be a shame if your digital goods were accidentally destroyed by my associates, a fee, of perhaps 30%, would ensure this terrible tragedy would be avoided. They provide no service, hopefully soon it will be illegal.
  - memefrog 3y ago
    Illegal to do what? Charge people fees for what they do using your platform? On what possible basis can you make it illegal? It's Apple's app store for software that runs on Apple's phones. Nobody is forced to use an iPhone. They're expensive luxury products.
    - mavhc 3y ago
      Use your dominance as a platform provider as leverage to extort extra fees for doing nothing. https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/AT.40437 https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/AT.40437
      - memefrog 3y ago
        They don't extort anything and they aren't dominant. They're a minority player in the market. If anyone is dominant, it is Google. Despite Apple being more expensive, people still choose them. This isn't lock in, it is because they're the luxury, cool choice.
        mavhc 3y ago
        The Apple App Store led with an estimated revenue of $85.1 billion (roughly £70.5 billion) in 2021, responsible for 63% of total app revenue. In the same year, Google Play Store generated revenues of nearly $47.9 billion (roughly £39.7 billion) through Android apps