App Store Subscriptions(developer.apple.com)
developer.apple.com
App Store Subscriptions
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/subscriptions/
101 comments
You mean the process to get to the subscription management page isn't intuitive? I'd actually be shocked if more than 3 people out of the 1 billion that have bought iOS devices have ever figured this out without Googling or being shown. "Tap View Apple ID", seriously?
1. On the Home screen, tap Settings.
2. Tap iTunes & App Store.
3. Tap your Apple ID at the top of the screen.
4. Tap View Apple ID.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202039
1. On the Home screen, tap Settings.
2. Tap iTunes & App Store.
3. Tap your Apple ID at the top of the screen.
4. Tap View Apple ID.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202039
depends on what will be on the person bank statement, if it's your company or apple. they will call you to cancel, not apple, if the statements say the charge is for your service
apple isn't new to this kind of outsourcing
apple isn't new to this kind of outsourcing
I keep watching in disbelief (from distance) how Apple more and more sucks at user experience. The next thing I know Microsoft will be releasing software that just works, lol.
Yup, seems like they stopped caring under Cook. On iOS the shift button indication still sucks after all these years.
Still, if Apple's barometer has become "just to be less sucky" then Google and MS, they're still doing awesome.
Still, if Apple's barometer has become "just to be less sucky" then Google and MS, they're still doing awesome.
Apple historically got a lot of praise for having a great user experience that was intuitive.
Apple also historically had a small fraction as many users as Microsoft and had Steve Jobs, who didn't seem to care if existing users were bothered and instead wanted the experience to always be perfect.
Once you reach a certain number of users, any menu or UI change becomes increasingly painful for your current users, at the expense of new users and, sometimes, what feels like common sense.
Apple also historically had a small fraction as many users as Microsoft and had Steve Jobs, who didn't seem to care if existing users were bothered and instead wanted the experience to always be perfect.
Once you reach a certain number of users, any menu or UI change becomes increasingly painful for your current users, at the expense of new users and, sometimes, what feels like common sense.
There are "we can't please everyone" decisions, there are plain mistakes and there are UI decisions that benefit no one except possibly the company - i.e. dark patterns.
I personally don't see what benefit putting the subscription management behind an unrelated UI widget that doesn't even appear to be clickable could possibly bring to an end-user. Or how such a design got through usability testing in the first place. Hence the likelihood for a dark pattern seems pretty high to me here.
I personally don't see what benefit putting the subscription management behind an unrelated UI widget that doesn't even appear to be clickable could possibly bring to an end-user. Or how such a design got through usability testing in the first place. Hence the likelihood for a dark pattern seems pretty high to me here.
The key binding change for New Folder from Command-N to Command-Shift-N still gets me. I think it's been a decade since they did that.
You can customize keyboard shortcuts with System Preferences -> Keyboard -> Shortcuts -> App Shortcuts.
However, this may only serve to compound the problem.
However, this may only serve to compound the problem.
Yeah, of course. But it's something like using a Dvorak keyboard layout -- every time you use another computer or help someone else you hit friction. Customizing system level key binding is something I've intentionally avoided.
They've been doing that for decades. As has Apple. Both have also been shipping crap software for decades.
They're huge companies.
They're huge companies.
The other day I tried to figure out how to change the 2nd city shown on the Apple Watch's default watchface. (There's a "world clock" feature that displays the time in another city in the corner of the watch screen.)
Turns out that the process to do this involves first configuring the city in an app within the iPhone, and then on the watch doing a series of UI actions: a force-touch, a swipe, a tap and turning the "digital crown" to find the right city within a UI element that is a list although it doesn't look like one. Several of these actions are entirely undiscoverable (the force-touch and digital crown in these contexts are just actions you have to stumble on by trying all the possible combinations, I guess).
I don't think there would have been any way to figure this out without googling it. And this is a feature that's prominently displayed in the default view of the Apple Watch screen, so it's perfectly reasonable to expect that users will want to change the city.
It's hard to believe that this device was designed by the company famous for the one-button mouse. I do find the physical design attractive though.
