Apple Approves Hey Email App, But the Fight's Not Over

After rejecting an update last week, Apple has approved a new version of the subscription email app Hey. From a report: The approval, which came last week, ahead of today's Apple Worldwide Developer Conference, is meant to lower the temperature after Apple's initial app rejection drew widespread condemnation from lawmakers and other developers. But the approval is also only temporary in spirit, meant to give Hey developer Basecamp time to develop a version of the app more in line with Apple's policies -- and Basecamp's approach to that challenge is very aggressive, as a letter posted to its website today details.

"Hey!" is simply small enough

[93 Escort Wagon]

... that Apple feels like they can push the company around. I don't see a way to subscribe to Netflix or Amazon Prime through their iOS/iPadOS/tvOS apps, but those remain on Apple's App Store, unchallenged.

It seems like this would be legally dubious at best, but then - iANAL.

Re:

[dgatwood]

It's *all* legally dubious at best. The entire requirement that all purchases go through Apple is basically a glorified tying agreement. Those are per se illegal under U.S. antitrust law. A decade ago, I was shocked that the rule in question hadn't already been overturned by the courts. I'm *really* shocked that it still hasn't. (This is, of course, just my opinion, and IANAL.)

Re:

[TheReaperD]

Corporations and government have agreed, either implicitly or implied consent, that instead of going through the hassle and bad press of trying to overturn US anti-trust laws, they'd mutually agree to ignore them.

Re:

[fish_in_the_c]

As far as I'm concerned the whole 'walled garden' is bad and should be made illegal ( or easy to opt out of). It is a violation of property rights to sell something , then try to maintain control of what is done with that thing after it is sold. I know there is copywrite involved yada yada, but the effect is the same and it falls in the 'I know it when I see it' catagory. It is pretty obvious when something is done primarliy to allow the entity that created to software to control and manipulte the market

Re:

[nzkbuk]

As much as I agree with you it's not going to happen. The root of the problem is that software is "licenced" to you rather than "sold" to you. That boat sailed with digital downloads

Re:

[bill_mcgonigle]

It's *all* legally dubious at best. The entire requirement that all purchases go through Apple is basically a glorified tying agreement. Those are per se illegal under U.S. antitrust law.

It's worse than that. I suggested to David to charge 30% more an iOS entitlement than for the base web/android version. Everybody is happy that way - Apple users pay more, but ..... Apple users pay more.

The response I got was that Apple's terms mandate that you can't do that.

To be clear - if you have an Android business a

Re:

[dgatwood]

Actually, a number of companies with subscriptions (e.g. Netflix) have done exactly that — charge a convenience fee for signing up through the app. What they're not allowed to do is advertise the fact that you can go on their website and subscribe for less money. And in the end, Netflix concluded that it was too much trouble, and stopped taking new subscriptions through the App Store entirely. You either have an account or the app just doesn't do anything.

Re: "Hey!" is simply small enough

[liefer]

Which again is against Apple's terms. You're not allowed to release an app that doesn't do anything without a login - it will get rejected. That's the case for mere mortals anyway, Netflix seems to have gotten a pass on this

Astroturfing at it's finest

[EvilSS]

Seriously, the guy literally wrote the book on this kind of marketing and you rubes are eating it up hook, line, and sinker. What, 3 stories on here (all from the same person, hrm...), the tech site that time forgot? The sun could turn into a giant disco-ball and it would get three stories on /. Picked up by every tech news site? For some bullshit email service no one hear of before all this?

Re:

[EvilSS]

And yes, I see the It's. Damn it.

why no independent app store?

[belmolis]

I'm not an Apple person so perhaps this is naive, but why doesn't someone set up an app store independent of Apple, without all of Apple's restrictions?

Re:

[Xenx]

Apple locks down software on their phones. You can't, normally, run 3rd party software on an iPhone. There are independent app stores. However, you have to jailbreak your phone to get access to them.