Apple Announces New In-App Purchase API

[MacRumors]

Apple yesterday announced a new API to expand in-app purchase capabilities on the App Store, providing developers with new ways to support large content catalogs, creator-driven experiences, and customizable subscription models.

The new "Advanced Commerce API" addresses three broad use cases:

• Apps offering extensive libraries of one-time purchase content, such as audiobooks or educational courses, that require frequent updates.
• Apps that provide access to creator-led content, enabling users to purchase either one-time or renewable subscriptions tied to specific creators or collections.
• Subscription services that offer optional add-ons, such as additional channels, sports content, or region-specific options, as renewable purchases within a broader subscription framework.

These use-cases can now more flexibly leverage Apple's payment infrastructure, which includes end-to-end payment processing, tax compliance, and customer service integration. Apple details the eligibility criteria for developers applying to use the API in a new support document.

Apple's announcement appears to be part of a broader effort to refine its App Store policies following scrutiny, particularly in the European Union. This particular API appears to be a direct response to challenges faced by apps with unconventional monetization models, such as Patreon, an online platform that enables creators to offer paid memberships to their audiences. In 2022, Apple required Patreon to adopt the App Store's billing system for in-app purchases.

Article Link: Apple Announces New In-App Purchase API

 

[QuarterSwede]

Or you can be like some podcasters I listen to and literally direct your audience away from spending 30% more by buying on Apple’s platform and instead buy from their patreon directly. Apple is starting to have a real issue here with those types of platforms.

 

[Ctrlos]

Apple really need to take one on the chin with all this IAP stuff and just refuse to take a cut of IAP App revenue. Most of their income in this sector comes from games anyway which they can leave alone because the categories are not so vague.

With apps a developer could be selling loyalty, movies, delivery, food, magazines, books, songs, images, looking for crowdfunding and all sorts of other things that Apple really has no business taking any cut of. If I want to rent a movie anywhere but iTunes I have to go via a web portal which is the very definition of anti-competitive given the inconvenience.

 

[CarAnalogy]

Just give us upgrade pricing! Stop ruining software with IAP!

 

[chrono1081]

Just give us upgrade pricing! Stop ruining software with IAP!

As much as I hate IAPs myself it's literally the only way anymore to monetize software. People just don't want to pay for software anymore and a lot of software relies on various data APIs to use, those API's aren't free and cost money and those prices usually go up with app popularity.

A developer can't rely on a single stand-alone purchase covering the cost of those APIs for the life of the app, hence subscription services are the answer.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Personally, I find every possible way to subscribe (and pay) creators directly

Screw Apple trying to take a cut of every bloody thing they have no right to touch

 

[apparatchik]

Apple really need to take one on the chin with all this IAP stuff and just refuse to take a cut of IAP App revenue. Most of their income in this sector comes from games anyway which they can leave alone because the categories are not so vague.

With apps a developer could be selling loyalty, movies, delivery, food, magazines, books, songs, images, looking for crowdfunding and all sorts of other things that Apple really has no business taking any cut of. If I want to rent a movie anywhere but iTunes I have to go via a web portal which is the very definition of anti-competitive given the inconvenience.

You might want to edit your post.

Apple doesn't take a cut on physical goods, I've developed pharmacy and dog food delivery apps, and other than the $100 / year developer membership, Apple doesn't get a cent from any of the companies products (in the millions per year) sold and charged for directly within the apps.

 

[Ctrlos]

You might want to edit your post.

Apple doesn't take a cut on physical goods, I've developed pharmacy and dog food delivery apps, and other than the $100 / year developer membership, Apple doesn't get a cent from any of the companies products (in the millions per year) sold and charged for directly within the apps.

Bar food, everything else was meant as a digital purchase

 

[koelsh]

Was anyone complaining about the API(s)? Everything I've heard boils down the policy being what's broken and Apple's announcement doesn't seem to mention the policy being replaced or updated.