Turns out that the process to do this involves first configuring the city in an app within the iPhone, and then on the watch doing a series of UI actions: a force-touch, a swipe, a tap and turning the "digital crown" to find the right city within a UI element that is a list although it doesn't look like one. Several of these actions are entirely undiscoverable (the force-touch and digital crown in these contexts are just actions you have to stumble on by trying all the possible combinations, I guess).
I don't think there would have been any way to figure this out without googling it. And this is a feature that's prominently displayed in the default view of the Apple Watch screen, so it's perfectly reasonable to expect that users will want to change the city.
It's hard to believe that this device was designed by the company famous for the one-button mouse. I do find the physical design attractive though.
Actually, that's exactly the kind of shit you have to do when you only have one button. I was using my cousin's apple mouse one day and discovered context menus are found by touching or rubbing it on the front somehow (don't exactly remember a couple years later).
Simple is great, but not when you try to make simple do complex.
Simple is great, but not when you try to make simple do complex.
Apple has forgotten the "... but no simpler" part of Einstein's dictum.
relevant Dilbert http://dilbert.com/strip/2016-06-12
Not sure why you are being downvoted, it's straight to the point. Not a fan of Dilbert myself, but still...
Recent OS upgrade experiences show that this is happening.
Windows 10: will upgrade your computer while you are sleeping without consent
OSX El Capitan: free upgrade requires you to create an account and type in your credit card number
Windows 10: will upgrade your computer while you are sleeping without consent
OSX El Capitan: free upgrade requires you to create an account and type in your credit card number
Windows 10 will upgrade your computer at any time of the day without your consent. A med school student friend of mine has to take tests on her computer. 15 minutes before the test, Windows 10 was updating and rebooting.
Found out, unless you have the pro version, you can't even tell Windows not to do that. You can only set a period of time where Windows will do it (like 2 am) so it doesn't do it at more inconvenient times.
OS X upgrades are worse, in my opinion. For any given version, Apple just nags me to install it. But if I go from major version to major version, suddenly selling my MBP gets complicated, because I can only install the version that it came with after I wipe it. It's up to the person who buys it from me to log in to Apple and update the OS to a more recent version.
Then there's iOS which nags you constantly to install updates that have been known to brick some devices...
Found out, unless you have the pro version, you can't even tell Windows not to do that. You can only set a period of time where Windows will do it (like 2 am) so it doesn't do it at more inconvenient times.
OS X upgrades are worse, in my opinion. For any given version, Apple just nags me to install it. But if I go from major version to major version, suddenly selling my MBP gets complicated, because I can only install the version that it came with after I wipe it. It's up to the person who buys it from me to log in to Apple and update the OS to a more recent version.
Then there's iOS which nags you constantly to install updates that have been known to brick some devices...
I have home edition, it is set to reboot in the middle of the night. The laptop goes to sleep or hibernates when I go to bed, one or the other, the update is still pending when I start the laptop in the morning. Updates can be put off indefinitely, if this is the normal pattern.
>But if I go from major version to major version, suddenly selling my MBP gets complicated, because I can only install the version that it came with after I wipe it.
That isn't true. You can install a fresh copy of the most recent OS.
That isn't true. You can install a fresh copy of the most recent OS.
You can, but that requires you to log in with your Apple ID and password. Or to download (with your Apple ID and password) a copy and create an installation thumb drive.
El Capitan definitely doesn't require you to create an account OR enter a credit card number, I've done it on plenty of machines. Obviously you have to create an account if you want to use iCloud, but you can simply choose not to.
I believe you, but the OS told me to upgrade to El Capitan using the App Store and the App Store told me I had to log in to iCloud and iCloud told me I had to give it a credit card. I believe you that there is a way around it, but there is also a way around getting upgraded to Windows 10. If the OS doesn't tell the average user about it, it's not part of the UX.
You can select "no credit card" or similar when creating an Apple account. It's hidden behind a button but definitely possible.
> "Tap View Apple ID", seriously?
This has always seemed like a horrible user-hostile dark-pattern on Apple's part. When you subscribe, Apple says to go to Settings to unsubscribe or turn off auto-renew, but it's very opaque. It's also hidden behind a username/password prompt.
