Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mmuro 4272 days ago
Ok, so Coda 2.5, BBEdit, TextExpander and other developer-type apps can't be in the App Store because they can't be sandboxed. Fine, if it's a developer-type tool that has to do things most everyday users aren't going to need, do it outside the Mac App Store. For everything else, the Mac App Store is great.

In fact, I'm such a fan of the Mac App Store that I wish every app could conform to it's rules so I wouldn't have to dig out a lame license key, or heaven help me, email the vendor for some time sensitive generated key thing.
1 comments
smackfu 4272 days ago
It's not just developer-type tools that can't be sandboxed. Dropbox can't. BackBlaze can't.
link
heychristian 4272 days ago
Also, any service where it isn't viable to give 30% of their revenue to Apple, Spotify for example (who have to give 70% of their revenue to record companies).

Not that Apple would want Spotify in the store anyway, with it being an iTunes competitor.

link
vitd 4272 days ago
Wait - so what do they do on iOS? There’s a free Spotify app for iOS. Why couldn’t they do the same on the desktop?
link
14113 4272 days ago
Because they have to allow it for iOS, otherwise iOS becomes "the platform without Spotify". Imagine if iOS wouldn't allow a native Facebook app - what would happen then?

With OSX it's a little different, as there are alternative channels for installing Spotify, which prevents OSX from becoming "a platform without Spotify", and also allows Apple to ignore them entirely, and push their own product in the store.

link
giovannibajo1 4272 days ago
No, Spotify is not an exception to App Store rules.

There are hundreds of apps that allow you to use subscriptions made outside of the App Store. The rules for digital goods and digital subscriptions are:

* If you want the actual payment/checkout to happen ON the phone THROUGH the app, it MUST be an In-App Purchase (subject to 30% cut). * Appendix: redirecting to a website for the payment is forbidden, because it would be a too easy workaround to the previous rule. * If you want the app to just connect and use an existing subscription made elsewhere, go ahead, nothing is owed to Apple.

Dropbox for instance happily works with the subscription made on the website. A couple of years ago, they ALSO added a way to subscribe to their paid plan through the app, in which case the 30% cut is paid to Apple. I can see they doing it because probably they don't want to lose customers that feel like upgrading with a single tap is much easier than going to the website and inserting credit card details. As everybody in marketing knows, when you're potentially one tap away from buying something, the sole idea of having to go to the computer and taking the wallet is enough for a turndown for most people; impulsive buying is a strong force.

link
14113 4270 days ago
Ah, I wasn't really commenting on the pricing - more on the idea of having a "competitor" on your own store.
link
smackfu 4271 days ago
Rdio just charges more on iOS. "Rdio costs the price you see if you subscribe via Apple’s in-app subscription service. This price difference is due to Apple’s policy of taking a 30% cut of subscriptions that occur through their service."

I didn't think Apple allowed this, but they are doing it.

link