 

[CarAnalogy]

As much as I hate IAPs myself it's literally the only way anymore to monetize software. People just don't want to pay for software anymore and a lot of software relies on various data APIs to use, those API's aren't free and cost money and those prices usually go up with app popularity.

A developer can't rely on a single stand-alone purchase covering the cost of those APIs for the life of the app, hence subscription services are the answer.

Right but upgrade pricing solves a lot of the same problem, especially on the Mac. Some software is absolutely worth paying for, but not worth paying forever. I would also happily pay upgrade pricing for substantial upgrades.

IAP is now the only way because it’s been made the only way. I understand what you’re saying about cloud services and monthly recurring revenue and all that. But it’s not the only option, and Apple has come out in the past with their excuses for why they don’t support upgrade pricing.

It’s more about Apple’s recurring revenue than the developers.

 

[turbineseaplane]

There's no good reason to not support both subscriptions and upgrade pricing

Different models are better for different software products and markets

Apple has chosen to support only the method that's better for them (recurring revenue)

 

[McWetty]

Probably not a popular opinion, but I go out of my way to avoid software that has IAP or a subscription. I’m happy to pay for a sub that calls data from other sources or pays licensing fees (Carrot, Parcel, Music+), but almost everything else either needs to be an up front cost or pay for an upgrade. I switched from Adobe to Affinity for that reason.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Probably not a popular opinion, but I go out of my way to avoid software that has IAP or a subscription. I’m happy to pay for a sub that calls data from other sources or pays licensing fees (Carrot, Parcel, Music+), but almost everything else either needs to be an up front cost or pay for an upgrade. I switched from Adobe to Affinity for that reason.

Agreed

I prefer to pay for software and upgrades and if there are recurring costs on their end to provide the App/Service, have those spelled out separately and transparently. I'm happy to pay in a recurring fashion when there actually are legitimate recurring costs to a developer

But I'm not interested in just having a developer "on a recurring retainer payment" to "keep working as they see fit (or not)"

 

[ProbablyDylan]

• Apps that provide access to creator-led content, enabling users to purchase either one-time or renewable subscriptions tied to specific creators or collections.

This is for apps like Patreon, I'm guessing? Wasn't there a bunch of drama last year about Apple taking a 30% cut from creators?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Or you can be like some podcasters I listen to and literally direct your audience away from spending 30% more by buying on Apple’s platform and instead buy from their patreon directly. Apple is starting to have a real issue here with those types of platforms.

From what I’ve seen happening with MuseScore recently where I’m SOOO glad that I paid my subscription through Apple, there’s no way anyone’s getting money from me directly.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

With apps a developer could be selling loyalty, movies, delivery, food, magazines, books, songs, images, looking for crowdfunding and all sorts of other things that Apple really has no business taking any cut of. If I want to rent a movie anywhere but iTunes I have to go via a web portal which is the very definition of anti-competitive given the inconvenience.

The answer seems simple to me, if anyone wants to make ABSOLUTELY sure that Apple gets none of their money, make sure they don’t have any goods/services that require a user to have a device with an Apple logo on it to use. Like me, I don’t have anything on the App Store, so my money comes to me without paying a commission to Apple. It’s actually super easy, barely an inconvenience.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

As much as I hate IAPs myself it's literally the only way anymore to monetize software. People just don't want to pay for software anymore and a lot of software relies on various data APIs to use, those API's aren't free and cost money and those prices usually go up with app popularity.

A developer can't rely on a single stand-alone purchase covering the cost of those APIs for the life of the app, hence subscription services are the answer.

Upgrades were things offered with the software companies were mid-to-large sized and the sales folks were continually pushing the app such that developers could get paid. Today, IAP’s means a developer doesn’t HAVE to have sales folks, just find enough folks that receive value that they’re willing to pay for monthly, and that small team of developers can continue to work on their app while receiving living expenses. Just like in the old days, but it’s only being filtered through 1 company instead of filtering through 10-12 organizations in a big company.