It would be much better if there were a Subscriptions option directly under 'iTunes & App Store' – even if there were still a password prompt behind this, at least people would know how to find it.
But Apple have long, long needed to modernise their entire iTunes Store experience, of which subscriptions are just one small problem. Does anyone know if it's still running on WebObjects? The whole experience has always felt slow and un-responsive, which felt normal when it first launched, but now feels very behind the times. It wouldn't surprise me if the subscriptions issue is a result of this too. Would be interested to hear if this is the case.
It's always felt like poor discoverability and lag were big reasons behind their social efforts (Ping/Connect) failing too. Not every social network needs a web presence, but presumably it'd help to be able to access/link to this content on the web at large, rather than it being buried deep inside existing apps.
This has always seemed like a horrible user-hostile dark-pattern on Apple's part. When you subscribe, Apple says to go to Settings to unsubscribe or turn off auto-renew, but it's very opaque. It's also hidden behind a username/password prompt.
It would be much better if there were a Subscriptions option directly under 'iTunes & App Store' – even if there were still a password prompt behind this, at least people would know how to find it.
But Apple have long, long needed to modernise their entire iTunes Store experience, of which subscriptions are just one small problem. Does anyone know if it's still running on WebObjects? The whole experience has always felt slow and un-responsive, which felt normal when it first launched, but now feels very behind the times. It wouldn't surprise me if the subscriptions issue is a result of this too. Would be interested to hear if this is the case.
It's always felt like poor discoverability and lag were big reasons behind their social efforts (Ping/Connect) failing too. Not every social network needs a web presence, but presumably it'd help to be able to access/link to this content on the web at large, rather than it being buried deep inside existing apps.
How would running WebObjects be relevant here? Because it's an old platform?
Honestly, I'd like to know too. I have no first-hand knowledge here, which is why I was asking about it.
WebObjects has been discontinued, presumably for a reason, and while it was ahead of its time back in the day, it wouldn't be surprising to me if its age is starting to show when trying to deal with the huge amounts of traffic the iTunes Store must handle. But I really don't know. I only asked because I've seen it mentioned in this context before.
I've personally experienced a lot of flakiness with the Apple ID infrastructure though, especially with 2-factor auth enabled (their old 2-factor auth, not the new system which I haven't tried yet). Most recently when trying to purchase AppleCare after the fact, I just couldn't log in. I have no idea what's going on behind the scenes.
WebObjects has been discontinued, presumably for a reason, and while it was ahead of its time back in the day, it wouldn't be surprising to me if its age is starting to show when trying to deal with the huge amounts of traffic the iTunes Store must handle. But I really don't know. I only asked because I've seen it mentioned in this context before.
I've personally experienced a lot of flakiness with the Apple ID infrastructure though, especially with 2-factor auth enabled (their old 2-factor auth, not the new system which I haven't tried yet). Most recently when trying to purchase AppleCare after the fact, I just couldn't log in. I have no idea what's going on behind the scenes.
It's hidden behind a u/p prompt for a very good reason: that section of the site contains your personal info, payment information, shipping address, and so forth. It is absolutely necessary to require reauthentication to access that data.
Redacted example from my site: http://imgur.com/a/cL0t7
Redacted example from my site: http://imgur.com/a/cL0t7
That's a decision on their part which makes it a dark pattern. Subscriptions do not need to be in the same place. Although, I guess what you're subscribed to could be sensitive enough...
I think, given how Apple treat subscriptions (they email you multiple times warning you when a subscription is about to expire, renewable subscriptions are only for certain types of content), I would rather chalk this up to incompetence rather than maliciousness.
I think we're starting to seriously abuse the term "dark pattern". Placing subscription management (i.e. controlling what stuff hits your credit card) behind a reauthentication is not deceptive in any way.
Just to be clear, the dark pattern isn't the re-authentication itself, it's hiding the "Subscriptions" button behind a button that says "View Apple ID" where many people (myself included) may not think to look. The re-authentication just compounds the problem by hindering discoverability of where the "Subscriptions" button actually is, because you have to go through a password prompt to find it.
