{"id":33655,"date":"2021-09-15T21:04:20","date_gmt":"2021-09-16T01:04:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=33655"},"modified":"2021-10-20T16:46:17","modified_gmt":"2021-10-20T20:46:17","slug":"the-future-of-the-app-store","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2021\/09\/15\/the-future-of-the-app-store\/","title":{"rendered":"The Future of the App Store"},"content":{"rendered":"

Marco Arment<\/a> (tweet<\/a>, Hacker News<\/a>):<\/p>\n

I think the most likely long-term outcome isn’t very different from the status quo — and that’s a good thing.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I would like to see big changes, but I think he’s probably right that we won’t.<\/p>\n

\n

Apple will still require apps to use their IAP system for any qualifying<\/a> purchases that occur in the apps themselves. […] Most apps will be required to also<\/em> offer IAP side-by-side with any external methods.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

Apple will have many<\/em> rules regarding the display, descriptions, and behavior of external purchases, many of which will be unpublished and ever-changing. App Review will be extremely<\/em> harsh, inconsistent, capricious, petty, and punitive with their enforcement.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

I’d expect any app offering external purchases to have a very high chance of being escalated to a slower, more pain-in-the-ass review process, possibly causing it not to be worthwhile for most small developers to deal with.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

Most importantly, many products, services, and business models will become possible that previously weren’t, leading to more apps, more competition, and more money going to more places.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I don’t see why that would happen given the very limited scope of the changes.<\/p>\n\n

Nick Heer<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

I keep thinking about the likelihood of the sideloading doomsday scenarios that Arment writes about. […] I could see Facebook creating its own app marketplace for iOS, but I am unclear why developers would need to submit their apps to multiple marketplaces, so long as Apple gets to keep its first-party App Store.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

This modest corrective action is, I think, a good step toward a store that improves users’ experiences while opening up new possibilities. I still hope Apple takes greater advantage<\/a> to simultaneously release regulatory pressure and the hostility felt by developers.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

David Heinemeier Hansson<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

Now imagine that Apple abides by the injunction but also attempts to continue forcing IAP upon developers who don’t want it. The gag orders are gone, because that was the anti-steering provisions explicitly prohibited by the injunction. Which means developers have to offer something they don’t want to offer, but they’re free to present that offer as they see fit. Can you see where this is going?<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Not the way he thinks, I expect. Apple will probably get away with having lots of rules about the allowable language, require that IAP get top placement, and do various other things to make the non-IAP flow needlessly feel second-class.<\/p>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n