Do creators have an option to opt out of allowing transactions from the iOS app?
Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
611–620 of 1001 posts
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#612Earlier quoted context omitted.
They added "in app purchases" indicators in the store for this. I use it all the time. "In app purchases" on something that claims it's free is not free.
Apple's longstanding App Store guidelines always forced a certain level of "quality" and good customer experience, yet they're now allowing apps that are the exact opposite. Most of these apps use dark UX patterns to trick new users into scammy free trials which convert to $100+/yr subscriptions after 1-3 days. These apps also make it difficult to close out of the subscription window, or make it seem like you have to…
> scammy free trials which convert to $100+/yr subscriptions after 1-3 days
I’m fairly certain this is because it’s the only way of offering a trial that Apple allows?
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#613Earlier quoted context omitted.
Broken up in what way, and how would it help?
Generally, the Apple Store would be a separate company from Apple phones. A user gets to choose which store they want to use on their phone. Along with other things like which map app is the default. This way, the different stores could compete - by charging lower fees or offering more services. Like the android store does a bare-bones check of the app and so it only charges 10%. Apple checks every app throughly, so…
What a cluster fuck that would become.
I can see it now: needing to have 15 different stores with subscriptions to get apps who all have different deals with different apps for exclusivity.
No thanks.
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#614Folks that still buy Apple: what are you waiting to boycot this draconian business? Every Apple device you buy feeds this monster.
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#615Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I'll start by saying that companies like Apple need to be regulated, as they're misusing their market power to the detriment of everyone but them. However, your argument isn't what you think it is. It's extremely common for companies to sell/gatekeep (Or "pimp" as you put it) access to "their" user base. Think credit cards (Amex can charge merchants more as because their users tend to spend more) or even club memb…
This is a very strange analogy. I didn't buy my credit card. I don't own it. The credit card is just a little piece of plastic, totally useless without the line of credit, i.e, the service provided by the credit card company, in stark contrast with my computers, which can be used quite extensively without the App Store. The credit card company is not gatekeeping "access" to me. I can pay for things with cash, a debit…
>This is a very strange analogy.
You can be both an Amex and a Visa card Customer.
You can also be an iPhone and Android Customer at the same time as well. As well as a web user.
Amex charges higher fees, and offer specific services to their customer base.
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#616Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do we know whether or not iOS's subscription model supports pausing? I guess I assume Patreon would mention if it didn't.
It does not. Apple do all the billing. You have no mechanism to link up users and bills or change users billing. The only way would be to notify all subscribers to cancel their subscription, hope they do that, and then notify them all to resubscribe afterwards, which would obviously be catastrophic for subscription revenue, as well as a terrible user experience.
I wonder why Patreon isn't hammering this point more if that's the case. This seems to me to be an almost bigger problem than the loss of the per-creation billing.
Not that losing per-creation billing is good, but Patreon has been threatening it for a while, and there are ways it could in theory be simulated. But this makes it effectively impossible for creators to go on vacations, take a sabbatical, whatever... without continuing to charge patrons. It's a really commonly used mechanism from what I've seen, this would be a loss of a really important flexible tool for creators.
I'm not distrusting you, I just feel like I'd like to see some confirmation from Patreon before I start making accusations about it. Maybe they have some deal or know something about a future unreleased API that I don't know?
But losing the ability to pause a Patreon page would be a very, very big deal. Arguably even a bigger deal than the 30% tax, since I assume this change would affect everyone regardless of where they subscribe from. That's something that people should be talking about if it's the case.
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#617Earlier quoted context omitted.
A huge difference is Steam doesn't come pre-installed on your computers nor does it block you from installing other game managers.
Fair point. I do think Steam is engaged in anti-competitive behavior, but that doesn't mean they're the full equivalent of the app store. And we can see on the PC market the large number of indie games that very literally would not exist if PCs were locked into only using Steam. My point here is more that Steam is not really a good argument for justifying a pricing model. But it's a good clarification that in many wa…
Unrelated, I've noticed for a few years now, several of those HN similarity things claim we're proximate.
Perhaps they just think we both say Apple a lot.
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#618Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So there, looks like Apple brings in the money for Patreon. Apple users bring in the money for Patreon. I own an iPhone. I am not Apple, and Apple does not own me. Why should Apple be able to charge money for "access" to me, as if I were a prostitute and Apple my pimp? I'm simply using a computer, which I paid for.
I dont think, the customer, or in your example "you" does not even come into the equation. It is straightly Apple and Patreon. And in terns of Apple, they do think Patreon is accessing their customer base ( You ) and hence they want a cut of it.
This comment makes no sense to me and contradicts itself. First sentence:
> "you" does not even come into the equation
Second sentence:
> Patreon is accessing their customer base ( You )
Of course I come into the equation. Apple does not and cannot subscribe me to a Patreon without my initiative and consent.
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#619Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generally, the Apple Store would be a separate company from Apple phones. A user gets to choose which store they want to use on their phone. Along with other things like which map app is the default. This way, the different stores could compete - by charging lower fees or offering more services. Like the android store does a bare-bones check of the app and so it only charges 10%. Apple checks every app throughly, so…
Although I agree in principle, the counter-argument to this is that Apple would ultimately be blamed in the minds of consumers for not keeping those devices protected from bad software. They could say I told you so, but that doesn’t help them after the golden goose of the App Store has already been cooked.
>the counter-argument to this is that Apple would ultimately be blamed in the minds of consumers for not keeping those devices protected from bad software.
To be brash, maybe consumers need to learn how to protect themselves or move to dumb hardware that is impractical to hack. I don't understand this trend of blaming corporations for not being the de facto gatekeeper of security. They should help minimize spam/malware, but if you're going out of your way to disable those securities (likened to turning off Windows Defender after 2 warnings), your insecurities are self-inflicted.
Many "opponents" aren't asking to change the default experience. They simply want the reigns to take those risks and tinker. Most people can barely even find the theme settings on Android; I won't believe a signifigant portion will get through idiot-proof safeguards just because "well they have a chance to now!"
Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
#620Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always buy on Gog first because they really care about the user. No DRM, the ability to download safe copies in case some lawsuit happens and things get pulled out (e.g. like half the music in GTA San Andreas!). I understand you as a creator prefer steam but I wouldn't obey that, sorry. Also, reinforcing their market position is not in my best interest as a consumer.
I think you may have accidentally misread my post, or maybe I didn't word it carefully enough (in which case I apologize for the confusion). I don't prefer Steam. As a consumer, on principle in most cases I refuse to buy from it. Steam effectively punishes creators for not steering users towards their monopoly, and they have a ton of tools for user lock-in: Steam Input, Steam Workshop, etc... They may not be as egreg…
Supporting your "I don't prefer Steam" point, I make a point of supporting Gog (and SetApp!), only to find out that many of the games sold there are crippleware. Deep in the fine print of the non-DRM'd version distributed as 44 floppy disks (OK, not quite, but it feels like Slackware from the 90s nonetheless) is that this non-DRM version cannot multiplayer, not even offline LAN in the household.
Even more surprising, Gog's DRM'd version multiplayer may require ... STEAM! ... to run.
This is galling.
(For the game that most annoyed me, Baldur's Gate 3, this may have changed once Larian introduced their own cloud sync. I haven't tried again, the first experience was that tedious.)