Apple rejecting apps with Flattr micro-payment integration - Page 2

Flatter is not a charity org either.
'Donations' is simply a euphamism for 'payment'.

 

then what about your comment doesn't apply here? if you decide to DONATE to a content provider..  "App Store guideline 21.2 states: The collection of donations must be done via a web site in Safari or an SMS"

 

what I'd like to know is how the user is supposed to authenticate to flattr. let's say i have 10 apps that have that button. I have to login in each app? sorry. not me. in a webpage, your credentials can be stored in a cookie, so you auth once and the buttons just work.

 

 

 

 

 

Apple is don't NO such thing. Going by internet rumors, I see. John Doe can sell his cherries anywhere he wants to, but unless he has his own store to sell it, he's gonna have to make arrangements with the owner be it Apple or another store. Take a look at any retailer and if you were trying to get your products into Wal-Mart, Costco, or the lot, you'll see what terms they slap at you. If you don't like it, they'll simply waive good bye to you. Not to mention the huge lines that people stand in just to show off their products for a minute.

It's possible, but I don't think they understand the concept of a business. It wouldn't necessarily make them dumb though. People tend to think that they have rights to everything. What they forget is that companies have the right to refuse service to them.

 

People should think one step ahead. If a company uses its right to refuse service, they can leave for another company. If they declare their intentions in advance, they might get a different deal. Yet they choose to either foam at the mouth after the fact, or bend over, and sometimes both.

Ah.. thanks.

But Flattr is for donation only. You never use Flattr to purchase anything at all. It's just donations. It's a shame donation is banned as well on the app store. :(

Unless you tell us why, you're not adding to the conversation.

Actually, it's you who is not seeing what we are saying. We are not Apple-haters. We are egalitarians who have liked Apple for decades (25 years in my case) but realize that not everything Apple does is right. You seem to defend them no matter what they do.

 

In this case, your analogy is not apt. It is easy for a buyer to switch from Target to Wal-Mart. It is not at all easy for an iPhone user, locked into a 2-year contract, to switch to Android. That changes this case from one of "free market" to one of "restriction of trade".

 

It's actually quite amazing to me how many on this list are defending the .5Trillion dollar company over the little startup who just wants to get money to charities. Really, people??

How exactly does an end-user locked into a 2-year contract leave for another company??

 

… I. don't. like. the. idea. of. micropayments. 

 

I don't get how that can be any clearer. I'd much rather pay once and own.

 

 

Fortunately we're not talking about that at all. That's not even remotely close to what this argument is about.

Locking yourself into a contract for two years isn't what I call thinking ahead.

First, by gathering information and finding out what they're signing up for BEFORE signing. Why should someone else be responsible for your actions? Secondly, pay the early termination fee and move on. The contract is with the carriers, not Apple. Buy a different phone and use it, there's no termination fee as long as you stay with the carrier. You're not limited to using the iphone for an entire 2 years. There's no contract if you purchased it unsubsidized at full price from Apple.

 

Arguing over what Apple can and can't do with their store is just nonsense. I don't agree with everything they do, but I have enough sense to choose something else if it bothers me that much. So far, for me personally, I'm ok with their sandbox and I'm the first person at the refund line when I'm not satisfied with something I buy.

So Apple should be forced to sell Android phones in their store? They should be forced to sell everything that anyone could possibly ask for? they should be forced to sell software even if it has a backdoor?

Your concept of 'restriction of trade' is ridiculous. Apple has their own store and can sell whatever they want. If you don't want to agree to the terms, buy something else.

It's even more amazing to me that you insist on posting about subjects you don't understand.

Flattr's site says:
"There’s a brave new world filled with entertainment, news and tools made by everyone, and not just the big guys. This new world deserves your support.

Simply click on Flattr buttons on blogs and websites. Creators can make a decent living, because if lots of us do this, sums add up quickly and can keep a blog or a useful piece of software going."

It's not supporting charities.