Apple App Store: Difference between revisions

|Category=

|Description=

|ReleaseYear=

|Website=

Although there are supported iOS application installation source alternatives such as [https://altstore.io/ Altstore], they are not commonly used or known about which gives Apple a practical monopoly over iOS users and iOS app developers.

Apple takes fees of up to 30% on digital product sales and subscriptions,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mehta |first=Tushar |date=2025-05-06 |title=Apple cuts App Store fees, but experts urge caution against new U.S. pricing guidelines |url=https://www.digitaltrends.com/phones/what-experts-say-about-apple-app-store-pricing-changes/ |access-date=2026-02-20 |website=digitaltrends}}</ref> ranging from game currency to supporting content creators<ref name="patreon">{{Cite web |last=Roth |first=Emma |date=12 Aug 2024 |title=Patreon: adding Apple’s 30 percent tax is the price of staying in the App Store |url=https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/12/24218629/patreon-membership-ios-30-percent-apple-tax |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/Vi9cV |archive-date=13 Nov 2024 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref> to booking a Zoom call with a local business.<ref name="facebook">{{Cite web |last=Paul |first=Katie |last2=Nellis |first2=Stephen |date=28 Aug 2020 |title=Exclusive: Facebook says Apple rejected its attempt to tell users about App Store fees |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-apple-exclusive/exclusive-facebook-says-apple-rejected-its-attempt-to-tell-users-about-app-store-fees-idUSKBN25O042/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/9CJDN |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Reuters]]}}</ref> Some argue that these fees hinder iOS app developers from innovating and using the money to further improve their applications.{{Citation needed}} There are groups in support of developers who are experiencing difficulties in continuing development due to Apple (and [[Google]]'s) fees of between 15% and 30% of all revenue. These groups deny the notion that Apple and Google require the money generated by the app more than the developer.{{Citation needed}} These fees also push app developers to increase prices to maximize profits, which increases the prices that users have to pay.

Because of this, several governments including South Korea,<ref>{{Cite web |date=8 Mar 2022 |title=South Korea approves rules on app store law targeting Apple, Google |url=https://www.reuters.com/technology/skorea-approves-rules-app-store-law-targeting-apple-google-2022-03-08/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/q1VQW |archive-date=11 Jan 2023 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Reuters]]}}</ref> Japan,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Sharwood |first=Simon |date=13 Jun 2024 |title=Japan forces Apple and Google to allow third-party app stores and payments |url=https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/13/japan_smartphone_software_law/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/Jj9BI |archive-date=13 Jun 2024 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[The Register]]}}</ref> the European Union,<ref>[[wikipedia:Digital Markets Act|Digital Markets Act]]</ref> the United Kingdom,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Competition and Markets Authority |date=4 Mar 2021 |title=Investigation into Apple AppStore |url=https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/investigation-into-apple-appstore |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/uZ7A5 |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[gov.uk]]}}</ref> Australia,<ref>{{Cite web |date=28 Apr 2021 |title=Dominance of Apple and Google's app stores impacting competition and consumers |url=https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/dominance-of-apple-and-googles-app-stores-impacting-competition-and-consumers |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/Bw3gv |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[ACCC]]}}</ref> as well as the US and a handful of US States<ref>[[wikipedia:Open App Markets Act|Open App Markets Act]]</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=20 Nov 2024 |title=S.5364 - App Store Accountability Act |url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/5364/text/is |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/7yPxE |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[congress.gov]]}}</ref><ref name="doj">{{Cite web |last=Balsamo |first=Mike |last2=Liedtke |first2=Mike |last3=Whitehurst |first3=Lindsay |last4=Bajak |first4=Frank |date=21 Mar 2024 |title=Justice Department sues Apple, alleging it illegally monopolized the smartphone market |url=https://apnews.com/article/apple-antitrust-monopoly-app-store-justice-department-822d7e8f5cf53a2636795fcc33ee1fc3 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/BB4Zn |archive-date=21 Mar 2024 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[APNews]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=19 Feb 2021 |title=It’s time to free ourselves from ‘Big Tech’ monopoly |url=https://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2021/02/19/its-time-to-free-ourselves-from-big-tech-monopoly/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/bLDwu |archive-date=23 Feb 2021 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Arizona Capitol Times]]}}</ref> have opened investigations into anti-competitive practices, or considered or already passed legislation to force "gatekeeper platforms" such as Apple to be more reasonable with third-party developers.

