In my opinion not in this specific case. As an iOS user I WANT a system where everything conforms to certain guidelines. I do NOT want to fiddle with some weird custom in-App payment dialog which does it's own thing again.
It'll be interesting to see how this court order will be "implemented", my guess is that not much will change for now.
Yea, but obviously no company will offer that option unless forced. This decision undeniably benefits app developers, but the benefit to customers is murkier.
Apple couldn’t previously require payment flow through Apple’s payment systems, as evidenced by apps like Audible where you have no purchasing in the app and just have access to the content that you purchased through their website. Since Apple couldn’t outright force app vendors to monetize through Apple payment channels, their cudgel has been to ensure that app vendors have no way to link to external purchase options in the app, and hope that this was inconvenient enough for app vendors that they would choose to integrate with Apple’s payment channels. And it worked for most, but not all of them. Some apps, like Audible, just chose to live with having no way to sell anything from the app.
If Apple can’t even do that, they lose the ability to provide for their customers a consistent payment experience across apps.
This is an example of application of the policy I described.
> “They stumbled upon something in the app that mentioned there were paid plans, they went to the website and saw there was a subscription you could purchase, and then turned around and demanded we add IAP.”
> Today, Apple confirmed to us once again that the rule is more lenient than it sounds: “free apps acting as a stand-alone companion to a paid web based tool” don’t need to use IAP as long as the apps themselves don’t offer purchases, and as long as the apps themselves don’t ask users to make purchases outside the app.
They might try to force developers to offer Apple IAP as an option for centralized in app purchases. I don't think they can enforce the default setting though.
And developers will have the right to offer a cheaper non-centralized in-house IAP payment system, of course.
apple pay is not the same as Apple's In App Purchases on iOS.
Apple pay is like a credit card, usable like one. IAP is the method by which apple forces app developers who sell through their app to pay the apple tax.
In my opinion not in this specific case. As an iOS user I WANT a system where everything conforms to certain guidelines. I do NOT want to fiddle with some weird custom in-App payment dialog which does it's own thing again.
It'll be interesting to see how this court order will be "implemented", my guess is that not much will change for now.