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

191–200 of 317 posts

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

#191

Post by brimble »

scarface74 wrote: post #112
smoldesu wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We used to hate Microsoft for much less than this. I wonder how Apple can still have so many fans, even on this forum. If you build a lifestyle product, people can and will struggle to separate their own identity from the products they own. People take an insult on Apple like it's an insult on them , which is not a basis for healthy discourse in the slightest. We end up with apologist takes like "I actually like ha…

So 60% of the US population have iPhones because it’s a “lifestyle product”?

Yeah, weird. I thought I was an (softish) Android fan who got converted to Apple by working at a place developing on both platforms, and being exposed daily to just how much wildly better an experience my phones and tablets could be.

Guess I was wrong.

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

#192

Post by jim180 »

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?

I had a situation where New Yorker was able to charge me, after I used one-time credit card (and thus invalid) that was issued by Revolut.

The explanation was like this that, it was an “offline“ charge, which they let thru.

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

#193

Post by coder543 »

Spivak wrote: post #190
coder543 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Especially in the Dutch case, where they won't actually lose any revenue, since they're charging 27% anyway. I believe Apple is being forward-looking here. They know such a ridiculous 27% policy is unlikely to be tolerated by the regulators, since it defeats the entire purpose, so they're planning for a future where they're forced to lower that. They want the option to be presented to consumers as being scarier tha…

> They know such a ridiculous 27% policy is unlikely to be tolerated by the regulators. I actually think I'm 100% with Apple on this one. The Dutch regulators made the same mistake Epic and so many devs across the internet and hitched their "I don't want to pay 30% wagon" to "Apple is disallowing 3rd party providers" which have nothing at all to do with one another. The people pushing these regulations know that they…

> The people pushing these regulations know that they would go nowhere if they tried to attack sales commissions directly and now the stupidity is bearing fruit.

That’s a very strong statement to lack any citation. The intent of the regulators was clear. If a Apple is going to be petulant, the regulators can just come back and tell Apple to lower their commission across the board, which will inevitably hurt Apple more than if Apple had been reasonable about this.

I don’t think it’s a foregone conclusion at all that the regulators are just going to give up and go home, crying about how Apple so cleverly outsmarted them.

> I'm absolutely in favor of regulations that make it so platforms can't skim percentage revenue off the top but any regulation that does that will attract the ire of literally every business that sells things.

When it comes to other businesses, consumers have choice. If one company charges too much of a premium, consumers can go elsewhere. If I go elsewhere from Apple, I lose access to all of my purchased items. If Apple would refund me every dollar I paid, then maybe that would be viable, but Apple wants to have their cake and eat it too.

Imagine if switching from Walmart to Safeway required you to give up every item you had ever purchased from Walmart. This is why Apple is not the same as most businesses charging a commission.

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

#194

Post by drcongo »

justapassenger wrote: post #183
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.

Should people who didn’t like Microsoft forcing Internet Explorer 20 years ago, also just go and not buy Windows?

Yeah, that's what I did.

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

#195

Post by ajdude »

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…

Seconding this. Apple is also the only provider that lets me consistently pay with those Visa gift cards that almost never work when charging a credit card online.

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

#196

Post by scarface74 »

smoldesu wrote: post #180
scarface74 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you believe that 60% of Americans on average spend twice as much on iPhone, just for the “blue bubble”? There couldn’t possibly be any other reason? So technology products shouldn’t “just work”?

The "blue bubble" isn't just about iMessage, it's a colloquialism for how Apple's social marketing works. They have proprietary, closed protocols like Airdrop and Facetime that intentionally create friction between people on iOS and Android. It's a phrase for their marketing gimmicks that make vulnerable shoppers buy the products their friends have because they don't want to be left out. It's about the fashion statem…

And 60% of the US population fall for this marketing? Google makes 80% of their revenue from ad sales and they can’t convince more than 40% of people to buy their supposedly superior OS? Are the US so full of dummies compared to the rest of the world that we are succumbing to Apple’s nefarious marketing?

People have been saying that the only reason people buy Apple products since the iPod was introduced in 2001. The rest of the industry has had 20 years to catch up with Apple if it were that easy, they couldn’t?

Also Google has how many active and failed messenger apps in the last decade?

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

#197

Post by freetime2 »

vanilla_nut wrote: post #148
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, ev…

I also learned recently that if you cancel a trial Prime membership early, the benefits end immediately instead of ending at the end of the trial period.

I generally like to cancel trial memberships immediately after signing up to ensure that I don’t forget about it and accidentally get charged for something I don’t want. If I end up liking the service then I’ll happily enter my payment info again at the end of the trial. Most online services (including all App Store subscriptions) are fine with this approach. But Amazon seems to want to take advantage of people forgetting to cancel their unused subscriptions.

It’s really surprising that a company as large and successful as Amazon would feel the need stoop to such levels.

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

#198

Post by scarface74 »

onepointsixC wrote: post #185
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…

Sure I agree that dark patterns which try to prevent your from canceling are awful and the iOS App store comparatively makes that easy. But that's great argument for regulators to step in to prevent dark patterns. Cancelation should be just as easy as signing up.

Right because more laws to govern technology is the answer to bad laws with unintended consequences.

Or “why I see a cookie pop up on every damn web page I visit .”

Has the government ever made a good law regarding technology? The last one I remember is phone number portability.

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

#199

Post by modo_mario »

drcongo wrote: post #142
jamil7 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

>you pay the local council for the pitch

Unless you're a huge corporation like Apple which can sidestep a lot of it.

Either way tho it seems that analogy boils down to Apple having a monopoly-like position.

>for a fee

A high one propped up by a lack of competition.

>Don't like it, go make apps for Pine Phone.

Yeah I support some more push behind projects like that. In the meantime tho I don't think me or many others are going to suddenly love anticompetitive practices.

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

#200

Post by Spivak »

coder543 wrote: post #193
Spivak wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They know such a ridiculous 27% policy is unlikely to be tolerated by the regulators. I actually think I'm 100% with Apple on this one. The Dutch regulators made the same mistake Epic and so many devs across the internet and hitched their "I don't want to pay 30% wagon" to "Apple is disallowing 3rd party providers" which have nothing at all to do with one another. The people pushing these regulations know that they…

> The people pushing these regulations know that they would go nowhere if they tried to attack sales commissions directly and now the stupidity is bearing fruit. That’s a very strong statement to lack any citation. The intent of the regulators was clear. If a Apple is going to be petulant, the regulators can just come back and tell Apple to lower their commission across the board, which will inevitably hurt Apple mor…

> the regulators can just come back and tell Apple to lower their commission across the board

Unless you somehow craft a "fuck you Apple in particular" law which in basically all courts wouldn't fly, the regulation would be an immediate massive change to how all platforms do business. You would in one stroke wipe out the business models of basically all ecommerce platforms.

Re: your edit

> If one company charges too much of a premium, consumers can go elsewhere.

Except they can't though, that's the entire point. You're paying the commission to reach specifically the people on that particular platform. It's inherently non-fungible. You can sell art on lots of online stores, but if you want to reach Etsy customers you gotta pay up. If you want to sell software there's plenty of ways to do it from sharecropping on existing platforms of selling you own appliance but if you want to reach iOS users you gotta pay up.

Post reply on HN