This being a significant threat to Apple's revenue stream (interestingly, one they claim to be unsure is profitable<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lovejoy |first=Ben |date=17 Apr 2024 |title=Schiller doesn’t know whether the App Store is profitable; there are no minutes of meetings |url=https://9to5mac.com/2024/04/17/app-store-is-profitable-apple-notes/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/AinvZ |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[9to5Mac]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Lovejoy |first=Ben |date=17 Jan 2025 |title=Apple denies App Store profit margin is 75% – claims to have no clue |url=https://9to5mac.com/2025/01/17/apple-denies-app-store-profit-margin-is-75-claims-to-have-no-clue/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/Df7hl |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[9t05Mac]]}}</ref>), they have responded with practices such as geo-blocking certain operating system functionality based on physical location,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Eligibility |url=https://theapplewiki.com/wiki/Eligibility |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/Df7hl |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[The Apple Wiki]]}}</ref> misrepresenting/overstating risks, and using careful wording with commonly-understood terms to describe unreasonably difficult-to-use systems.{{Citation needed}}

Unlike traditional software license purchases, Apple's App Store terms tie the license to a specific account, making it impossible for users to resell their licenses secondhand, buy apps secondhand, or inherit a license from a relative.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2014-02-10 |title=I can sell my apps? |url=https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5888894 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/DelOf |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=2025-11-25 |website=Apple Community}}</ref> This system has since been copied by numerous other players in the media and digital goods sector.

*'''[[wikipedia:Digital Markets Act|Digital Markets Act]]''': The European Union's fairly sweeping recent regulations against forcing companies they classify as "gatekeepers" to play nice, giving smaller businesses access to software/hardware features they've historically reserved for their own use.

Apple has been collecting users' credit card numbers since launching the iTunes Store in 2004. The launch of the App Store in 2008, followed by the introduction of in-app purchases (IAPs) in 2009, allowed iPhone app developers to sell app features to users. The IAP system is provided as a developer framework named [https://developer.apple.com/storekit/ StoreKit]. Apps and their in-app purchases are managed through a dashboard named [https://developer.apple.com/app-store-connect/ App Store Connect]. App sales have eclipsed iTunes Store sales, and are now a primary focus of Apple's Media Services division.

Apple requires that any purchase of a digital good or service within an app use its in-app purchase system. This may seem reasonable because the customer may inevitably call Apple support, demanding a refund for an app they have issues with. Apple would rather provide a refund and leave the customer with a positive support experience than initiate a messy process involving contact with a third party, whose customer service is likely to be of a lower quality.

App Store purchase fees range from 15% to 30%. In September 2016, Apple expanded subscriptions to be available for any type of app, also introducing a 15% discount incentive for users who had already subscribed for a year.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Goode |first=Lauren |date=2 Sep 2016 |title=Apple’s new subscription offerings are now available to App Store developers |url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/2/12774758/apple-developers-app-store-new-subscription-rules |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/KmJCn |archive-date=7 Jan 202 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref> In November 2020, Apple introduced a reduced 15% fee for app developers with annual revenue below $1 million.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Centers |first=Josh |date=18 Nov 2020 |title=Apple Drops App Store Commission to 15% for Small Developers |url=https://tidbits.com/2020/11/18/apple-drops-app-store-commission-to-15-for-small-developers/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/tt8Hs |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[TidBITS]]}}</ref> For developers above this threshold, and for cases excluded from this program, such as for games, the fee is 30%. In the 2008 announcement of the App Store, Apple considered this a reasonable, industry-standard fee. However, the way we use apps has significantly evolved since 2009 - the world has shifted to heavily depend upon mobile apps, which have also evolved into more complex and sustainable business models than a simple one-time purchase.

 

The App Store system poorly handles secondary marketplaces of digital services that exist within the primary App Store marketplace, such as Patreon. Apple, however, still requires companies in the business of selling digital services to use this inadequate system. This requires the app to account for Apple's fee, which is significant enough to warrant price increases frequently, and to follow rules even if they do not align with the nature of the service being provided. Apple has often been found in disputes with such apps. This injects extra complication at no benefit to the marketplace, the creator, or the customer - only to Apple, which has little to no involvement after delivering the initial app download to the user's phone. The significant fee also often drives app developers to consider building their app around an advertising model instead, creating privacy concerns.

Apple, often in conjunction with Google, engages in lobbying efforts in the United States and other countries to address these issues. "ACT | The App Association", pitched as an association of independent small business app developers, is at least 50% funded by Apple, and does not list its claimed 2,000 members.<ref>{{Cite web |date=1 Oct 2021 |title=Not a class ACT: the so-called App Association is simply an Apple Association and does NOT represent app developers' interests in fair distribution terms |url=https://www.fosspatents.com/2021/10/not-class-act-so-called-app-association.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/eyn0i |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[FOSS Patents]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=19 Sep 2022 |title=Vast majority of ACT {{!}} The App Association's funding comes from Apple, former employees tell Bloomberg: astroturfing against app developers' interests |url=https://www.fosspatents.com/2022/09/vast-majority-of-act-app-associations.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/eGRNV |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[FOSS Patents]]}}</ref> In March 2024, the United States Department of Justice, along with 16 state attorneys general, filed a lawsuit against Apple, alleging that the company "extracts more money from consumers, developers, content creators, artists, publishers, small businesses, and merchants, among others."<ref name="doj" /> The future of this lawsuit is unclear as of April 2025.

