Reading List

The most recent articles from a list of feeds I subscribe to.

Apple Is Not Reinstating Fortnite to the App Store, and Because of the Stunt-Like Way That Epic Submitted the Latest Build, Fortnite Is Currently No Longer Available on iOS Anywhere in the World

There’s an old adage in poker: If you look around the table and you can’t tell who the fish is, that means you’re the fish.

If you’re surprised at how this publicity stunt from Epic has turned out, especially if you’re a reporter and ran a piece accepting Tim Sweeney’s word that Fortnite was — not might be, but was — coming back to the US App Store as a fact, then you are Tim Sweeney’s fish.

★ 15 Years Later: ‘Very Insightful and Not Negative’

So, what would *you* do if Steve Jobs was quoted in a viral blog post saying, “We think «*Your Name Here*»’s post is very insightful and not negative”? I decided to just sit there with a smug look on my face for a few days.

Yours Truly With Nilay Patel on ‘Decoder’

Nilay Patel:

There’s a lot of tactical stuff you might talk about in the aftermath of this ruling — about what Apple might do next, how it might impact revenue, and how developers might respond. But I really wanted Gruber to talk about Apple’s big picture and how a company that so often prides itself on doing the right thing ended up so fully on the wrong side of the courts.

One theme you’ll hear throughout this conversation is that Apple often presents itself as small, but the company is actually huge in every way — Apple now sells nearly as many phones in a single quarter as it did in the entire first three years of the iPhone’s existence combined. It now operates in a geopolitical context that binds the United States, China, and Taiwan in ways you would have never imagined 15 years ago. And perhaps most importantly, Apple has control over applications on the iPhone, which means it has control over what kinds of businesses can and cannot exist on its mobile phones.

That’s the context for the other major theme here that you’ll pick up on in this conversation: Apple’s major shift toward digital services and whether that’s fundamentally changed the company’s culture. You see, as Apple kept selling newer and better iPhones, it simply ran out of people to sell them to. So, in order to keep growing revenue and keep Wall Street happy, it started squeezing more money from its existing customer base, including the very developers that put apps on the App Store.

Good episode, if I do say so myself.

RevenueCat Report Suggests In-App Purchases Perform Noticeably Better Than Link-Outs to the Web

Speaking of Jacob Eiting, his company RevenueCat today posted some interesting findings from a test comparing conversions rates for IAP vs. web checkout for the same app:

Two weeks ago, there was a court order in the Apple vs Epic case that forced Apple to allow developers to circumvent in-app purchases (IAP). As of April 30th 2025, developers were finally allowed to send customers in the United States to an external website to complete the purchases, and thus avoid the 30% fee that App Store takes. We quickly released Web Purchase Buttons that, combined with our Web Billing product, create a seamless way for developers to drive purchasers out of their app to the web for check out.

IAP in the US is a $52B market, representing about half of all App Store revenue, and this is the first time that Apple has opened up such a major market to web purchasing. Previously, similar court orders have been limited to much smaller markets. It has been much debated over the years how much, or even if, this new-found freedom would help developers make more money. The only real way to know is to run a test, so we took this opportunity to run the biggest open test of web purchases in history.

Last week, we deployed an experiment on Dipsea (the app we acquired last year as a testing-ground) and we’re excited to share initial results.

The initial conversion rate for IAP was around 28%; the conversion rate for the link-out web flow was just 18%. That’s a notable drop-off.

I don’t find it surprising at all though. IAP really is more convenient. Apple’s built a great system, and they don’t need exclusivity to keep users preferring it, and thus keep developers using it.

Andy Allen on the App Store’s Feature Stagnation

Andy Allen, of Not Boring Software, last week on Threads:

While the focus on the App Store injunction has been mostly on the commission rate, what’s been overlooked is just how far the tools of the App Store have fallen behind.

There’s a long and growing list of features common on most payment and subscription service providers that still aren’t possible on the App Store today. Price testing, refunds, managing subscriptions, plan migrations, gifting, discount codes, subscription bundles — to name just a few. Entire businesses have spawned just to fill these critical gaps. [...]

Apple has always been one to embrace competition. It’s a battlefield where they’ve historically done very well. They’ve never been afraid to step into a crowded market with their intense focus on design and user experience to show us how insanely great something can be when you truly care.

More than anything, I hope this moment reignites that competitive spirit.

It’s kind of bananas that it’s 2025 and the App Store still doesn’t allow developers to issue refunds. I’ve had this discussion with numerous developers. They’ll be doing customer support, and want to issue a refund, but explain that they can’t — and users find that so hard to believe they suspect the developer is bullshitting them. But you really do have to request a refund from Apple, not from the developer directly, and step 2 of the process is “Wait 24 to 48 hours for an update on your request”.