EU Finds Apple Lacking in Efforts to Address In-App Payment Issues

[iChrist]

.
I'm confused. The screenshot say the IAP is $0.99. Shouldn't it be $9.99 or $99.99 as a more realistic example of the crapware that is 99% of the App Store??

 

[AdonisSMU]

About In-App Purchases: http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4009

I have absolutely no problems with Non-consumable and subscription IAPs as they have pretty clear legitimate uses:

• Non Consumable IAPs allow for developeres to release a demo of first X levels free, IAP to unlock the full game without the hassle of a seperate app with just the first 3 levels, and then having to download a different app for the full game potentially losing any progress from the demo along the way. This is essentially how the shareware / demoware software model has worked for decades with the purchase of unlock codes, additional level packs, etc
• Subscription IAPs are brilliant for magazine content subscriptions / premium content subscriptions such as MVP in MapMyFitness, and the like.

I can even see in principle where consumable IAPs might have a valid role in life but they are also massively massively abused in a "death by a thousand cuts" approach by greedy developers who make games where progress all but impossible without them.

Who are you to call developers greedy? Um many people's hard work goes into apps not just us "greedy" developers. You use the apps everyday then you need to pay for it. The servers that sit behind the apps aren't free.

 

[charlituna]

I disagree that bad parenting is involved. Leaving a child locked in a hot car is bad parenting. Not being completely aware of every possible back door charge on an item listed as FREE is not.

It's more a case of not paying attention to your kids and what they are doing. Whether it's paying with an iPad, playing with chemicals in the back yard or whatever.

And don't be like the guys that told his kid the account password and then also didn't look at his credit card bill for six months cause he thought it was paid off. If he had opened the bill he would have seen the first charges and stopped it before he got in trouble with the bank for nonpayment etc.

 

[AdonisSMU]

I've been saying it since it was first introduced.
There is no place for in-app purchases.

It is becoming a ridiculous money-making scheme that is going to ruin the mobile app market.

Apple needs to introduce an option for their customers to choose to 'opt out' of in app purchases, which simply disable the ability for your device to even make in-app purchases.

Apple also needs to add an extra feature to choose to disable or hide all apps that contain in-app purchases.

Apple is moving away from being customer focused and moving towards being profit focused.
As a look towards the future, I am actually considering to purchase something other than an Apple product. I no longer believe that Apple has my best interest in designing their products.

Do you boo. However, no one has your best interest at heart. Everything you buy you are being sold.

 

[kerrikins]

Which is why Apple should accommodate their customers properly.

Eh, I am really torn on this. Increasingly this has turned into "treat all consumers as though they are ten years old, hold their hands through every step and difficulty they may encounter, and give them everything they want".

I do agree that the fifteen minute window was bad, however, and I'm glad that Apple is getting attention for it and changing it. I also hate games like Two Dots, where they make you wait for upwards of ten minutes unless you - surprise - buy such and such. I deleted the app because the longer I played the more I realised that they were using it as a blatant cash grab. I hate ads but I would rather deal with ads than deal with that sort of crap.

So if this makes Apple crack down on this sort of stuff, I am all for it.

(Also, MacRumors, really? Stop saying that Apple "tattled" on Google. They are not schoolchildren, they are huge corporations and if one is going to be held to a certain standard the other should be as well.)

 

[Rogifan]

Two things apple could do:

1. Instead of having a misleading 'free' category on the App store, split it into "free" and "variable price".

2. Require all software with IAP to have a paid version with all IAP benefits unlocked.

No. I don't want the App Store further cluttered with the same app, one free and one paid. Give me one app and let me upgrade in-app if I chose to do so. Maybe there needs to be different rules for games but I still wouldn't want to see two versions of every app in the store.

----------

.
I'm confused. The screenshot say the IAP is $0.99. Shouldn't it be $9.99 or $99.99 as a more realistic example of the crapware that is 99% of the App Store??

Ok I'll bite: what's your source for 99% of the App Store being crapware?

 

[Oletros]

Have you ever tried to get the old Mac Pro towards the end? You can read it quite everywhere, also here on MR. In my book when something was made available for years but then gets removed by the gov't, it's pretty much a ban, at least in my sucky English dictionary.

Yes, that would be a ban but that was not what happened.

When a government make a regulation with 5 years to change your products in a simple way and you don't change them they are not banning your product

 

[charlituna]

It's not misleading. Have you ever downloaded any free app and have it ask you for money before it downloaded ?