The Settings app built-in search doesn't work either. If you search for "Subscriptions" it doesn't appear, because it's behind hidden behind this password prompt (to be more generous, that entire screen is probably only generated once you've logged in, but it doesn't have to be that way).
Additionally, the "View Apple ID" button itself is also non-obvious: you have to click your email address first for it to come up as a pop-over. I recognise my email address in blue is a link to my account information, but a less experienced user might (reasonably) think otherwise. It would probably be better for your account name to have a right disclosure arrow next to it (taking you to a new view with your account options inside) to specifically indicate that touching it takes you to this new screen, because that's the way everything else in the Settings app works.
To solve all of this, you could just as easily put the "Subscriptions" button one level up in the "iTunes & App Store" screen, before the password prompt, and only prompt for a password after the user has clicked it. This would solve all of these problems.
If this sounds confusing, that's because it is. That's the real problem here.
The Settings app built-in search doesn't work either. If you search for "Subscriptions" it doesn't appear, because it's behind hidden behind this password prompt (to be more generous, that entire screen is probably only generated once you've logged in, but it doesn't have to be that way).
Additionally, the "View Apple ID" button itself is also non-obvious: you have to click your email address first for it to come up as a pop-over. I recognise my email address in blue is a link to my account information, but a less experienced user might (reasonably) think otherwise. It would probably be better for your account name to have a right disclosure arrow next to it (taking you to a new view with your account options inside) to specifically indicate that touching it takes you to this new screen, because that's the way everything else in the Settings app works.
To solve all of this, you could just as easily put the "Subscriptions" button one level up in the "iTunes & App Store" screen, before the password prompt, and only prompt for a password after the user has clicked it. This would solve all of these problems.
If this sounds confusing, that's because it is. That's the real problem here.
There is intended to be a difference between poor UX and the godawful phrase "dark patterns." The amount of overintellectualization you can do about a given experience doesn't contribute to the darkness.
This, of course, is part of why it's such an awful phrase. It's too nerd-cool to avoid being overapplied by cool nerds.
This, of course, is part of why it's such an awful phrase. It's too nerd-cool to avoid being overapplied by cool nerds.
[deleted]
Apple doesn't need to put the unsub button right next to all your personal, and other, info though.
Tap #2 is bad enough.
I'm a relatively-infrequent Apple user who signed up for HBO Now when it first came out and you had to sign up exclusively via an iPhone App. As it turned out, you could use the credentials obtained from that signup to sign in with any web browser and stream content. You didn't need to use the app itself.
Apple was literally just handling payments and subscriptions for HBO Now, exclusively, for 3 months.
Imagine my frustration at trying to find out when my subscription was set to renew. Why am I supposed to know that iTunes and App Store settings is where I should look for anything to do with a subscription for something that isn't visibly tied to either iTunes or the App Store?
Taps #3 and #4 are truly banana-pants insane though.
I'm a relatively-infrequent Apple user who signed up for HBO Now when it first came out and you had to sign up exclusively via an iPhone App. As it turned out, you could use the credentials obtained from that signup to sign in with any web browser and stream content. You didn't need to use the app itself.
Apple was literally just handling payments and subscriptions for HBO Now, exclusively, for 3 months.
Imagine my frustration at trying to find out when my subscription was set to renew. Why am I supposed to know that iTunes and App Store settings is where I should look for anything to do with a subscription for something that isn't visibly tied to either iTunes or the App Store?
Taps #3 and #4 are truly banana-pants insane though.
Ah that's what it was. My dad complained about signing up for some HBO think and didn't know how to cancel. It was like $10 a month. He ended up just cancelling the credit card.
5. Enter password
6. Tap Subscriptions > Manage
7. Tap on a subscription
That's a crazy convoluted flow. It's hard to believe it was made that way on accident. Hopefully this change in iOS 10.
6. Tap Subscriptions > Manage
7. Tap on a subscription
That's a crazy convoluted flow. It's hard to believe it was made that way on accident. Hopefully this change in iOS 10.
Let's compare with Google's:
1. Play Store
2. hamburger menu
3. Account
4. Subscriptions
Not a lot better, but at least makes more sense than "View Apple ID" I think.
