I'm glad Hey now has a future on the App Store – it's better than not existing at all, but the whole episode has been absurd.
This new version introduces a new free option for the iOS app. Now users can sign up directly in-app for a free, temporary, randomized @hey.com email address that works for 14 days. Think of it like a temporary SIM card you buy when traveling. Or for when you don’t want to give out your real email address, like a short term “for sale” listing, like Craigslist does it.
This, in particular, is just ridiculous. A whole new feature, designed and developed in haste over a weekend, simply to satisfy Apple. But then we've had to do that ourselves in our own apps, and no doubt thousands of other devs have their own stories.
> Name one retailer that lets you hock your product in their store without paying anything?
I realize that Apple brands it as a store, but analogies to other "stores" don't really make sense. 90% of apps are free[1], so you could similarly ask "name one retailer who gives away 90% of their products for free".
To me, the App "Store" is part of the product you get when you buy an iPhone. When free apps are distributed through it, they aren't getting "free" placement, you (the iPhone customer) are getting the service you paid for when you bought the phone.
Is that free free or free up front with recurring revenue because your engagement is profitable for them via advertising or in-app purchases or both? Because those are not the same.
I don't think you can use any of basecamp features for free. [1]
They make money, that is not up for debate.
(and yes, I know, their platform, their rules, etc etc, but nothing about that says people cannot fight it, and make it politically difficult to let them bleed money from people for a very basic service.)
1 - I have never used basecamp, or looked into it, so YMMV
You can use any app that integrates with Basecamp without paying a cent to Basecamp for the integration itself. You can even browse a list of integrations hosted by Basecamp. https://basecamp.com/extras
Basecamp isn't free, but neither is an actual IPhone. In the case of the tools that are enabled on their platform, Basecamp's library doesn't require paying basecamp, and Apple's does.
And neither is my computer or internet connection. But that doesn’t mean I expect BaseCamp to be free. Can I distribute my games on any of the console manufacturers system for free?
And before someone responds that you can buy physical games for consoles, they still have to pay the console manufacturer for each physical game sold and the console manufacturers have to approve it.
Can I use BaseCamp’s APIs for free and create my own app? In fact, BaseCamp just announced that they will not allow third parties to integrate with their software that use their platform to track employees.
And they also are “reader apps”. They offer view only functionality for content. That exception applies to all sorts of apps no one ever heard of that force you to subscribe outside of the App Store.
That was Apple's initial attempt, but the pushback was fast and furious. Spotify, especially, led the charge that this was ridiculous and Apple relented pretty quickly, IIRC. Now you can charge more to cover their 30%.
>Who wants an app that you can’t do anything with when you download it?
Apple has accepted plenty of those into the App Store before. Maybe you can't expect every application on the App Store to work after downloading. I don't own a Tesla, so why should I expect the Tesla app to do anything for me?
There has always been a distinction in the App Store between an app that is used to purchase physical goods or ties in with physical goods than those that are used exclusively for digital goods. You can use the Amazon app to buy goods within Amazon’s store. But you can’t use it to buy Kindle books.
> Name one retailer that lets you hock your product in their store without paying anything?
This is a bad take. Hey is a subscription service. If you buy a magazine from a newsagent and then sign up to a subscription from it, the newsagent doesn't get to claim 30% of the subscription fee.
You do however pay the retailer something. Also, the physical retailer doesn’t provide you in further infrastructure - automatic updates, notification support, a printing press to help you create your magazine (ie developer tools), etc.
The analogy falls down because stores generally don't benefit a great deal from having products in their store except insofar as the money they make for the store, or occasionally the money they'll make by consumers buying other products in the store (in the case of loss leaders).
The iOS app store could be 100% free apps, or even 100% apps that Apple doesn't get a cent of, and Apple still benefits from those apps existing.
So now Apple should operate the App Store as a loss leader? The console makers also benefit from games because it makes their consoles more valuable. Roku benefits from apps being available. Are any of those free?
It’s not “simply to satisfy Apple”. The rule is so that Apps people download provide functionality you can at the very least try out.
This is about providing a consistent user experience, and a consistent user experience is why people trust the store and actually download things from it.
It should be about both: Following your distributor's rules and providing the good user experience of an app that doesn't immediately demand a login when you launch it.
Back when I was working at an iOS developer, our leadership brain trust decided that the next version of our app should require the user to log in, or sign up for an account, and not let the user move forward unless they did so. I advised against this because, 1. Apple generally forbids the practice, 2. It's an unnecessary roadblock to getting into the app (having an account provided optional benefits), and 3. The engineering effort, plus the effort to rework later once Apple rejects it, was not worth it. I was unconvincing, so we did the work, submitted to the App Store, and lo and behold, it was rejected, and we had to scramble to re-work a "skip the login" function (in 6 point gray-on-black text) link into the flow. sigh
This was almost a decade ago. I guess my point is that this whole episode, fair or not, was totally predictable and avoidable. I bet that Hey had engineers internally shouting for the hills to not do this, who were being ignored. Maybe the company's leadership just wanted to pick a fight with Apple. Who would want to start such a fight, I don't know? If you're not a behemoth then there are only two possible ways that fight ends: 1. tears and engineering re-work, or 2. App Store banishment. It's just not worth it. Or maybe it is worth it if you're an exec and it's not your time being wasted but some poor engineer working over the weekend to scramble for a fix.
I suppose if you've been sitting on the sidelines since 1971 to see if this whole "e-mail thing" was a fad or not, and currently don't have an email address, a 14 day trial with some rando address might be just what you're looking for. Now if only you had some one to email...
I may just be under-knowledgable of App Store practices but -- how much of this could charitably have to do with how can Apple confirm / accept apps that they can't test? With onboard payments they could fake charges and get into the app functionality, but without it and without any free content how can they do that? Or if you're Hey, are you able to specify credentials for Apple testing?
Well, when I worked for an enterprise health app that required an outside contract with employers, Apple required a valid login for testing. So, we gave them one. Surely, Hey did the same.
This new version introduces a new free option for the iOS app. Now users can sign up directly in-app for a free, temporary, randomized @hey.com email address that works for 14 days. Think of it like a temporary SIM card you buy when traveling. Or for when you don’t want to give out your real email address, like a short term “for sale” listing, like Craigslist does it.
This, in particular, is just ridiculous. A whole new feature, designed and developed in haste over a weekend, simply to satisfy Apple. But then we've had to do that ourselves in our own apps, and no doubt thousands of other devs have their own stories.