Jeff Johnson:
The problem is that what Apple means here by “free” as opposed to “paid” is simply that you don’t have to pay before downloading the app, but Apple’s counterintuitive definition tends to obscure what is most important to consumers: how much you have to pay to use the app. The range of allowed use can vary drastically among apps that are free with IAP. Some apps can be used forever for free with no apparent limitations, and the IAP merely unlocks bonus content or features. Some can be used for free in “reader” mode, with the ability to open and read documents, while an IAP is required to edit and/or sync documents. Some apps are free to use fully for only a limited time; in other words, they have a time-limited free trial. At the end of the trial, various outcomes are possible. Time-limited trials are especially popular with auto-renewing subscription apps, which start charging you automatically at the end of the trial. And ironically, some so-called “free” apps don’t allow any use at all unless you first pay the IAP.
At this point, I think the way the store represents this information is obscuring more than it’s helping.
You might be shocked to learn that the window is actually floating. That is, it floats above and covers every other window on the Mac, even if you switch to a different app. And Apple approved this. You can close the floating window, but that quits the app.
By default, the lifetime $39.99 license is selected. It’s labeled “Best choice - no subscription”. The 3 day free trial is available only if you select the $19.99 yearly subscription option. The subtitle of the subscription option says, “Only $5.00/month”, the math of which is way off and would add up to $60 per year if accurate. I don’t know how that window got approved by Apple.
Apple is so picky about payment screens in some cases, but then it approves stuff like this.
Apple is supposed to protect users by making refunds and subscription cancelations easy, but Apple doesn’t actually make it as clear and easy as claimed. Why aren’t there refund and cancel buttons directly on the app’s product page? Such buttons could be right above the Ratings & Reviews section! For that matter, why don’t app developers have to ability to offer refunds directly to customers?
I recently had two cases where customers encountered problems related to Apple’s Bluetooth API and asked Apple for refunds. Even though the purchases were recent, Apple refused and told them to contact the developer instead—even though we can’t offer refunds. Luckily, I was able to work around the bug.
Previously:
App Store Business In-App Purchase iOS iOS 18 iOS App Mac Mac App Mac App Store macOS 15 Sequoia
Sarah Perez:
Creator platform Patreon has rolled out an updated version of its app that now allows users to make purchases via the web, in the wake of the Apple-Epic court ruling that forced Apple to allow app developers to include links to alternative forms of payment without being subject to Apple’s commission.
Previously, on version 125.4.1 of Patreon’s iOS app, users who wanted to subscribe to a creator’s membership plan would have to do so using Apple’s in-app purchases.
[…]
The option to use Apple’s own in-app purchases method, meanwhile, is shown only in very small text below the larger, bold “Join” button.
Jess Weatherbed:
The new Patreon web payment option supports Apple Pay, credit cards, Venmo, and PayPal. The alternative checkout options are currently limited to fans purchasing new memberships and creators using the subscription billing model, which charges fans based on their sign-up date, according to Patreon. The company is working to include alternative checkout options for one-time payments “in a future update.”
Matt Birchler:
This post from last year remains relevant today. Apple’s logic around “safety and security” for allowed payment methods was:
- it’s safe enough to enter your credit card in an app to buy physical goods
- it’s safe enough to enter you card into an app to buy digital goods you enjoy on other devices
- it’s unsafe to enter your card in an app to buy digital goods you enjoy on that device
Not entering your card info and just using Apple Pay: also not allowed.
Via Nick Heer:
This nonsense remains true outside the U.S. and the other regions that have mandated, to varying degrees, a revision to Apple’s payment terms. It makes no sense at all — but, of course, nothing about this really does. It is all reverse justification — a way for Apple to absorb a slice of an economy it feels it is owed for little reason other than because.
Jeff Johnson:
It’s nonsensical!
If a purchase occurs in Safari—which is Apple’s app—then Apple is NOT owed a cut, but if a purchase is made in Amazon’s app, then Apple IS owed a cut???
