I don't get this controversy at all. If Apple requires a 30% cut of in-app purchases, raise in-app prices 30% and provide a link to a 30% "discount" version through your website.
Is that also against an Apple rule? If so I can somewhat understand.
EDIT: You can upcharge IAP purchases, but you can't advertise the cheaper alternative. That's wildly anti-consumer on Apple's part, surely the EU can't be happy about that kind of situation?
Yes, I find it hard to believe that YouTube charging 30% or 40% more for a YouTube Premium subscription through iOS and not telling the customer that they are paying a vastly inflated price because Apple insists on getting a cut is protecting or advocating for consumers in any way, shape or form.
I didn’t know that they allow different prices. A few days ago someone replied to my comment on HN and told me that it’s not allowed. If indeed it’s allowed, I think it’s more reasonable for Apple to require app makers to offer the IAP signup option.
Is that also against an Apple rule? If so I can somewhat understand.
EDIT: You can upcharge IAP purchases, but you can't advertise the cheaper alternative. That's wildly anti-consumer on Apple's part, surely the EU can't be happy about that kind of situation?