Apple Reportedly 'Scrambling' to Make Required Changes to In-App Purchase Policies

[TouchMint.com]

Scrambling?
I can't be the only one that thinks freemium games are eeeeeevil and some of the developers that make them have ethics issues?

Agree 100%!

The quality of games are suffering for sure. I would love to see a shift away from freedom! hopefully this makes freedom unprofitible thus forcing dev companies out or to a better model.

When I say freedom I mean games that suck you in addict you and then force you to pay with real money to progress or be the best. Free games with a trial and then full purchase or games that allow you to buy cosmetics are fine by me.

 

[bpcookson]

I would be fine if they just got rid of in-app purchases, completely.

As a consumer, I think in-app purchases are one of the worst developments and trends in recent years.

I completely disagree. There is nothing inherently wrong with the in-app purchase system and it does, in fact, provide a great benefit to developers and consumers alike. It is simply the recent abuse of the technology that is unfortunate.

In my opinion, one of the worst developments and trends in recent years is the knee-jerk "throw the baby out with the bath water" reaction.

Perhaps of even more concern, today's massive social outlets can turn minor public discontent into huge movements overnight. People have so many tools at their disposal that it's just too easy to start a crusade. Given the first world's aching hole-in-the-heart affliction called Materialism, we all need a torch to bear; the masses are readily galvanized. Then government needs us to believe in them or they're out of a job so they need to take action and, since the hard stuff is hard, they take up the torch on this dumb stuff.

 

[BaldiMac]

That's the point, though: there's no way to turn off one-click purchasing currently. Once you authorize a purchase once, it will allow any subsequent purchases without a password - at least until a time limit expires.

You can enable Restrictions to require a password with every purchase.

 

[SMIDG3T]

Hmm...so nothing could come out after noon central? Maybe next week then.

There's also tomorrow but I highly doubt it. Monday or Tuesday I think.

 

[C DM]

I hate to be that guy... but maybe not give your kid an iPhone/iPad??

Yup, when it rains, just don't bother going outside at all, no need to try to come up with a solution like an umbrella or anything when a much simpler solution of sating at home and not doing anything at all exists.

 

[Parasprite]

I know enough to know a 2 year old shouldn't be allowed to hold, and especially not left unattended, with a device made of glass and thin metal. Sounds like a family and children services, shattered glass and lacerations, neglect case waiting to happen.

Sounds more like a bandaid to cover the owie they got from tripping over the dog and a trip to the Apple Store to convince them it was a 2 foot drop out of your front pocket onto bathroom tile for good measure.

What happened to hotwheels, GIjoe, TV, Nintendo, etc.

Except for Nintendo, they probably already have iOS apps that are (at least marginally) compatible with their toys.

 

[jozero]

I wish they had the opposite setting. "Ask to enter a password only once a day for purchases".

The gymnastics required so people with children don't buy a Ferrari is screwing it up for the vast majority without little children.

 

[GQB]

Since many people aren't aware of their ability to personalize settings, making these options on by default would make a lot more sense. People really do need to do more research though if this is causing a significant issue.

There's nothing more annoying than the arrogance of the tech-savvy in demeaning those for whom digging through configuration settings is a daunting task.
We're in an age when anything designed with that paradigm is a fail.

----------

I wish they had the opposite setting. "Ask to enter a password only once a day for purchases".

The gymnastics required so people with children don't buy a Ferrari is screwing it up for the vast majority without little children.

The defaults should be for maximum lockdown, with the option for those who want more to dig into configurations, not the other way around.

 

[borderbob]

I know enough to know a 2 year old shouldn't be allowed to hold, and especially not left unattended, with a device made of glass and thin metal. Sounds like a family and children services, shattered glass and lacerations, neglect case waiting to happen.

What happened to hotwheels, GIjoe, TV, Nintendo, etc.

My 3 year old has a hand me down iPad2 in a rubber case. It's all good. That said, he managed to spend $140 on Angry Birds Friends coins before I learned about changing the AppStore password timeout.

Good thing I like Angry Birds Friends.



b.b.

 

[subsonix]

The defaults should be for maximum lockdown, with the option for those who want more to dig into configurations, not the other way around.

Why? It's more sensible to let a middle of the road approach be default, and then let any extreme in any direction require a personalized setting IMO.

 

[Antares]

I completely disagree. There is nothing inherently wrong with the in-app purchase system and it does, in fact, provide a great benefit to developers and consumers alike. It is simply the recent abuse of the technology that is unfortunate.

I agree. I like the basic idea of in-app-purchases. Let me buy only what features I want in an app or game. Let me buy expansions to my current game rather than having to buy a whole new game.

However, this is now being abused to the point where some developers are purposefully leaving out content in full priced games so they can charge you for that content, later. Or, with others, if you add up all the individual transactions (say, you want all the content), the total cost far exceeds what anyone would charge or pay for a full priced game. And really, why would a developer not do this? You're maximizing your income and not doing anything illegal...

I'm okay with IAP but it needs to be regulated better.

I agree with what you said. However, I'm not sure how Apple can realistically "regulate" this. Developers are technically not doing anything wrong. And there are way to many apps and transactions within apps to be able to monitor each individual IAP to ensure they fall within "guidelines" (whatever those guidelines may be).