1. Play Store
2. hamburger menu
3. Account
4. Subscriptions
Not a lot better, but at least makes more sense than "View Apple ID" I think.
You can also cancel subscriptions for a specific app from the app page in the GP store
That would almost require Apple to allow developers to have an actual direct relationship with the customers. As far as I can see, they are Apple's customers that you are just renting.
Wouldn't it just require an API call?
Might want to know which user to put in the API call, and I'm pretty sure that would involve some lookup.
To service the subscription, you must be given some token? You should be able to hand that token to Apple and tell them to cancel the associated subscription.
Apple definitely provides you with unique details about the transaction and your system can verify whether renewal occurred or not. Wish they would add an API for cancelling. It would significantly reduce the number of rude emails we get from people if we could offer a cancel button in the app.
However, it would not solve the issue of people that think that simply deleting the app will cancel the subscription, or dissuade people from insisting that we cancel the subscription for them.
However, it would not solve the issue of people that think that simply deleting the app will cancel the subscription, or dissuade people from insisting that we cancel the subscription for them.
That sounds right but the problem is how to associate the user with the token beyond something in your app. I just am not sure how I would go from a twitter support account to canceling the subscription.
I don't know the details of the current API, but wouldn't you already need some basic information about your subscribers before that? To, you know, actually do the thing that the user subscribed to...
I read the docs, but I get the feeling we need someone to detail exactly what the store gives you for personal information. It seems like tokens but I'm probably missing something.
My dad somehow subscribed to some kind of HBO or something through the App Store..couldn't figure out how cancel. Ended up cancelling the credit card.
Slightly redeeming, apparently devs can now at least transfer users directly to the "manage subscriptions" page:
Rather than needing to code your own subscription management UI, your app can open the following URL:
https://buy.itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZFinance.woa/wa/man...
Opening this URL launches iTunes or iTunes Store, and then displays the Manage Subscription page.
See: https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Networ...
Rather than needing to code your own subscription management UI, your app can open the following URL:
https://buy.itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZFinance.woa/wa/man...
Opening this URL launches iTunes or iTunes Store, and then displays the Manage Subscription page.
See: https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Networ...
As someone who's cancelled lots of subscriptions - I couldn't agree more, it's a right pain in the ass and the Apple website where you do unsubscribe is painfully slow (at least in Australia)
I paid for YouTube Red under two different accounts for three months before realizing how to cancel it.
Auto-renewable subscriptions provide a simple way to offer free trials to users.
I do like that Apple promotes the classic "let's hook them with a free trial and hope they forget to unsubscribe in time" dark pattern as an official use case.
(Edit) Also:
Even if a user cancels and resubscribes within 60 days, they will still accumulate days of service from the point where they lapsed. [...] As part of your overall subscription marketing plan, consider ways to win back lapsed subscribers with targeted messaging, such as email or in-app messaging, to communicate the value of your subscriptions and encourage users to resubscribe.
So app developers are not just incentivized, Apple explicitly advises that they spam unsubscribers with notifications to win them back. Sounds great!
I do like that Apple promotes the classic "let's hook them with a free trial and hope they forget to unsubscribe in time" dark pattern as an official use case.
(Edit) Also:
Even if a user cancels and resubscribes within 60 days, they will still accumulate days of service from the point where they lapsed. [...] As part of your overall subscription marketing plan, consider ways to win back lapsed subscribers with targeted messaging, such as email or in-app messaging, to communicate the value of your subscriptions and encourage users to resubscribe.
So app developers are not just incentivized, Apple explicitly advises that they spam unsubscribers with notifications to win them back. Sounds great!
In my experience, Apple actually warns about renewal before they renew. This is something I have yet to see with other major services. Hopefully it'll stay in and other services follows suit.
If that's the case, it would make it somewhat less suspicious. Given how deep the unsubscribe button seems to be buried, I hadn't been hopeful.
I'm starting to question whether or not Apple still notifies users prior to all renewals...
I have a handful of monthly subscriptions through the App Store, and currently, none of them notify me of the renewal before it occurs (I've checked my spam folder).
