Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does Apple take their customary cut? I am not interested in "donating" to Apple.
Ever use a credit card to make a donation anywhere?
Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
351–360 of 579 posts
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#352I am not sure why it needs to be called a donation. Just let the in-app purchase unlock some cosmetics in the app like games do. You weren't going to deduct the donation from your taxes anyway. I am curious how this ends up working out. Google takes a cut of the donations now... but the process of buying is probably easier. So maybe it will increase donation revenue, and make it easier to support free software. (Taki…
I contribute to projects that are committed to never locking away features behind licenses or in-app purchases, because most open-source projects in that space eventually went down that route.
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the reason Apple started doing this way back. Sad to see Google follow suit. I guess the bottom line is the bottom line...
I thought this was a Apple only thing and Google doesn't do this. For example, you cannot buy Audible books frim iOS apuo but can from the Android app.
Now that I think of it, Uber has you put your credit card in. I'm not sure why that's allowed
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#354I am not sure why it needs to be called a donation. Just let the in-app purchase unlock some cosmetics in the app like games do. You weren't going to deduct the donation from your taxes anyway. I am curious how this ends up working out. Google takes a cut of the donations now... but the process of buying is probably easier. So maybe it will increase donation revenue, and make it easier to support free software. (Taki…
My immediate thought at reading the title "So sell a supporter animation that plays in an about menu".
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can even go along your last point. But it's a different argument to say "going through google is more efficient" or to say "you can't not go through google". Frankly, they're using their market dominant position to force free developers into a distribution model that serves them as the payment processor. I'd not go so far as to argue those are separate businesses, but it's really a blatant abuse of their power. Arg…
Why is it an abuse of their power? Google and Apple are essentially saying that if you use their store as a sales funnel then they take a 30% cut, and they enforce that by being the sole payment processor on the store. Basically Google and Apple both know that people will make more money by listing in their stores and taking a 30% cut than not listing at all.
And they are in the process in doing so (partly by closing the platform through read-only system partition and expecting the app developer to sign the app through Apple means) with MacOS.
The platform is not yet closed, as the system partition can still be mounted in read-write mode and notarization can be bypassed for now. But their are clearly in the process to make these changes permanent in near future. Reason why they introduced them in Catalina.
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#356Ah yes, the multi-billion dollar megacorp trying to prevent goodwill donations. Dear regulators: BREAK UP GOOGLE.
They're trying to prevent money laundering.
I'm pretty sure they just want their cut.
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#357One of our apps ( https://Yang2020.app ) were rejected by Apple for the same reason - having a Donate link. Ultimately we removed the link on native apps (kept it on the Web) and the app was accepted. However, before doing this, we corresponded with Apple Developer Support / App Review Team and asked them about the Acceptable Business Models of their developer guidelines, which states: (vii) Apps may enable individua…
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
GDPR doesn't cover apps, or organizations a data subject can only be an individual.
Individual developers (sole proprietors) are covered under GDPR!
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open source developers shouldn't be forced to lock away additional functionality in their apps, or resort to special tricks just to be able to receive donations for their projects. Google could make a positive impact by introducing new features that help users seamlessly fund their favourite open source apps, right from their Google accounts. GitHub has recently introduced a similar initiative called GitHub Sponsors…
>Open source developers shouldn't be forced to lock away additional functionality in their app The additional feature can just be text that says thanks for the money, feel free to give us more money in the future.
Edit: I'm referring to https://opensource.org/osd
Edit2: Having read round some more, it seems you possibly could sell a different version, of course you would have to offer the source code which others would be free to give away, (this is for the gpl). I don't know if the discrimination clause of the Open Source Definition would come into play though.
Re: Open-source apps removed from Google Play Store due to donation links
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
The strangest fact is, those donation pages only have some links, there is no in-app payment. I don't understand what Google is thinking about when they banned donations... Wait. I suddenly understand something I've seen previously... There is a workaround! You simply upload two versions of the app, the free edition and the supporter edition. The support's edition is a paid app. You can ask the users who want to supp…
So Google can make the donation go through them, cripple the normal version, and take a 20% processing fee?