 

[nt5672]

Agreed

I prefer to pay for software and upgrades and if there are recurring costs on their end to provide the App/Service, have those spelled out separately and transparently. I'm happy to pay in a recurring fashion when there actually are legitimate recurring costs to a developer

But I'm not interested in just having a developer "on a recurring retainer payment" to "keep working as they see fit (or not)"

Every year, whether by malice or ignorance, Apple breaks it APIs. It is not feasible with Apple products to write and forget. That is what the subscription is that you are paying for. The developer really does NOT want to do this.

 

[Ctrlos]

The answer seems simple to me, if anyone wants to make ABSOLUTELY sure that Apple gets none of their money, make sure they don’t have any goods/services that require a user to have a device with an Apple logo on it to use. Like me, I don’t have anything on the App Store, so my money comes to me without paying a commission to Apple. It’s actually super easy, barely an inconvenience.

I still prefer physical reads and I've bought my music from iTunes for over 20 years so I'm not going to moan about music.

 

[robertosh]

After almost 4 years of work I'm closing to release my first ever app (game). It will have no ads, no micro-transactions, no data collection, no internet connection needed. Free to test, one-time payment to unlock it all, forever. I know that is not the most profitable way, but it's the most honest one. I think is also in developers hands to change the current unfriendly ecosystem in the mobile app stores. I will start with my little stone.

 

[garranhado]

Subscriptions should be only for content (books, movies & series, music, …) not app or features. For apps we should pay one time and major updates.

Apple should change that!!

 

[henrikhelmers]

As much as I hate IAPs myself it's literally the only way anymore to monetize software. People just don't want to pay for software anymore and a lot of software relies on various data APIs to use, those API's aren't free and cost money and those prices usually go up with app popularity.

A developer can't rely on a single stand-alone purchase covering the cost of those APIs for the life of the app, hence subscription services are the answer.

But isn't this because selling upgrades isn't possible? I think selling upgrades would also make the AppStore more fun, as every major release would be an easy milestone to promote. SaaS is just so incredibly boring.

 

[turbineseaplane]

But isn't this because selling upgrades isn't possible? I think selling upgrades would also make the AppStore more fun, as every major release would be an easy milestone to promote. SaaS is just so incredibly boring.

Not only boring, but can be actively frustrating

I look forward to and enjoy major software releases where I can dig in on what's new, what has changed... decide if I want to jump onboard now or lets things shake out (maybe for years!)

With SaaS, it's the total opposite and can be infuriating when some tiny update on a Thursday "changes something" and is annoying or breaks something or you just don't like it.... maybe it was a even a bad decision on a whim by a Dev and now you have to spend time on a forum or email complaining about it in hopes it changes.

Multiply that by all the Apps installed and constantly getting "updates" and it's like being in a flood stage river trying to just keep your head above water.

I actually sometimes think, for Devs, SaaS can allow too much ease and speed for un-thoughtfully tinkering and tweaking with deployed and in use software.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Or you can be like some podcasters I listen to and literally direct your audience away from spending 30% more by buying on Apple’s platform and instead buy from their patreon directly. Apple is starting to have a real issue here with those types of platforms.

Good.

Less money in the pocket of a trillion dollar giant and more in the pocket of the little guy trying to make a living.

 

[I7guy]

Good.

Less money in the pocket of a trillion dollar giant and more in the pocket of the little guy trying to make a living.

The trillion dollar company is the enabler for others to make money for virtually no outlay. If you don’t like the way apple operates, should be a piece of cake to:
- develop, design, manufacture, ship and distribute your own platform
- hire software engineers to architect an appropriate solution, get data center resources to support the workload
- figure out how the aftermarket support
- get developers to join your cause. After all 100% of the developers are fed up with apple taking a cut.
- you of course will host for free or a nominal cost that doesn’t even cover expenses. You’ll get revenue through, hardware and software upgrade sales. Charging for software will be a hit with the user base.

Should be a piece of cake to do with everybody who has ideas about the way apple is mismanaged.