WordPress for iOS Was Blocked From Updating Unless it Agreed to Add In-App Purchases for .Com Plans [Updated]

[Shirasaki]

Makes me wonder if Apple would have an issue with developers advertising their prices as “$10 + Taxes and Fees” for a $13 IAP.

In a world where profitability must always be on the rise, stuff like this is bound to happen. I have a hunch Apple wouldn’t allow it.

If that markup happened from day one, Apple would just bite the bullet anyways. Maybe because Steve Jobs did not want that happen back in early days, given their track record of squeezing their business partners. If I am a developer that creates paid app on iOS and Android, I would no doubts pass this 30% fee to customer without mentioning it anywhere in my app. It is not MY responsibility to foot Apple’s bill. It is the CUSTOMERS.

 

[Shirasaki]

Please, raise your price and see what the market can bear.

Do it from day one when App Store was born, not 10 years later and suddenly realise “30% of my 1 billion revenue is too much!” These kind of cuts should be paid by customer, not developer.

Gimme a break.

 

[rp2011]

Greed.

Business

 

[russell_314]

You’re either misunderstanding the point or are just willfully obtuse, but either way, my point is not about the markup but about the product selection.
Automattic sells Wordpress premium services (the farmer’s eggs) elsewhere. They don’t sell them through iOS, at all. Now Apple (the grocery store) is saying they’ll no longer carry Automattic’s free offering (the farmer’s cheese) unless they also get the premium money (eggs.)

Actually that happens in regular business as well. It’s quite common. I understand what you mean now though. Apple is requiring them sell the eggs if they also want to have other products in their stores. The farmer is free to take all his products out of the store.

 

[jeblis]

I don’t know why companies think access to the App Store should be free. It’s way more than just payment processing.

 

[sinoka56]

I don’t know why companies think access to the App Store should be free. It’s way more than just payment processing.

They pay $99 yearly, and for people saying $99 is cheap, $99 is 83 (82.5) customers of $4 if they're going to pay the Apple tax. Calculation is 99 / (4*.3).

 

[bousozoku]

This doesn't make any sense to me. Apple don't need to profit from every company on the planet. They have a business of their own. They should be living or dying on their own works.

It makes sense to charge a fee for hosting, promoting, administration of applications but forcing companies to provide profit from options that have primarily been outside their apps seems ripe for governmental intervention.

 

[Michael Scrip]

I don’t know why companies think access to the App Store should be free. It’s way more than just payment processing.

It shouldn't be "free" but it shouldn't be a flat 30% either.

Let's say an app offers a $1 in-app-purchase and a $50 in-app-purchase.

Apple would be getting $0.30 for the former and $15 for the latter. What's the difference? They're both digital transactions happening in the blink of an eye in Apple's data center. Apple isn't doing anything more for the $50 pack of gems versus the $1 pack of gems for some silly game... yet one takes much more money from the developer.

I agree that Apple provides more than just payment processing... but the flat fee becomes ridiculous at some point.

 

[s66]

Dear Apple:

Please add an NDA clause in your contracts that gags companies that agree to your terms and conditions in the app store from complaining about the policy once they signed it.

That way we don't get to suffer to the idiots doing this to draw attention to their product/app. Be done with it, please.

As to the developers: live with it, every other platform charges you too.

As to the end users: who cares who gets what cut of your money, it's not like it makes stuff more expensive - pricing is based on what you want to pay for it, so how that is divided up will not change the amount in the least (unless some dev is trying to do yet another PR stunt)

As to those of us choosing iOS because it's a closed system: one app store, one in app payment system, one set of parental controls, one limit on in app spending, ... that's comfort, and it's worth a lot.

All the others: please enjoy your android device, and leave the rest of us alone.

 

[kerr]

Apple's greed knows no bounds. Took 42 years to become a $1 trillion company, and just 2 more years to become a $2 trillion company. Keep doing what you're doing Apple if you want to turn businesses, developers and customers away.

