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

21–30 of 338 posts

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#21

Post by cmelbye »

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…

“1” isn’t an option on its own, that’s what they’re already doing today and part of why they were rejected.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#22

Post by htunnicliff »

dilly_li wrote: post #11

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 a…

This is how the Netflix app works.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#23

Post by epanchin »

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.

If one is able to install software without going into the App Store, then one is also liable to be socially engineered into installing software from outside the App Store.

No thanks. Keep iPhones in their walled gardens where they are safe. Androids exist for experimentation.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#24

Post by AYBABTME »

Probably naive question, but couldn't they markup the In-App-Subscription by whatever % of cut Apple is taking? The same is done by restaurants for things like Uber Eat/Postmate: they have their prices on their menu, and a marked-up price on these platforms.

downvotes: mind explaining why my naive question is not a worthy contribution/question? or if you just disagree, I'm genuinely interested in understanding what I'm not grasping.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#25

Post by neximo64 »

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…

Explain Spotify and Netflix?

The Hey app copies Netflix almost exactly, even in the language used for the subscription? How is that very clear for a rule?

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#26

Post by terracatta »

This letter is actually astonishing. In this letter Apple:

* Chastises them for making free apps in the past

* Reminds them they've had to distribute their apps for free (almost as if they should be grateful and now give them some money)

* States they would accept their app if it provided unrelated functionality or access to competitor products (who are oddly not subject to the same rules).

* Implies that everyone is following the rules but them (which is demonstrably false even if you accept the "Reader" and "Business" definitions they provide)

Also, according to DHH, they leaked this letter to the press before sending it to the Basecamp CEO. Nice.

The argument is so strange, it's almost as if "email" is a special term of art that causes Apple to categorize this app in a way that is not is not consistent with other SaaS products. Even with that said, there are no other similar email apps like Superhuman that are subject to these rules. If I was a Chat or Email based SaaS company CEO and I relied on the iPhone to complete my multi-platform value prop, I would be very worried about this happening to my already approved app.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#27

Post by Hamuko »

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…

>The rules on the app store are very clear

Are they? According to Protocol.com, which got in contact with Apple over the thing:

>Apple allows these kinds of client apps — where you can't sign up, only sign in — for business services but not consumer products. That's why Basecamp, which companies typically pay for, is allowed on the App Store when Hey, which users pay for, isn't.

But if I search for the word "consumer" in the App Store Review Guidelines, the only result is the following:

>Data gathered from the HomeKit API, HealthKit, Consumer Health Records API, MovementDisorder APIs, ClassKit or from depth and/or facial mapping tools (e.g. ARKit, Camera APIs, or Photo APIs) may not be used for marketing, advertising or use-based data mining, including by third parties. Learn more about best practices for implementing CallKit, HealthKit, ClassKit, and ARKit.

Is there another set of rules that actually covers the things that Apple says if the rules are "very clear"?

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#28

Post by davesmylie »

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…

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

It's not quite so simple as that.

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.

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#29

Post by embrassingstuff »

From the article

> could work within Apple's rules by allowing the app to function as a reader for standard e-mail, while also offering Hey subscriptions

This is apple's new stance or is it conventional wisdom for store policy?

If only Hey also worked with regular mail all would have been well?

Re: Apple rejects appeal from email app Hey

#30

Post by xxpor »

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…

#1 USED to be the option. Apple decided to start enforcing the letter of the agreement, which meant 1 is only available for "reader" apps.

That's what's so egregious.

Post reply on HN