Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Introduces Subscription Codes for Developers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I mean, who cares about customers anyways? All that dev add is āno lock inā and they are good.
Unless that dev is indie developer or small business, customers are just disposable one-time income source, especially for big companies like Apple, Google, Microsoft etc. I think Apple does not want that happen, so they push devs to provide subscription instead of one-time payment.
Not only āstayā, but they will replace every single āpay once and use foreverā model as time goes on, eliminating āownershipā idea entirely. Wonder when we are unable to buy grocery at local supermarket and need to āsubscribe for foodā.
I think the subscription model has a lot of advantages. The problem is, most developers arenāt pricing their apps appropriately given the new model. An app that might have cost $50 to buy is suddenly $50/year. Itās ridiculous. Developers need to get real and stop overcharging (Iām looking at you 1Password) or customers will continue to resist the subscription model.
I agree. And once youāve eliminated the concept of ownership and a generation has grown up with ārentingā everything as the new normal, people will be even easier to control.
I think one of the problems with App Store is you don't have a direct relationship with your customers. Sure you don't have to manage payments and that's ok particularly when you're a small developer, but once you build a customer base you lose control over it. Your example is one of the cases you wish you had more control over the payment, you could in theory find out a user has been subscribed for a while and give him one of those codes, but is not really what you want to do, you wish you'd be able to lower the price not just give a discount.
Well more ways to rent a non transferable license to usesoftware, youbeverrealy ownd the software beforeither, jue just ownd a license to us ittgat had no time limit on it it.
Instead of adding useless features, Apple should work on revamping the entire subscription system. Working with subscriptions is notoriously hard on iOS as StoreKit makes it super hard for developers to be able to detect subscription status, detect refunds, and handle upgrades/crossgrades.
Why on earth is there no simple "func doesUserHaveValidSubscription(for: String) -> Bool" function in StoreKit? Why do I have to process every single receipt, handle the expiration time, and detect if any receipt is not-expired every time just to answer the simple question of "Is the user subscribed?" when Apple literally knows the answer but is not telling me? Why does Apple not offer an API endpoint to check a user's subscription status and instead relies on webhooks that are so poorly documented? Why can't I log in to a dashboard and issue refunds? Why can't I accept promo codes in my app and instead have to tell the user to go through 3 sets of menus in App Store to redeem the code?
Revenue from apps being in the neighborhood of $500m/yr for Apple, you'd think they would do a better job of building out a subscription platform.
Why on earth is there no simple "func doesUserHaveValidSubscription(for: String) -> Bool" function in StoreKit? Why do I have to process every single receipt, handle the expiration time, and detect if any receipt is not-expired every time just to answer the simple question of "Is the user subscribed?" when Apple literally knows the answer but is not telling me? Why does Apple not offer an API endpoint to check a user's subscription status and instead relies on webhooks that are so poorly documented? Why can't I log in to a dashboard and issue refunds? Why can't I accept promo codes in my app and instead have to tell the user to go through 3 sets of menus in App Store to redeem the code?
Revenue from apps being in the neighborhood of $500m/yr for Apple, you'd think they would do a better job of building out a subscription platform.
You know what ekseis handely ( fir the seller) skkiped with subscriptions, the sticker shock,a cusummer seas $499 for perpetual license to use office and thinks hell no,I cant afford that Iāll uselibre/open office insteadā the same person sees office for $29.99/mount and thinks ā30/mounth, jea I can afford thatā and clicks subscribe withoutcalculatimg the cost over time, I dusoect most people think more about cash imidiate cash flow and instant gratification-than tco
Except Apple kinda do force devs when offering a subscription is basically a prerequisite to have their app featured on the App Store front page..
[/QUOTE]
I think you have to accept that according to the pro-Apple majority narrative that money is just enough to maintain the status quo.
Any further improvements would make an increase of the commission Apple gets inevitable...
Are you sure? I mean I could be wrong, but I just checked the App Store on my iPhone and thereās Game of The day called Bird Alone featured, and its a paid app one time purchase.
There are other paid apps being featured that are one time purchases on the App Store front page. Right now, I see other apps like Tenuto, Subwords, Oreos, that are one time purchases.
Do let me know any official statements if subscription is a requirement for an app to be featured on the App Store front page, because my experience said otherwise.
You obviously don't know the unreasonable high revenue that Apple makes with the App Store. You should appreciate how much time, money and effort is necessary to create a good app and then compare this with the effort Apple is putting into improving the App Store.
Apple is too big to fail right now, and they are in an amazingly comfortable position. Iād argue they can just sit around for 2 years not actually innovating while still being able to survive. Of course they will keep innovating, but Apple can keep doing whatever they are doing and everybody else just have to suck it.
$5 a month or 5 cents a month doesn't matter to me and others like me. We don't have a choice to do subscriptions. A subscription only app simply means that I have to way to ever have it. Subscription only apps and applications are a roadblock for people without access to a credit card.
Isnāt the App Store a roadblock for people without access to a credit card? I thought you had to have a card to even purchase a non-subscription item.
Nokia was too big to fail, too. Turns out they werenāt too big to fail, folks just assumed that they couldnāt win and didnāt try. A lot of that is going on now, āAppleās far too big (even though Android is WAY bigger) and they canāt be beat. Iād better just figure out how I can profit on what theyāve already built.ā
Well, Nokia certainly did not reach $2T back then, and Apple is doing a lot of amazing things that wows the industry etc. Situation has changed a lot.
Yes, Android is new new Nokia and is so large that Apple doesnāt even compete in a lot of markets. One wrong move and they could absolutely fail. If folks get their way and youāre able to install whatever you want on an Apple device, then itās a very good chance they could BECOME too big to fail because the entire industry would be propping up their hardware.
For now, though, theyāre just a good sized number two and in no way too big to fail. (Iāll check this post again in 10 years or so