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

This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 317 posts

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#141

Post by horsawlarway »

snowwrestler wrote: post #65
sschueller wrote: post #4

It's really time to do what needs to be done. I want the EU to force Apple and Google to allow 3rd party app stores with the exact same rights as theirs (auto updated etc.). Just like back in the day when Microsoft was forced to let users allow other browser when it wasn't even being blocked. Just theirs was pre-installed! The security excuse doesn't cut it, sorry. 3rd party app stores can be just as secure if not ev…

> Just like back in the day when Microsoft was forced to let users allow other browser when it wasn't even being blocked. Just theirs was pre-installed! Microsoft’s antitrust case is frequently misunderstood. MS was a supplier to the companies that made and sold computers. They got in trouble for messing with other suppliers. Apple manufacturers and sells the computer. It’s not analogous.

It's a LOT closer than you seem to be painting it.

Apple is a supplier to software companies (of both hardware and software). They are getting in trouble for messing with other suppliers (of both hardware and software).

To quote the charges in the MS case:

"the U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally maintaining its monopoly position in the personal computer (PC) market primarily through the legal and technical restrictions it put on the abilities of PC manufacturers (OEMs) and users to uninstall Internet Explorer and use other programs such as Netscape and Java."

Apple in this case:

"Apple is illegally maintaining its monopoly position in the mobile application market primarily through technical restrictions it puts on the abilities of iOS software developers and users to install 3rd party application and programs."

We're essentially playing out a very similar situation, just with the focus on digital goods.

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#142

Post by drcongo »

jamil7 wrote: post #91
makerofthings wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is great, too. I just wish all the folk on hackernews that want to trash what apple have built would just go buy an Android phone and leave it alone. If you don’t like the AppStore, don’t buy an iPhone.

> I just wish all the folk on hackernews that want to trash what apple have built It wasn't just Apple though, the value of their platforms is greatly reduced without the work of third-party developers (probably many of whom are on HN) that build software for them.

But, if you run a fruit and veg stall on the local market, you pay the local council for the pitch. Don't like it, set up in a lay-by by the side of the motorway out of town and see how much that affects your bottom line.

Developers didn't build the software for Apple, they built it to sell to consumers and Apple provides them with a pitch on the market for a fee. It's how the world works. Don't like it, go make apps for Pine Phone.

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#143

Post by jaywalk »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #104

I think all the verbiage and display of these types of regulatory-enforced modals should be specifically defined by the regulations. Why are these any different from nutrition labels? In the US, nutrition labels always look pretty much exactly the same, down to the font. I don't have to look in 30 different places to find the calorie count. Compare that with cookie dialogs, where each website has its own different ve…

This is not a "regulatory-enforced" modal. Nothing in the regulations said they had to add this nonsense, Apple chose to add it to make third-party payments as painful as possible.

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#144

Post by thesimon »

AMD_DRIVERS wrote: post #123

Can we also acknowledge that Apple says that you must use a Payment Service Provider that also supports Apple Pay? "Your PSP will need to offer the following:[...] - Broad payment support including cards, iDEAL, and Apple Pay." This just seems evil.

And it needs to support iDEAL, with Apple doesn't even support for IAP.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#145

Post by tjpnz »

disgu wrote: post #132

I'm probably in the minority here but I'm at a point where I'll simply not purchase any service if I cannot use the in app form of payment. I'm just done with everything else. If I miss out on something then so be it. Have you ever bought an Adobe subscription, ever tried to cancel a New York Times subscription? Or Audible where they say "Well, you can cancel but then we'll also take the tokens you've already paid fo…

You can get similar functionality to what Apple is offering through a disposable credit card (privacy.com and alike). Worst case you can take the matter up with your credit card company.

How many times in a year do you cancel something?

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#146

Post by Grustaf »

coder543 wrote: post #98
Grustaf wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps the 27% is a troll, but the warning screen is 100% in line with how they always do things. Just like when you run an executable on your mac that you downloaded from the internet, they warn you and ask you if you really want to open it. That's not about money, it's about making it clear to users what they are about to do, so they don't have a bad experience and are put off Apple products.

> That's not about money [citation needed] It can be about more than one thing at the same time, but it certainly seems likely to be about the money. Apple wants people to use the App Store on their Mac more. Those apps can be malicious too[0], but you don't see Apple warning you before you download or open them. [0]: one of the first links on google, but this is not an isolated incident: https://appleinsider.com/art…

I mean of course it's indirectly about money, they want people to have a good experience with their Mac so they stay in the ecosystem. But when you sideload an app like that there is no question about losing app store revenue (developers can just notarize their app for free), it's only about the user experience.

No doubt on iOS it's about both, but my point is that it's reductive to think it's ONLY about losing app store revenue. Especially in the Dutch case, where they won't actually lose any revenue, since they're charging 27% anyway.

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#147

Post by AMD_DRIVERS »

thesimon wrote: post #144
AMD_DRIVERS wrote: post #123

Can we also acknowledge that Apple says that you must use a Payment Service Provider that also supports Apple Pay? "Your PSP will need to offer the following:[...] - Broad payment support including cards, iDEAL, and Apple Pay." This just seems evil.

And it needs to support iDEAL, with Apple doesn't even support for IAP. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631

Oh my god it just gets better and better.

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#148

Post by vanilla_nut »

disgu wrote: post #132

I'm probably in the minority here but I'm at a point where I'll simply not purchase any service if I cannot use the in app form of payment. I'm just done with everything else. If I miss out on something then so be it. Have you ever bought an Adobe subscription, ever tried to cancel a New York Times subscription? Or Audible where they say "Well, you can cancel but then we'll also take the tokens you've already paid fo…

And the inevitable cancellation dark patterns! I cancelled my prime membership the other day, and holy cow, I had to confirm my intent at least 5 times. Offers to “pause”, a page telling me what I’ll miss out on, plus more pages that boil down to “actually?!?!”

Seems like subscriptions have gotten out of hand. Since the goverment can’t regulate meaningfully, I’m at least glad that Apple has some solution to this, even if it feels a bit monopolistic.

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#149

Post by bogwog »

scarface74 wrote: post #103
notyourday wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netherlands should respond with passing a law that any platform company that does that is subject to a 97% tax on the revenue generated via platform stores, payable 5 years in advance with the overpayments refunded at the end of the tax year. When a company goes to war with the government, the company always loses. It is time for Cook to learn it. He is under a delusion that he is god.

The Netherlands population is a little more than half of Texas’s population. Apple could completely pull out of the Netherlands and wouldn’t even feel the affect.

This is completely incorrect. Apple will feel the hurt if they lose a market with 17 million people. They won’t go out of business, but whoever was adjacent to that decision will be losing their job.

Re: This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system

#150

Post by cute_boi »

tjpnz wrote: post #145
disgu wrote: post #132

I'm probably in the minority here but I'm at a point where I'll simply not purchase any service if I cannot use the in app form of payment. I'm just done with everything else. If I miss out on something then so be it. Have you ever bought an Adobe subscription, ever tried to cancel a New York Times subscription? Or Audible where they say "Well, you can cancel but then we'll also take the tokens you've already paid fo…

You can get similar functionality to what Apple is offering through a disposable credit card (privacy.com and alike). Worst case you can take the matter up with your credit card company. How many times in a year do you cancel something?

Can't companies ban such cards? I think there are some BIN code etc… that can be used to identify them.
Post reply on HN