Maybe Apple should require developers of games, with in-app purchases, to also have a full version of the game available (with all content included) available for purchase. Say, $20 or $30 for the full game and free version where you have to purchase all of the content separately.

 

[Hurmoth]

Terrific! I want to type my incredibly long password in more often, thereby killing my fingers, hands and carpal tunnel even more so. Thanks FTC!

/sarcasticrant



In all seriousness, there SHOULD BE an option to TURN this CRAP off. I get having it on by default, but let responsible humanbeings do whatever THE #*$Y#*$ they want.

 

[Reason077]

You can enable Restrictions to require a password with every purchase.

Yeah. I guess the problem is that this setting is buried so deeply in the settings where many users never see it. Maybe it needs to be turned on by default.

 

[jonAppleSeed]

You can enable Restrictions to require a password with every purchase.

THIS LEAVES A 15 MINUTE WINDOW OPEN FOR ALL SUBSEQUENT PURCHASES TO BE APPROVED

Sorry to yell, but people JUST. DON'T. GET. IT.

This is why Apple has to change their code.

 

[BaldiMac]

Yeah. I guess the problem is that this setting is buried so deeply in the settings where many users never see it. Maybe it needs to be turned on by default.

I don't know why. It's worked for a decade with great success in iTunes. I think the only "needed" solution is more prominent IAP information (which Apple has done to some extent.)

----------

THIS LEAVES A 15 MINUTE WINDOW OPEN FOR ALL SUBSEQUENT PURCHASES TO BE APPROVED

Sorry to yell, but people JUST. DON'T. GET. IT.

This is why Apple has to change their code.

Yelling doesn't help. And you are wrong.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

this is nothing different than my friends ordering pay per view porn and mainstream movies in the 80's and 90's without parent's permission and then swearing it was an accident

but that did not need your pin / password for free stuff. Now that will be like needing the pin to get free VOD shows and that is same pin for the PPV as well.

 

[tdmac]

This doesn't seem logical as the basis for a delay. I would think the FTC requirement would include "ANY" in app purchases. Thus, this would require this verification to work on any device running a version of iOS that works with in app purchases. Not simply those who upgrade to iOS 7.1.

 

[taptic]

So tired of in-app-purchases...

 

[lesferdinand]

People use cell phones as a babysitting device, maybe that's the problem.

Ultimately, kids being interested in whatever their parents are interested in is the root cause of all this 'trouble'. But I don't think we're going to revert that trait, developed over millions of years of evolution, any time soon...

There are two sides to this: on the one hand, some child-proofing activity may be expected from parents. On the other hand, exploitative behavior from the side of app publishers/developers should be addressed as well. It's overly simple (and thus very common) to put the blame all on one side.

 

[nagromme]

I would be fine if they just got rid of in-app purchases, completely.

As a consumer, I think in-app purchases are one of the worst developments and trends in recent years.

I think you mean consumable in-app purchases. That's an obnoxious business model, but only one of MANY things that can be done--and done most conveniently for the user--in-app than any other way.

For instance, if a developer releases a great and complete game, then later wants to develop and sell 20 more levels for it--this is a great way to do that. Or a useful limited app, even for free, that you can then pay to unlock additional "pro" features or upgrade to a full game. These are very fair business models, and they help developers eat while making it so users don't have to download (and nobody has to maintain) two different versions of an app.

Same for ad-supported games: that's fine, but if they offer an IAP to turn the ads off, even better!

 

[subsonix]

I think you mean consumable in-app purchases. That's an obnoxious business model, but only one of MANY things that can be done--and done most conveniently for the user--in-app than any other way.

For instance, if a developer releases a great and complete game, then later wants to develop and sell 20 more levels for it--this is a great way to do that.

It can also enable a "try before you buy" or demo of an app, without having to pay upfront.

 

[lesferdinand]

It can also enable a "try before you buy" or demo of an app, without having to pay upfront.

Yes, indeed. With Apple not caring enough so far to create a proper demo option in the App store, publishers/developers were forced to be creative with IAPs.

 

[subsonix]

Yes, indeed. With Apple not caring enough so far to create a proper demo option in the App store, publishers/developers were forced to be creative with IAPs.

A demo version of an app typically works in the same manner though, with some vital part left out.

 

[Menge]

THIS LEAVES A 15 MINUTE WINDOW OPEN FOR ALL SUBSEQUENT PURCHASES TO BE APPROVED

You are wrong. In Restrictions there is a setting that will make it ask for a password for every single purchase made. The password entry is only valid for that one purchase. I have it on.

 

[lesferdinand]

The defaults should be for maximum lockdown, with the option for those who want more to dig into configurations, not the other way around.

Yes, while at the same time making sure it remains usable (so not like Windows Vista) or else people will turn off security settings completely/resort to 1234-type passwords.

It's definitely not an easy problem to tackle. But one that a platform holder should be willing to accept. The touch home button in the 5s is a step in this direction: while objectively it reduces security (fingerprints can be lifted from the device and replicated while a good, not written down password can't (yet) be extracted from someone's brain without them cooperating) in many cases it increases it because it makes enabling enhanced security settings/passwords more convenient for the user.