4 ms·

Because they want to be able to take their 30% slice. Not so mysterious.

by pervycreeper 13y ago

joe_inferno 13y ago
Do they take 30% from banking apps?
- gress 13y ago
  No. The original poster is trolling.
  - wmf 13y ago
    Sadly, I suspect some people actually believe this 30% argument.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - erichocean 13y ago
    Wait. You mean a random HN comment from someone with the username @pervycreeper isn't completely factual? /shocked
prezjordan 13y ago
Someone brought up in another thread that you can still use banking applications. When you transfer money on something like BoA or even Venmo, Apple doesn't get a cut.
- _delirium 13y ago
  That's true, though conventional usage has limited them to mostly stuff that would've happened outside iOS anyway. People tend to use things like the JPMorgan Chase app to check if their paycheck was deposited, or to scan a check, not to make in-app purchases that circumvent Apple's micropayments system (this is probably technically possible, but the flow is so bad that conversion would be very poor).
- chc 13y ago
  That's true. Do you think it means that the in-app purchase rule doesn't exist, or are you just very intrigued that banking is treated differently from other transactions?
  - gress 13y ago
    The in-app purchase rule applies to purchased content that is delivered in the app.
tzs 13y ago
Apple does not take 30% of things purchased through apps that are not meant for consumption IN those apps. For instance, if you buy movies tickets through an app, Apple does not get a cut. If you buy a computer through Newegg's app, Apple does not get a cut. If you buy a lawn mower through Walmart's app, Apple does not get a cut. If you pay your electric bill through your bank's app, Apple does not get a cut.
saidajigumi 13y ago
I've seen this echoed several times, and AFAICT it's an uncritical knee-jerk reaction. It doesn't pass muster. Apple's track record indicates it doesn't care about money that doesn't "pass through" its platform. Historically, Apple wants its cut of transactions including: app purchases, in-app purchases, subscription purchases available directly through apps, and digital media purchases for iOS devices (cf. Kindle app). However, there are notable major categories of apps that handle payments but do not incur the payment-cut issue. As others have noted, banking applications, which often include payment and money transfer functions, are ubiquitous. Payment facilitators are no strangers to the app store: PayPal[1], Square's line including Register[2], Cash[3] and Wallet[4]. Retail store apps also don't appear to be affected by the 30% cut: Amazon, B&H Photo, McMaster-Carr, etc. all have store apps. Also, it seems that Apple has been forthcoming regarding reasoning in the past over disputes regarding in-app purchases, e.g. with Amazon over the Kindle app presenting the Kindle Store. In the BtC app cases, it's the stonewall "game over" response, with no ongoing communication as to how the app might regain compliance. That suggests, in contrast to other cases, that Apple's current position is that these apps cannot become compliant. Even though the BtC-related apps otherwise resemble established payment-related products. That's an interesting distinction and points to either undisclosed legal concerns or otherwise different business concerns than were raised in earlier cases. [1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/paypal/id283646709?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/paypal/id283646709?mt=8 [2] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-register/id335393788?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-register/id335393788?... [3] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-cash/id711923939?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-cash/id711923939?mt=8 [4] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-wallet/id455018546?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-wallet/id455018546?mt...
- pervycreeper 13y ago
  Good point, but all those payment apps have a very specific use case. The possible uses for BTC are much more varied, and Apple may well be anticipating some as-yet undiscovered use that could be disruptive to existing channels for collecting fees (among other things). Allowing Bitcoin would be playing with fire, given their business model.

Because they want to be able to take their 30% slice. Not so mysterious.

joe_inferno 13y ago

Do they take 30% from banking apps?

gress 13y ago
No. The original poster is trolling.
- wmf 13y ago
  Sadly, I suspect some people actually believe this 30% argument.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- erichocean 13y ago
  Wait. You mean a random HN comment from someone with the username @pervycreeper isn't completely factual? /shocked

prezjordan 13y ago

Someone brought up in another thread that you can still use banking applications. When you transfer money on something like BoA or even Venmo, Apple doesn't get a cut.

_delirium 13y ago
That's true, though conventional usage has limited them to mostly stuff that would've happened outside iOS anyway. People tend to use things like the JPMorgan Chase app to check if their paycheck was deposited, or to scan a check, not to make in-app purchases that circumvent Apple's micropayments system (this is probably technically possible, but the flow is so bad that conversion would be very poor).
chc 13y ago
That's true. Do you think it means that the in-app purchase rule doesn't exist, or are you just very intrigued that banking is treated differently from other transactions?
- gress 13y ago
  The in-app purchase rule applies to purchased content that is delivered in the app.

tzs 13y ago

Apple does not take 30% of things purchased through apps that are not meant for consumption IN those apps. For instance, if you buy movies tickets through an app, Apple does not get a cut. If you buy a computer through Newegg's app, Apple does not get a cut. If you buy a lawn mower through Walmart's app, Apple does not get a cut. If you pay your electric bill through your bank's app, Apple does not get a cut.

saidajigumi 13y ago

I've seen this echoed several times, and AFAICT it's an uncritical knee-jerk reaction. It doesn't pass muster. Apple's track record indicates it doesn't care about money that doesn't "pass through" its platform. Historically, Apple wants its cut of transactions including: app purchases, in-app purchases, subscription purchases available directly through apps, and digital media purchases for iOS devices (cf. Kindle app). However, there are notable major categories of apps that handle payments but do not incur the payment-cut issue. As others have noted, banking applications, which often include payment and money transfer functions, are ubiquitous. Payment facilitators are no strangers to the app store: PayPal[1], Square's line including Register[2], Cash[3] and Wallet[4]. Retail store apps also don't appear to be affected by the 30% cut: Amazon, B&H Photo, McMaster-Carr, etc. all have store apps. Also, it seems that Apple has been forthcoming regarding reasoning in the past over disputes regarding in-app purchases, e.g. with Amazon over the Kindle app presenting the Kindle Store. In the BtC app cases, it's the stonewall "game over" response, with no ongoing communication as to how the app might regain compliance. That suggests, in contrast to other cases, that Apple's current position is that these apps cannot become compliant. Even though the BtC-related apps otherwise resemble established payment-related products. That's an interesting distinction and points to either undisclosed legal concerns or otherwise different business concerns than were raised in earlier cases. [1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/paypal/id283646709?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/paypal/id283646709?mt=8 [2] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-register/id335393788?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-register/id335393788?... [3] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-cash/id711923939?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-cash/id711923939?mt=8 [4] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-wallet/id455018546?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/square-wallet/id455018546?mt...

pervycreeper 13y ago
Good point, but all those payment apps have a very specific use case. The possible uses for BTC are much more varied, and Apple may well be anticipating some as-yet undiscovered use that could be disruptive to existing channels for collecting fees (among other things). Allowing Bitcoin would be playing with fire, given their business model.