marco.orgMarco.org

I’m Marco Arment : a programmer, writer, podcaster, geek, and coffee enthusiast. Apps • Podcast • Twitter • About Developer relations June 3, 2021 ∞ https://marco.org/2021/06/03/developer-relations Apple’s leaders continue to deny developers of two obvious truths: That our apps provide substantial value to iOS beyond the purchase commissions collected by Apple. That any portion of our customers came to our apps from our own marketing or reputation, rather than the App Store. For Apple to continue to deny these is dishonest, factually wrong, and extremely insulting — not only to our efforts, but to the intelligence of all Apple developers and customers. This isn’t about the 30%, or the 15%, or the prohibition of other payment systems, or the rules against telling our customers about our websites, or Apple’s many other restrictions. (Not today, at least.) It’s about what Apple’s leadership thinks of us and our work. * * * It isn’t the App Store’s responsibility to the rest of Apple to “pay its way” by leveraging hefty fees on certain types of transactions. Modern society has come to rely so heavily on mobile apps that any phone manufacturer must ensure that such a healthy ecosystem exists as table stakes for anyone to buy their phones. Without our apps, the iPhone has little value to most of its customers today. If Apple wishes to continue advancing bizarre corporate-accounting arguments, the massive profits from the hardware business are what therefore truly “pay the way” of the App Store, public APIs, developer tools, and other app-development resources, just as the hardware profits must fund the development of Apple’s own hardware, software, and services that make the iPhone appeal to customers. The forced App Store commissions, annual developer fees, and App Store Search Ads income are all just gravy. The “way” is already paid by the hardware — but Apple uses their position of power to double-dip. And that’s just business. Apple’s a lot of things, and “generous” isn’t one. But to bully and gaslight developers into thinking that we need to be kissing Apple’s feet for permitting us to add billions of dollars of value to their platform is not only greedy, stingy, and morally reprehensible, but deeply insulting. * * * Apple further extends the value argument, and defends their justification for forced commissions, by claiming responsibility for and ownership of the customer relationship between all iOS users and each app they choose to use. This argument only makes sense — and even then, only somewhat — when apps are installed by a customer browsing the App Store, finding an app they hadn’t previously heard of, and choosing to install it based on App Store influence alone. But in the common case — and for most app installations, the much more common case — of searching for a specific app by name or following a link or ad based on its developer’s own marketing or reputation, Apple has served no meaningful role in the customer acquisition and “deserves” nothing more from the transaction than what a CDN and commodity credit-card processor would charge. The idea that the App Store is responsible for most customers of any reasonably well-known app is a fantasy. It isn’t the App Store that has enabled all of the commerce on iOS — it’s the entire world of computing and modern society, created by a symbiotic ecosystem in which Apple played one part alongside many others. The world was already moving in this direction, and had Apple not played its part, someone else would’ve. The App Store is merely one platform’s forced distribution gateway, “facilitating” the commerce no more and no less than a web browser, an ISP or cellular carrier, a server-hosting company, or a credit-card processor. For Apple to continue to claim otherwise is beyond insulting, and borders on delusion. * * * At WWDC next week, these same people are going to try to tell us a different story. They’re going to tell us how amazing we are, how important our work is, and how much they value us. And for thousands of Apple employees who’ve made the great products and platforms that we love, including the hundreds of engineers presenting the sessions and working the labs, it’ll be genuine and true. But the leaders have already shown us who they really are, what they really think of us, and how much they value our work. Please forgive some sloppiness in my metaphors or phrasing — my writing skills are pretty rusty — and I’ll return the favor to anyone who responds. ◆ In-App Purchase Rules September 11, 2020 ∞ https://marco.org/2020/09/11/app-review-changes A summary of today’s changes to 3.1.3 Other Purchase Methods : Your app must use Apple’s in-app-purchase (IAP) system for all purchases made in the app. Unless they’re purchases for goods or services that are consumed outside the app, in which case you are prohibited from using IAP. Unless those goods or services consumed outside the app are magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, or video, in which case, you are required to use IAP. But if your app only “reads” previously purchased magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, or video, and doesn’t mention the possibility of purchases anywhere in the app, you don’t need to use IAP. Unless you offer account creation, in which case, you are required to use IAP. Unless you only offer free account creation, in which case, you don’t need to use IAP. But if you offer paid upgrades from free accounts within the app, you are required to use IAP. Except for accounts that were created outside the app, which can offer paid account upgrades and don’t need to use IAP. If you’re selling “experiences” between people, you don’t need to use IAP. Unless those “experiences” include three or more people, or aren’t consumed live, in which case, you are required to use only IAP. If your purchase is for services, features, or game items, you are required to use only IAP. Unless you operate on multiple platforms, in which case, you can also offer purchasing outside the app. But you can’t tell anyone about it. Unless you get their contact info somewhere else, in which case, you can tell them about it, but not in the app. You are required to use IAP even if you sell your app or service directly to other people. Unless you only sell it to businesses or groups for their employees or students to use, in which case, you still must use IAP, but you can include your own payment method as well. Unless those groups are families, or unless those employees or students are somehow “consumers”, in which case, you must only use IAP. Do I have that right? * * * How about an alternative that’s clear, fair, reasonable, and consistently enforceable? Apps may offer other payment mechanisms in their app, as long as terms are clear and customers aren’t misled, and may or may not choose to implement in-app purchase based on its merits. In one stroke, antitrust and regulatory pressure disappear, developer relations are significantly repaired, and Apple can go back to spending its time, resources, PR, and political capital on making their products better and customers happier. ◆ Introducing Voice Boost 2: Remaster your podcasts January 31, 2020 ∞ https://marco.org/2020/01/31/voiceboost2 The latest update to Overcast includes a feature that I’m especially proud of that took over a year to build. Voice Boost 2 is an all-new audio engine that includes professional-grade, mastering-quality loudness normalization. When I first introduced Overcast in 2014 , Voice Boost was one of its headlining features: Voice Boost is a combination of dynamic compression and equalization that can make many shows more listenable and normalize volume across all shows. This makes amateur-produced podcasts (including many of my favorites) more listenable in loud environments, like cars, where you’d otherwise need to crank the volume so...