When I first subscribed to an app a couple of years ago, I received notifications before renewals (that sub was a 6 month or 1 year term, I don't recall exactly).
I also have an app that has offered subscriptions for almost 2 years. From end user reports recently (there weren't many issues about renewals until more recently), I'm getting the impression that Apple doesn't notify about upcoming subscription renewals unless the payment method Apple has on file is out of date, as we get quite a few emails asking about how to update payment information.
We would certainly be interested in finding out what others (both end-users and app developers) have found in their experience.
I have a handful of monthly subscriptions through the App Store, and currently, none of them notify me of the renewal before it occurs (I've checked my spam folder).
When I first subscribed to an app a couple of years ago, I received notifications before renewals (that sub was a 6 month or 1 year term, I don't recall exactly).
I also have an app that has offered subscriptions for almost 2 years. From end user reports recently (there weren't many issues about renewals until more recently), I'm getting the impression that Apple doesn't notify about upcoming subscription renewals unless the payment method Apple has on file is out of date, as we get quite a few emails asking about how to update payment information.
We would certainly be interested in finding out what others (both end-users and app developers) have found in their experience.
I hope to god they make testing them easier. If you set a subscription to annual, then your test account can only test it every hour (and it used to be every 4 hours).[0] Imagine during development and testing only being able to verify your code flow every hour! I changed to "non-renewing subscriptions" to avoid this, which are essentially one-time purchases that don't require using their ridiculously awful subscription API.
[0] https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Langua...
[0] https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Langua...
I recently had to work with it and drove me insane. Development sandboxes should be frictionless.
This is a dumb workaround, but you can also add a monthly auto-renewing subscription that's just for testing. It auto-renews every 3 or 5 minutes (I forget which), and expires after 15 minutes.
> At the end of each subscription duration, the subscription will automatically renew until a user chooses to cancel it.
What happens when a user dies? I mean, that does happen occasionally. Are the relatives on the hook to somehow email apple the death certificate to clear out their debts five years later? The issue of death on the internet is woefully overlooked. Perhaps there is an opportunity here for a startup to provide "closure services" where they settle all accounts.
What happens when a user dies? I mean, that does happen occasionally. Are the relatives on the hook to somehow email apple the death certificate to clear out their debts five years later? The issue of death on the internet is woefully overlooked. Perhaps there is an opportunity here for a startup to provide "closure services" where they settle all accounts.
Probably the same as what happens when for example a gym member dies? All your credit cards probably be closed and services won't be able to charge you anymore.
Then you go to collections
Presumably, when a credit card charge for a renewal of a recurring service fails, they don't send you to collections, they just cancel your account.
You'd be surprised, many contracts have an auto-renew clause and you absolutely go to collections. If you are lucky they just cancel you.
The services are pre-paid.
Apple is already in the 'subscription' category with the Apple TV. I subscribe (via the Apple TV) to Hulu and HBO. I remember magazines being the same, as well.
Apple is already in the 'subscription' category with the Apple TV. I subscribe (via the Apple TV) to Hulu and HBO. I remember magazines being the same, as well.
Generally credit cards are cancelled after you die.
I would assume that it's the CC that is generally closed, and then the charge just fails.
I want an option, as a consumer, that disables the ability to sign up for anything that has recurring billing.
Yes it's possible to have no credit card at all on file for your itunes account (though they go out of their way for you to not realize that), but sometimes you may want to actually pay for an app too.
Yes it's possible to have no credit card at all on file for your itunes account (though they go out of their way for you to not realize that), but sometimes you may want to actually pay for an app too.
> Yes it's possible to have no credit card at all on file for your itunes account [-] though they go out of their way for you to not realize that
Funnily I tried to give apple some money through the app store but made the mistake of signing up with my German credit card when living in LA and was lost in a "we cannot accept this German CC with a LA address"-limbo and never was offered a way out. So I now have a crapple account that one cannot put money into without some apparently lengthy verification process and I therefore can give my app store credentials to friends who just need some xcode update :D
Funnily I tried to give apple some money through the app store but made the mistake of signing up with my German credit card when living in LA and was lost in a "we cannot accept this German CC with a LA address"-limbo and never was offered a way out. So I now have a crapple account that one cannot put money into without some apparently lengthy verification process and I therefore can give my app store credentials to friends who just need some xcode update :D
It's odd they are using Netflix as a poster child for this. Isn't 30->15% of your subscription really a big deal for them?