Previously:
App Store Apple Pay External iOS Payments In-App Purchase iOS iOS 18 iOS App Patreon
Juli Clover:
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said over the weekend (via The Verge) that Epic will use its Epic Games Sweden account to submit Fortnite to the App Store in the U.S. Apparently, Sweeney has spoken to Apple about the issue, and based on his wording, it sounds like Apple could allow the plan, but he did not say that he has explicit approval from Apple.
Tim Sweeney (last week):
We will return Fortnite to the US iOS App Store next week.
Tim Sweeney:
Not Monday or Tuesday. Beyond that, we’re working as hard as possible and aren’t certain what day it will be ready.
John Gruber:
If Apple were going to allow Fortnite back into the App Store they could have done so at any point in the last four years. And there’s nothing, not a word, in Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers’s decision last week that says Apple needs to reinstate Epic Games. I think Apple just stays the course and Fortnite remains persona non grata as far as the App Store is concerned.
Juli Clover:
It has cost Epic Games more than $100 million to challenge Apple’s App Store rules in the ongoing Apple vs. Epic Games legal battle, Epic CEO Tim Sweeney said today in an interview with Business Insider.
Sweeney said that Epic Games has paid “legal bills” in excess of $100 million, but that the dispute has cost the company a lot more.
But if you look at lost revenue, that’s another story. We can’t predict exactly how much we would have made on iOS, but in the two years that we were on the platform, Fortnite had made about $300 million on iOS. So you could have projected hundreds of millions of dollars of lost revenue as a result of the fight.
Previously:
Update (2025-05-12): Juli Clover (CNBC):
As promised, Epic Games today submitted Fortnite to the U.S. App Store, and if approved by Apple, it will mark the first time that the Fortnite app has been available in the United States since 2020.
[…]
Epic Games’ U.S. developer account has been banned since the initial Apple vs. Epic Games battle in 2020, so Epic Games is using the developer account that it established in Sweden to submit Fortnite to the App Store. Epic Games created a Swedish App Store account last year in order to create an Epic Games app marketplace in the European Union, as allowed by the Digital Markets Act.
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said that the company has “conversed” with Apple about the plan, and that Apple is aware that Epic Games is submitting Fortnite using the Epic Games Sweden subsidiary that it established for the EU. Sweeney has not confirmed whether Apple said that’s okay, and it’s not clear if Apple will approve the App Store submission.
John Gruber (Mastodon):
I too asked Apple for comment on this earlier in the week, and they had nothing to state. Maybe Apple will just allow this. I don’t know. But if I were a betting man, I’d wager that Apple does not allow Fortnite back. That last week’s injunction was a big loss for Apple doesn’t make it a win for Epic. If all were forgiven or forgotten, Epic wouldn’t need to submit this through their Swedish subsidiary, which has an Apple developer account only because the EU forced Apple to grant them one.
Jeff Johnson:
I’m sad to say that I continue to think Gruber is right that Apple doesn’t need to and indeed won’t let Fortnite return to the App Store.
Attached are some key passages from the court ruling. It affirms that Epic was guilty of breach of contract, and moreover that Epic’s standing in the case depends on being an industry competitor and not on having apps in the App Store.
I remain confused about how the Swedish subsidiary fits into this. On the one hand, it’s obviously still controlled by Epic, the company that Apple banned, and the courts said that was OK. On the other hand, given that the account exists and already has another app approved, what would be the legal rationale for rejecting Fortnite if it follows the guidelines? Does it come down to whether the EU wants to stand up for the rights of one of its companies to submit apps to the US store?
Francisco Tolmasky:
Apple has personal beef with Epic so they won’t let you play one of the most popular games on Earth on their devices that you spent thousands of dollars on. […] An Apple that cared about customer experience would be working towards a resolution that gets the most popular game on Earth back on their platforms.
Reminder that Epic’s stunt didn’t endanger customers in any way. Rather, it demonstrated that a nefarious developer could trivially get through App Review and cause actual harm. And, of course, the real sin was bypassing the 30%, which was a problem for Apple but actually good for customers (who could still choose IAP instead of a discount if they wanted). What Uber did was worse, and not only did Apple not ban them, but it gave them a special entitlement to record the user’s screen.
