As a user, I like Apple’s subscription and billing processes. If I remember correctly, Apple even sends out an email when a trial subscription is about to end, giving me plenty of time to cancel it. I’m far more likely to use an app or service if it offers a subscription via the App Store than if I have to go through a sign up process. (Also makes changing cards much less of a pain.)
As a developer (but I’m not an independent developer), I’d say it also makes sense. I wouldn’t want to deal with the hassle or fallout of handling customer billing info. I don’t want access to your billing info if I can help it. Now, if you’ve got a multiplatform service, especially one where even your Apple users are highly likely to use it on non-Apple devices (heck, they might not even use the service on any of their Apple devices but still use the service), then not using Apple’s billing system makes a lot more sense (especially if you’re a media service with the overhead costs of media rights). As for apps, one time or subscription, you should charge what will give you a profit after Apple’s cut. If your market won’t bear that price, then you should cut expenses. (If Apple weren’t taking a cut and you complained about the profitability of your app at $99 vs $130, I’d tell you the same thing. You know the upfront fee, you should account for that in your pricing, and you aren’t owed users.) It honestly seems like this is just another developer protesting Apple’s rules for free publicity for a new service. (Apple’s rules are a little unclear, but, if you offer a subscription outside of the App Store, you generally can’t have a direct link or a call to action to get them to go to your site to sign up for the subscription. The screenshotted message seems like it’s toeing the line between call to action and not. It seems intentionally grey area-y.) There’s also the smell test. It’s admittedly not absolute, but some services/apps seem more appropriate for external subscriptions and some seem more like just trying to avoid Apple’s fees (which seems scammy for an app or glorified app-service hybrid, anything that’s not clearly a service first and foremost). This one, my initial impression was that it’s more app than service.
As for Hey, I’m not clear what it’s supposed to do. Seems like it’s SaneBox, except you have to use a Hey email account and the Hey app? I don’t get an unreasonable amount of email, and I have a manual email workflow that mostly keeps me on top of things, so I’ve never felt the need for SaneBox (I do kinda wish iOS Mail had auto filing rules and an export button, but that’s about it). Using Hey would require me to change apps, change my email account that I use (which is almost like legally changing your name, your email account is essentially your online identity for most services), and it doesn’t really seem suited for the GTD-ish workflow I use, which means that the Hey way of doing things would have to be 1000% better than my current workflow to get me to use it. SaneBox would give me, like, 90% of the features for cheaper and let me keep my existing workflow. (The notes feature seems like a neat idea, but it’s one of those ones that sounds good on paper, but I’m not sure how much I’d actually use it in practice. Most of my email, I either delete, file away in a reference folder, copy the info I need from it and then file away or delete, reply immediately, or, if it’s actually actionable but not right now, I’ll add it to OmniFocus, or rather Reminders as I’m re-establishing an OmniFocus based system with my upcoming re-read of GTD. It’s the 2 minute rule, and it works well for me as long as I don’t let things just sit in my inbox. I can’t think of a context where I’d want to take notes on an email where it wouldn’t be an actionable email and thus better suited for my to-do system.)