 

[sinoka56]

Dear Apple:

Please add an NDA clause in your contracts that gags companies that agree to your terms and conditions in the app store from complaining about the policy once they signed it.

That way we don't get to suffer to the idiots doing this to draw attention to their product/app. Be done with it, please.

As to the developers: live with it, every other platform charges you too.

As to the end users: who cares who gets what cut of your money, it's not like it makes stuff more expensive - pricing is based on what you want to pay for it, so how that is divided up will not change the amount in the least (unless some dev is trying to do yet another PR stunt)

As to those of us choosing iOS because it's a closed system: one app store, one in app payment system, one set of parental controls, one limit on in app spending, ... that's comfort, and it's worth a lot.

All the others: please enjoy your android device, and leave the rest of us alone.

Just because people don't agree with your foolish thinking mean that they're idiots. LMAO

If there are new app stores get introduced, just don't use them, it's that simple.

 

[aidler]

It‘s very very difficult and a lot of money is on the line but I think developers and companies should stick together against Apple and fight this through.

 

[Reason077]

The greed jumped out. To expect a 30% cut of ALL online subscription services that have an iOS app is way too much.

Exactly. It’s not Apple’s rules that are unreasonable, it’s the 30% cut.

If it were, say, 15% on digital content purchases (Amazon reportedly got this deal), then it wouldn’t seem like such a racket.

 

[Reason077]

Apple doesn’t take a cut of my Netflix subscription nor my Spotify sub.

By not offering subscriptions within the app and therefore not giving Apple their 30% cut, Spotify and Netflix are violating the App Store rules.

They’re big enough to get away with it, but for everyone who isn’t Spotify or Netflix (or Amazon), you better pay up.

 

[Naaaaak]

You don't get it!

Apple is providing value!
End-users are protected by Apple's swift and just action!
WordPress just tried to just rob a store, an app store, and Apple caught them!
In-App purchase is a fundamental right and if you don't like it, make your own store!
Only Apple can enforce rules so equally.

My name's Rene Ritchie John Gruber I'm buying the next 10 app consoles iPhones!

 

[Reason077]

My Email provider offers an iOS email client app, but they don't offer IAP subscription payment, you have to go through their website. So that's a 'reader' app too.

There was recently an email app (called “Hey”) which was rejected from the App Store for doing exactly this. Apple seems to have determined that email apps are not “reader” apps.

 

[BaltimoreMediaBlog]

I don’t think you can compare iOS to Android this way. Google licenses out Android for other hardware companies to distribute, much like how Microsoft does with PCs. They make the software to work on a bunch of different types of hardware, and leave it up to them as to what to do with it. Some make their own app stores with their own branding and stuff.

Apple makes the hardware and the software. That’s it.

That doesn't give Apple the right to put a gun to their heads and force their terms on them or me. I want to do with something I buy, what I want to do with it, not what Timmy says I'm ALLOWED TO. I OWN IT, NOT TIMMMY! I have an iPhone that can run 32 bit apps for lots of cool free games, but Apple says that isn't allowed anymore, so Timmy yanks the rug out from under you after you paid all that money for the iPhone. I hope Apple loses this battle for this and several other reasons.

 

[Reason077]

Why do you think it's 'ridiculous'?

Netflix don't provide iAP, so Netflix don't have to pay anything to Apple for Netflix subscriptions.

It’s not that simple because, for most apps, Apple requires that any purchases, services and subscriptions you offer elsewhere must be made available through the app using IAP. Netflix is an exception here.

 

[the8thark]

Learn to make better analogies before you make a fool out of yourself again

Learn to understand what a good analogy is before you make a fool of yourself.

 

[the8thark]

That doesn't give Apple the right to put a gun to their heads and force their terms on them or me.

Apple doesn't force you to put your app on the iOS store. You have android and other platforms. You are also free to create your own platform to put your app on.
[automerge]1598074390[/automerge]

Don’t like Apples platform? Go somewhere else. It’s simple.

Epic, Wordpress and others fail to understand this.