Previously:
Update (2025-05-15): Tim Sweeney:
We need to release a weekly Fortnite update with new content this Friday, and all platforms must update simultaneously. So we have pulled the previous Fortnite version submitted to Apple App Review last Friday, and we have submitted a new version for review.
This another way of saying that, 5 days after submission, Apple had yet to approve or reject the app.
Steve Troughton-Smith:
So Apple is now facing a situation where a ‘European company’ (Epic’s EU subsidiary) is submitting a new app that doesn’t break any current rules, from an upstanding dev account, and Apple’s previous rules under which their parent company was banned for infraction were outright illegal at the time. This is happening with 30 days until EU starts enforcing the DMA re anti steering.
[…]
But each week that goes by that Epic has to pull and resubmit is another piece of evidence for lawmakers, quantifiable ‘damage’ to account for, and proof that Apple is going to continue playing chicken until regulation closes in on them (again, most likely in the EU).
Steve Troughton-Smith:
Remember when Apple tried to tell the judge that they would be happy to welcome Epic back to the App Store once the court case was over and the issue adjudicated? I do, because I read the transcripts and listened to the hearings.
I guess technically it’s not over yet because Apple has appealed. On the other hand, Apple made the offer, without the condition of the court case being over, after the legal battle had already begun. So it seems like it was never a serious offer and only meant to sway public opinion.
Previously:
App Store Business External iOS Payments Fortnite iOS iOS 18 iOS App Legal
Joe Rossignol:
Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman today said that iPadOS 19 will be “more like macOS.”
Gurman said that iPadOS 19 will be “more like a Mac” in three ways:
- Improved productivity
- Improved multitasking
- Improved app window management
Previous discussion of the rumored redesign had focused on fears of macOS becoming more like iOS or iOS becoming more like visionOS, but this sounds more promising.
Jason Snell:
This report is intriguing, but frustratingly vague. Apple wanting to tinker with iPad multitasking and app window management is dog-bites-man stuff at this point.
Stephen Hackett:
That certainly sounds like what our anonymous commenter was describing, and while it would be great for the iPad to gain a more Mac-like windowing system, I don’t think the people who want macOS on their iPads will look at iPadOS 19 and be truly satisfied.
Window management doesn’t address the core issue that has haunted the iPad since the beginning.
Joe Rossignol:
When an iPad running iPadOS 19 is connected to a Magic Keyboard, a macOS-like menu bar will appear on the screen, according to the leaker Majin Bu.
That makes sense.
Joe Rossignol:
A leaker known as Majin Bu today claimed that iOS 19 will enable support for at least a limited version of Stage Manager on iPhone models with a USB-C port.
Ryan Christoffel:
According to Jon Prosser, there’s a change coming that will impact users of large iPhones especially.
iOS 19 will reportedly move apps’ search bar to the bottom of the app—a big change from its current location.
Previously:
Update (2025-05-08): John Gruber:
One of the reasons why Apple’s own apps are always better — and more capable — on MacOS than on iOS or iPad is that they’ve got more commands, better organized, because there’s a menu bar. Apple Notes, Apple Mail, the whole iWork suite — they’re all better on Mac, and they all have way more features on the Mac.
Reading a menu is also far more humane than scrutinizing icons.
[…]
I know iPadOS today already supports a menu-bar-like HUD thing when you have a keyboard attached and hold down the Command key. I find that to be far less usable and far more distracting than a Mac-style menu bar. There’s a reason the Mac only shows you one menu at a time. Focus.
[…]
Why shouldn’t users be able to access all menu commands when they’re just using the iPad via touch? It’s unnecessarily restrictive that the full list of commands in an app is only available when a keyboard is attached — especially for a device that many users never attach a keyboard to.
iOS iOS 19 iOS Multitasking iPadOS iPadOS 19 Magic Keyboard for iPad Rumor Stage Manager