I'm an audible, spotify, and netflix subscriber currently. I have to purchase (or use tokens) on their respective sites then I can stream the content in the app.
What is the value add for companies like these to "take advantage" of an app store subscription?
I'm an audible, spotify, and netflix subscriber currently. I have to purchase (or use tokens) on their respective sites then I can stream the content in the app.
What is the value add for companies like these to "take advantage" of an app store subscription?
>What is the value add for companies like these to "take advantage" of an app store subscription?
As I see it, none. But Apple would love getting netflix and spotify subscribers, since those services are ones that people stay on forever.
Actually some companies DO NOT like it, because they might lose some users due to the pricing being bumped up 30%
www.theverge.com/2015/7/8/8913105/spotify-apple-app-store-email
www.recode.net/2016/6/30/12067578/spotify-apple-app-store-rejection
As I see it, none. But Apple would love getting netflix and spotify subscribers, since those services are ones that people stay on forever.
Actually some companies DO NOT like it, because they might lose some users due to the pricing being bumped up 30%
www.theverge.com/2015/7/8/8913105/spotify-apple-app-store-email
www.recode.net/2016/6/30/12067578/spotify-apple-app-store-rejection
This looks like it will result in dark patterns to try and get people to stay beyond the treshold for increased returns.
I could get if the 'threshold' is a week - games could start timegating things by a few days.
But really, we're talking about a year here. I feel its a long enough timeframe that mostly encourages good practices (like continuously providing value for subscribing customers).
But really, we're talking about a year here. I feel its a long enough timeframe that mostly encourages good practices (like continuously providing value for subscribing customers).
There's a lot of negativity around recurring payments but I'm excited about this model both as a developer and a consumer particularly on iPad. There's been a race to the bottom in pricing in mobile app stores, where a one-time payment equivalent to a cup of coffee can be seen as too expensive for an app costing tens of thousands of dollars (or more) in engineer time to make / support. Maybe as a result of this there's no shortage of micropayment or advertising based mobile games but the productivity space is not very competitive with Mac/PC where people don't blink at paying 10x that cost up front.
If this can establish a middle ground where more app categories can find a sustainable business model including long term support and updates that could be very interesting, especially now that many apps might want to include cloud-based features where committing to support forever in exchange for a one-time payment might be a risky proposition.
If this can establish a middle ground where more app categories can find a sustainable business model including long term support and updates that could be very interesting, especially now that many apps might want to include cloud-based features where committing to support forever in exchange for a one-time payment might be a risky proposition.
"For apps currently offering subscriptions, note that if you raise prices before iOS 10 is available, customer notification will behave as it does today. We recommend holding on price increases until iOS 10 is available so your apps can take advantage of customer consent to price increase notifications."
The free trial period is a huge win for developers, something we've been wanting since the beginning.
(Though admittedly it's only for subscription-based pricing, but, let's admit it, one-time software purchases seem to be going the way of the dodo.)
(Though admittedly it's only for subscription-based pricing, but, let's admit it, one-time software purchases seem to be going the way of the dodo.)
> let's admit it, one-time software purchases seem to be going the way of the dodo.
I don't think one-time software purchases are going anywhere. In fact, the more apps switch to ad-driven or subscription pricing, the easier it will be for (unique, interesting) apps with non-subscription pricing to market this to their advantage. I expect subscription-based revenue in the App Store will dry up for the vast majority of apps once users get over the novelty in a few years.
Plus, some software simply cannot be subscription based by definition. Most non-AAA games are finished works with only maintenance updates in their future. Who would want to subscribe to that?
I don't think one-time software purchases are going anywhere. In fact, the more apps switch to ad-driven or subscription pricing, the easier it will be for (unique, interesting) apps with non-subscription pricing to market this to their advantage. I expect subscription-based revenue in the App Store will dry up for the vast majority of apps once users get over the novelty in a few years.