Actually in some cases it can be. There are apps that are just viewers which are listed as free, implying that the service is also free, but it's not. That is the sort of thing that the EU is balking about. If you have to pay for a service to have any content in the app then it is not free and should not say fees. I rather agree with that point. Not sure what it should say but they could come up with something. Perhaps just 'install player' and a pop up that says that is just the viewer app and using it requires a subscription etc and has folks confirm they want it. By a similar token when the whole iOS 8 parent permission request thing kicks in it could require permission for downloading even free games that have IAP and let parents know this. Perhaps when bar IAP on an account level rather than device level.

 

[nsayer]

Doing business in Europe

I make and sell small electronic things.

I can't sell them in Europe because of RoHS, and lead-free solder is just too onerous to work with.

More and more, Europe is just becoming too difficult a market to deal with because of the increasing burdens of EU regulations. How much more of this before large businesses just decide that Europe isn't worth the bother?

 

[Oletros]

Apple should just buy the EU.
Mebbe they could make it profitable instead of trillions in debt with no growth and 11% unemployment.
Magic.

I suppose that those posts are just to try to start a flame bait

 

[whooleytoo]

You mean something like this

Looks good - but it needs to be really simple to use. It wouldn't surprise me if many children are more tech-savvy (or at least, more determined! ) than the parents who own the devices.

Ideally a button in the iOS7 control centre to Lock to current app - so you can't leave and use another app without password, IAP is disabled and notifications are disabled. Maybe make it context-sensitive? So if you hit the button in an app it limits them to that app, if you hit the button in a Home screen folder it restricts them to the apps in that folder.

 

[Oletros]

Actually in some cases it can be. There are apps that are just viewers which are listed as free, implying that the service is also free, but it's not. That is the sort of thing that the EU is balking about. If you have to pay for a service to have any content in the app then it is not free and should not say fees. I rather agree with that point. Not sure what it should say but they could come up with something. Perhaps just 'install player' and a pop up that says that is just the viewer app and using it requires a subscription etc and has folks confirm they want it. By a similar token when the whole iOS 8 parent permission request thing kicks in it could require permission for downloading even free games that have IAP and let parents know this. Perhaps when bar IAP on an account level rather than device level.

Totally agree

 

[ssspinball]

And so they should. Apple is pretty much playing the dangerous game of monopoly - something that here in the EU takes very seriously!

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word monopoly. Apple does not have the only app store in the world.

 

[charlituna]

.
I'm confused. The screenshot say the IAP is $0.99. Shouldn't it be $9.99 or $99.99 as a more realistic example of the crapware that is 99% of the App Store??

Very few game IAP are that high. Developers like the whole 99 cents thing cause folks don't think as much about paying that little even when it's a one time use thing and they do it 100 times without really thinking. If it's $99.99 almost everyone stops to consider what they are getting for it. And many don't do it.

 

[osx11]

Nanny state hard at work.

It's called consumer protection! Free-market capitalism has its faults. This is one way of addressing these issues.

 

[charlituna]

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word monopoly. Apple does not have the only app store in the world.

The confusion comes from folks not understanding what the market is. Years ago Apple was hit with a monopoly charge by a company that wanted the courts to let them create and sell hackintosh systems because Apple has a monopoly in the Macintosh market. Only the courts ruled that there is no 'Macintosh market' and that Apple is part of the personal computer system market and has no market power to abuse there etc. Same with smartphones, tablets etc. There is no iPhone market or iPad market.

 

[OtherJesus]

Always find it laughable that governments go after companies for irresponsible parenting.

While I detest IAP, I have to agree that I detest nanny state government even more.

There are plenty of restrictions parents can put turn on in iOS. Furthermore, they can opt to have a "none" payment option or give their kids gift cards.

 

[charlituna]

Looks good - but it needs to be really simple to use.

How is what you are saying more simple than a saved mode that could potentially be tied to the passcode. Junior enters his passcode of 1234 and gets a fully restricted mode that shows literally just his face games and the copy of Cars that is loaded in the Video App. Versus I enter my passcode of H2&xx19lO!mK (which means something to me but he has no clue about it) and I see my mail, safari, my episodes of true blood and breaking bad, the App Store etc.

Sure it takes a little longer to set up but it covers all items and I don't have to go in and turn them on and off all the time nor do I have to restrict him to one game or app like Guided Access does. And since the device can't be restored without my Apple ID password cause I have find my turned on even if he's savvy enough go know how to do a DFU he won't be able to get back in anyway.

now arguing that the options for IAP should disappear if buying them in restricted, or being able to turn them off during searches on an account level for junior can't see any apps that have IAP (nor games, shows, movie, book listings above his age), ok that I can agree with. Setting up a mode so that find my is tied to my iCloud and not his so he can't erase to get around the rules in his personal iPad, yeah I'll agree with that as part of restricted mode.

