Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 338 posts

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#11

Post by dilly_li »

The news I read yesterday [0] (from Hey's founder?) painted Apple as the obvious villain.

Today's news (the above link) shows a slightly differnet picture.

> "The Hey Email app is marketed as an email app on the App Store, but when users download your app, it does not work," Apple said in a letter to Basecamp CEO Jason Fried on Thursday. "Users cannot use the app to access email or perform any useful function until after they go to the Basecamp website for Hey Email and purchase a license to use the Hey Email app."

Basically Hey doesn't work as a standalone free app. The user has to download it AND subscribe somehow. Apple basically dictates, the developers either 1) offer some Reader-like free features, or 2) pay the Apple tax and build the subscription feature with IAP.

I am not saying the 30% tax is justifiable.

The logic behind Apple's rejection doesn't seem completely unreasonable to me.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23542937

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#12

Post by JeremyBanks »

Traster wrote: post #5

I don't think picking a fight with Apple as a PR strategy is a good move. The rules on the app store are very clear, if you're charging a subscription for functionality you're providing through an iOS app, that subscription must be available through Apple's payment system. I know people don't like that, but it's not unexpected. So given that Hey knew the rules, it seems a bit manipulative for them to submit their app…

This is a disingenuous response.

There are countless examples of other applications that have done exactly what Hey is doing without being banned. This is not clearly against the rules. To the extent that it is against the rules, Apple has deliberately phrased them in vague ways to let them change the meaning later. It is the exact opposite of “very clear”; it is abusive. Even Apple fans like Gruber agree.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#13

Post by Hamuko »

outworlder wrote: post #9
ipsum2 wrote: post #4

What's infuriating is Apple's inconsistency. Some apps offer subscriptions outside of the app store and are still there (including Basecamp!)

EDIT: Having deployed a few apps in the past which required login and not being harassed, I thought something else was going on. This seems to be an unspoken policy change. I'm joining the outrage bandwagon now. > What's infuriating is Apple's inconsistency. Some apps offer subscriptions outside of the app store and are still there (including Basecamp!) That doesn't violate guidelines. Unless your app takes users out…

>Unless your app takes users outside of the app store to purchase stuff(including the subscription itself) without in app purchases.

Where did Hey take users outside of the app?

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#15

Post by cfcosta »

Traster wrote: post #5

I don't think picking a fight with Apple as a PR strategy is a good move. The rules on the app store are very clear, if you're charging a subscription for functionality you're providing through an iOS app, that subscription must be available through Apple's payment system. I know people don't like that, but it's not unexpected. So given that Hey knew the rules, it seems a bit manipulative for them to submit their app…

If anyone, they should be the one to do it. Basecamp/37Signals is established and has enough money to fight the fight without being included in the bickering like it would happen if Google or Amazon did it.

Not to say anything is coming from this, but at least they do have enough money to make buzz.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#16

Post by zaroth »

ProAm wrote: post #6
Traster wrote: post #5

I don't think picking a fight with Apple as a PR strategy is a good move. The rules on the app store are very clear, if you're charging a subscription for functionality you're providing through an iOS app, that subscription must be available through Apple's payment system. I know people don't like that, but it's not unexpected. So given that Hey knew the rules, it seems a bit manipulative for them to submit their app…

That's fine, let me install software without going to the App store.

Here you go;

https://developer.apple.com/programs/enroll/

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#17

Post by nkcmr »

Traster wrote: post #5

I don't think picking a fight with Apple as a PR strategy is a good move. The rules on the app store are very clear, if you're charging a subscription for functionality you're providing through an iOS app, that subscription must be available through Apple's payment system. I know people don't like that, but it's not unexpected. So given that Hey knew the rules, it seems a bit manipulative for them to submit their app…

By itself, this argument makes sense. But the problem is how wildly unevenly it is applied. If you're "big enough" you get a pass.

Also, they got their first version through without any issues or a peep about this rule. And only when they needed to push a codefix is when they got held up.

If you're going to have rules, they MUST be applied evenly.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#18

Post by outworlder »

EDIT: I'm retracting my statement. This is how things used to work. I don't see any changes to the policy. Yet, the app is still not getting approved. And it is not taking users to its own payment portal.

So I got no clue WTF is going on.

> In rejecting Hey's appeal, Apple notes that the developers could work within Apple's rules by allowing the app to function as a reader for standard e-mail, while also offering Hey subscriptions from its Web site. Alternatively, it says Hey can add an in-app subscription option, sharing revenue on those purchased within the app while keeping all subscription revenue earned outside of Apple's ecosystem.

1) Don't handle payments inside the app at all, do everything payment-related on the website.

2) Implement in app purchases

These are the options. "Hey" should pick one.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#19

Post by ChrisLTD »

outworlder wrote: post #18

EDIT: I'm retracting my statement. This is how things used to work. I don't see any changes to the policy. Yet, the app is still not getting approved. And it is not taking users to its own payment portal. So I got no clue WTF is going on. > In rejecting Hey's appeal, Apple notes that the developers could work within Apple's rules by allowing the app to function as a reader for standard e-mail, while also offering Hey…

They already did #1. Apple is saying they have to do #2.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#20

Post by vasachi »

outworlder wrote: post #18

EDIT: I'm retracting my statement. This is how things used to work. I don't see any changes to the policy. Yet, the app is still not getting approved. And it is not taking users to its own payment portal. So I got no clue WTF is going on. > In rejecting Hey's appeal, Apple notes that the developers could work within Apple's rules by allowing the app to function as a reader for standard e-mail, while also offering Hey…

Well, they did implement option 1.
Post reply on HN