Plus, some software simply cannot be subscription based by definition. Most non-AAA games are finished works with only maintenance updates in their future. Who would want to subscribe to that?
How would trials work with one-time purchases?
Download app for free, it works for n days then it displays a 'thanks for trying' screen unless you pay. Desktop "shareware" has worked like this for decades.
I love the opportunity this model provides. But for an existing app (that would greatly benefit from subscriptions and offers continuous new content daily) how to message this kind of switch w/o simply starting over seems, well, difficult to say the least. Unless you put one app "to bed" and start anew, how do others imagine taking advantage of this model? Or does it apply better to only new apps? Hard to say.
You can enable new features only to users with a subscription.
Apple and their ever-so-generous 30% take. As a multiple Apple product user, I still see that is horrible.
"Auto-renewable subscriptions provide a simple way to offer free trials to users."
Not sure it said that before.
Not sure it said that before.
On April 19th [0], it read: "If you have an app with auto-renewable subscriptions, you have the option of offering free trials to new users."
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20160419200531/https://developer...
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20160419200531/https://developer...
I hope they don't force the use of this. I have a web app with subscription working now. Added an App that only works with existing subscription. What if I'm forced to this?
It'd be pretty hard to enforce for apps that are normally web-based but also have an app (they might just redevelop their website to be mobile friendly instead of needing an app) or apps that aren't just for iOS (it's easier to maintain one subscription service instead of two)
I wonder what the deal is with the fact that in the UK, everyone who uses the BBC iPlayer on any platform must now own a 'TV License' and pay £145 per year.
Until yesterday, you could use the app to watch things on catch-up. Now the 'levy/subscription/tax/license' is mandatory.
Is there a loophole they're using that I'm missing? eg: That they don't want to call it a 'subscription', even though that's exactly what is. (Well, more of a 'tax', but they hate calling it that too.)
Until yesterday, you could use the app to watch things on catch-up. Now the 'levy/subscription/tax/license' is mandatory.
Is there a loophole they're using that I'm missing? eg: That they don't want to call it a 'subscription', even though that's exactly what is. (Well, more of a 'tax', but they hate calling it that too.)
What's the problem? You're still perfectly able to provide service to customers who've already got a subscription; you are only denied the ability to offer them an opportunity to
purchase that subscription from the app.
No problem. Just wanting to clarify how it relates.
So, since no one 'buys' a subscription 'through the app' then Apple can't demand a cut? Is that right?
I thought there was an issue if an app provided content which was only consumable through a paid subscription. Which the iPlayer now is. (Though you don't need to log in to view it, but you'll be breaking the law if you do and you haven't paid.)
ta.
So, since no one 'buys' a subscription 'through the app' then Apple can't demand a cut? Is that right?
I thought there was an issue if an app provided content which was only consumable through a paid subscription. Which the iPlayer now is. (Though you don't need to log in to view it, but you'll be breaking the law if you do and you haven't paid.)
ta.
Yes, subscriptions to content that can be access through an iOS app aren't required to go through Apple (so long as they are purchased outside of the app), in which case Apple won't take a cut.
Note that this is purely down to Apple allowing it — there's nothing stopping Apple from disallowing apps that do this, but to do so wouldn't be in Apple's interests.
Also, the TV licence is officially a tax. Not that that really changes anything. Apple could still chuck BBC iPlayer off the App Store if they really wanted to, but they'd be crazy to do so.
Note that this is purely down to Apple allowing it — there's nothing stopping Apple from disallowing apps that do this, but to do so wouldn't be in Apple's interests.
Also, the TV licence is officially a tax. Not that that really changes anything. Apple could still chuck BBC iPlayer off the App Store if they really wanted to, but they'd be crazy to do so.
Thanks for clearing that up. It's been gnawing away at my brain all day.
Could you subscribe to receive/buy weekly/monthly coins(virtual currency)?
Or is this only for app usage.
Or is this only for app usage.
You can't use subscriptions for consumable purchases.
Let the lawsuits and squabbles over negative response billing for iOS apps begin!
Many customers forget where they even sourced their subscription to begin with, especially if you have a multi-/omni-channel presence.