 

[krravi]

Nanny state hard at work.

I also heard Apple is free to operate in Somalia as it pleases.

 

[Rogifan]

Actually in some cases it can be. There are apps that are just viewers which are listed as free, implying that the service is also free, but it's not. That is the sort of thing that the EU is balking about. If you have to pay for a service to have any content in the app then it is not free and should not say fees. I rather agree with that point. Not sure what it should say but they could come up with something. Perhaps just 'install player' and a pop up that says that is just the viewer app and using it requires a subscription etc and has folks confirm they want it. By a similar token when the whole iOS 8 parent permission request thing kicks in it could require permission for downloading even free games that have IAP and let parents know this. Perhaps when bar IAP on an account level rather than device level.

Apps that require a subscription to work should say "subscription required" rather than "free" with "offers in-app purchases" below. Maybe games that require IAP to progress could be labeled as "free to try" or something. Not sure it will matter though as the kids who don't understand any of this (and are allowed to use a parents device unsupervised) probably won't understand the different labels either.

 

[iChrist]

Ok I'll bite: what's your source for 99% of the App Store being crapware?

1.2 million apps. Would you say there are over 12,000 apps worth paying for, not poor imitations of another app, or try to trick you into IAPs?

Obviously it wasn't a percentage based on anything, more of an exaggeration, but actually, maybe it's over 99%. Who knows.

 

[Ries]

So is the EU admitting that Europeans are so ****ing stupid and retarded that they can't figure that out for themselves? Really?

at least they are working to protect us, not rip us off as much as possible. $1000 for a bucket of blue berries in a free kids app, is nothing more than scam. Especially when the password unlocked all you can buy for 15min without passwords.

 

[iChrist]

Very few game IAP are that high. Developers like the whole 99 cents thing cause folks don't think as much about paying that little even when it's a one time use thing and they do it 100 times without really thinking. If it's $99.99 almost everyone stops to consider what they are getting for it. And many don't do it.

Many apps, especially games, offer purchases that high, in addition to $0.99. Is that a genuine offer to a paying customer? Or are they just trying to fleece someone who's not paying attention (like a child)?

 

[macduke]

Clearly the only solution that would make these people happy is to eliminate in-app purchases altogether. I, for one, support this endeavor. DOWN WITH IAP! Haha. But seriously, yes—kill IAP. Especially in games. It's been ruining the App Store for years now. In it's place, allow for time-limited trials of apps. I know there are a lot of legit apps that are limited and you unlock the features with IAP. Just replace that with a dialog box that pops up after a specified period of time. They can choose to buy it or delete it. Done. Then we can put all the parasitic game companies like King out of business.

While they're at it, they should also add something I've been wanting in the App Store for a while: AAA Games section. Established AAA gaming studios would be invited, and newcomers would need to be vetted for the quality of the game. Set a minimum price of $29.99, a maximum price of $49.99, and allow developers to lower the price down to $19.99 or something when the game goes "gold" or sells a fixed number of copies, much like console makers do with hit games that are a year or two old. IMO this would help establish iOS as a premium gaming platform, as developers could set fair prices in their own section of the store. People would be more assured that their money is going towards a higher quality game with tons of content and replay value, instead of some 99 cent game which could be terrible. I'm all for indie gaming (and the App Store is overflowing with it), but I think that the App Store should also have a section for the big boys so that they might be more likely to port their games to iOS, and accessory makers would be more likely to create new controllers and compete in that space by lowering prices. Throw in a new Apple TV with App Store support and much faster graphics capabilities and suddenly Apple has their own console. Yes, these machines are getting to the point where they're at least as capable as an Xbox 360 or PS3 (especially with the new Metal API), and I'm fairly certain that my iPad will be faster than my Xbox One before the next generation of Xbox comes out, likely sometime after 2020 if the previous generation is any indication.

 

[00sjsl]

Why doesn't the EU then tell Apple specifically how they want the fix implemented and when they want it done by ? It seems very foolish to let a company say they would handle it, not get a timeframe, and then complain when the company doesn't implement the fix a way you like it or in the timeframe you wanted ?

Courts/Governments don't like to get into design since then they get the blame if the feature is implemented is a stupid way, e.g. browser choice.