 

[farewelwilliams]

Should Apple take 30% of my pizza order? How about 30% of my cell phone bill if I pay it in my banking app? These situations make zero sense.

Of course it doesn't make sense, that's why they exempt those apps from the 30%.

If I buy coins or new levels in Candy Crush? Sure! If the purchase is used only for that app, and the data is hosted on Apples servers, they 100% deserve a 30% cut of that.

That's what Apple is doing...


I think you're proving Apple's stance here.

 

[Shirasaki]

Dear Apple:

Please add an NDA clause in your contracts that gags companies that agree to your terms and conditions in the app store from complaining about the policy once they signed it.

That way we don't get to suffer to the idiots doing this to draw attention to their product/app. Be done with it, please.

As to the developers: live with it, every other platform charges you too.

As to the end users: who cares who gets what cut of your money, it's not like it makes stuff more expensive - pricing is based on what you want to pay for it, so how that is divided up will not change the amount in the least (unless some dev is trying to do yet another PR stunt)

As to those of us choosing iOS because it's a closed system: one app store, one in app payment system, one set of parental controls, one limit on in app spending, ... that's comfort, and it's worth a lot.

All the others: please enjoy your android device, and leave the rest of us alone.

In summary: the only company that can earn money is Apple, Google and nobody else. Let’s promote monopoly and duopoly, and beg those mega corps to squeeze even more from every single man, woman and child on the planet.
Feel free to sign that up if you consider it a good deal.

 

[Cycling Asia]

Soon Apple will start blocking the online banking apps unless they get 30% of all online fund transfers. Noting that they were going to block WeChat because of the exact same fund transfers.

 

[farewelwilliams]

I think the problem is that the 70/30 split was introduced in a time when apps cost $1 and Apple kept 30 cents. Nobody really had a problem with that back then.

Before the App Store, there were no phone app stores (unless you can show me an example?).

After the App Store was introduced, the market decided apps should cost $0 to $1.

But that split doesn't really make sense when we're talking about recurring services that occur on someone else's servers.

Apple allows most of those recurring services to acquire the user before they download the app. So Netflix's twitter can tell the user "sign up here" and THEN tell the user to download the app.

However, if Apple plastered Netflix on the front page of the App Store (where 500 million users visit weekly) and Apple helped Netflix acquire more customers (assuming Netflix has IAP enabled) inside the app, Apple deserves a cut. 30% of 1 year of Netflix is about $45 and then it'll be 15% cut after the first year.

Now for a big giant Netflix company with big marketing budgets, it's as simple as telling the user to sign up at Netflix.com. If the user downloads the app instead, currently Netflix has a sign up screen says "you can't sign up for Netflix in the app". It's fairly obvious that the user will google search Netflix and sign up there. There's no problem about it today IMO.

There are two things here. There's the Wordpress app which is distributed in Apple's store.

And there's Wordpress itself which is providing web hosting to their customers on their own servers.

Yes... I agree that developers should pay something to Apple to have their apps in their store. Apple is providing the platform, the SDKs, the store, app review, updates, etc. I get that. Apple should be compensated for the app.

But I'm not seeing how Apple should be entitled to 30% of my web hosting fee I pay to Wordpress. Apple's isn't running my website... Wordpress is.

Can you imagine signing up for the $45/mo plan in the app... and Apple getting $13/mo? Does that make any sense?

The problem is that the developer isn't pasting the rejection e-mail.

Remember how Hey said "Apple is forcing us to use IAP!!!"? Turns out that wasn't entirely true. All Hey needed to do was include a free trial. Today Hey is accepted on the app store with 0 in app purchases. No rules were changed.

If the developer of Wordpress could paste the entire rejection e-mail, we could see the exact violation and come up what are the possible solutions. We don't know for a fact if Apple is forcing Wordpress to hand over $$$.

 

[firewood]

Consumers are the ones that end up paying more to support Apple.

And that's worth every penny, because those same consumers could pay less for the inferior Android solution, if what Apple brings to the table wasn't worth the extra "support" cost in that consumers opinion.