Despite criticism of Apple forcing its fee into transactions with small businesses and creators on platforms such as [[#Patreon|Patreon]] and [[#Facebook online events|Facebook]], on January 23, 2025, Apple announced the Advanced Commerce API. It "support[s] developers' evolving business models - such as extensive content catalogs, creator experiences, and subscriptions with optional add-ons".<ref>{{Cite web |date=23 Jan 2025 |title=Introducing the Advanced Commerce API |url=https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=yxy958ya |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/KEH8h |archive-date=23 Jan 2025 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Apple Developer]]}}</ref> While positioned as a way for such businesses to save development time and avoid ongoing costs by building on top of Apple's mature payments platform, its use is, in fact, necessary for these businesses to comply with the App Store guidelines, as seen in the cases outlined below. The feature requires submitting a description of the app's business model to Apple for approval. This continues a trend of requiring Apple's consent to conduct business in a place where users have been trained to expect it.

In 2018, Epic Games launched Fortnite on the iOS and Android platforms. The company made the unusual decision not to release the app on the [[Google Play Store]] - instead, it was made available as a standalone [[wikipedia:apk (file format)|Android app package]] file (.apk), which must be installed by following a series of manual steps.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Statt |first=Nick |date=3 Aug 2018 |title=Fortnite for Android will ditch Google Play Store for Epic’s website |url=https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/3/17645982/epic-games-fortnite-android-version-bypass-google-play-store |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/yTQLj |archive-date=16 Mar 2021 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref> The app was also released on the [[Samsung]] [[Samsung Galaxy Store|Galaxy Store]]. Google offered Epic Games a $147 million deal to release Fortnite on the Play Store, which the company declined.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Robertson |first=Adi |date=9 Nov 2023 |title=Google offered Epic $147 million to launch Fortnite on the Play Store |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/8/23953262/google-epic-fortnite-play-store-investment-antitrust-trial |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/poKzi |archive-date=9 Nov 2023 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref>

On 22 April 2020, Fortnite was finally released on the Play Store.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Carpenter |first=Nicole |date=22 April 2020 |title=Fortnite available on the Google Play Store for the first time |url=https://www.polygon.com/2020/4/21/21229930/fortnite-available-on-google-play-android-mobile-devices |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/Z0huU |archive-date=13 Aug 2020 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[Polygon]]}}</ref> In a statement, the company explained:

On 13 August 2020, Epic Games launched a campaign against both Apple and Google's app store business practices. The company released app updates on both platforms, introducing a method for purchasing V-Bucks, in-game currency, at a 20% discount by directly transacting with Epic Games, against the developer rules of both platforms. The platforms responded by removing the game from their storefronts. Epic Games then filed civil antitrust lawsuits against both companies in the Northern District of California.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Statt |first=Nick |date=14 Aug 2020 |title=Epic Games is suing Apple |url=https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21367963/epic-fortnite-legal-complaint-apple-ios-app-store-removal-injunctive-relief |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/vfFgU |archive-date=14 Aug 2020 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref> The campaign, branded "Free Fortnite", was later extended with lawsuits and complaints in Australia,<ref>{{Cite web |date=18 Nov 2020 |title=Epic Games extends its fight against Apple to Australia |url=https://www.epicgames.com/site/en-US/freefortnite-australia-press-release |url-status=live |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Epic Games]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251219044545/https://www.epicgames.com/site/en-US/freefortnite-australia-press-release |archive-date=19 Dec 2025}}</ref> the European Union,<ref>{{Cite web |date=17 Feb 2021 |title=Epic Game Files EU Antitrust Complaint Against Apple |url=https://www.epicgames.com/site/en-US/news/epic-games-files-eu-antitrust-complaint-against-apple |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/0Nqn7 |archive-date=26 May 2025 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Epic Games]]}}</ref> and the United Kingdom.<ref>{{Cite web |date=30 Mar 2021 |title=Epic Games files complaint to support CMA Apple investigation |url=https://www.epicgames.com/site/en-US/news/epic-games-files-complaint-to-support-cma-apple-investigation |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/FMiCR |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Epic Games]]}}</ref>

On September 11, 2021, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers decided the case. While the lawsuit against Apple failed on nine of the ten counts, Rogers ruled against Apple's use of "anti-steering" - its strategy of preventing users from being "steered" to a third-party storefront for payment processing - and placed a permanent injunction on this behavior.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brandon |first=Russell |date=11 Sep 2021 |title=Apple must allow other forms of in-app purchase, rules judge in Epic v. Apple |url=https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/10/22662320/epic-apple-ruling-injunction-judge-court-app-store |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/gf9tJ |archive-date=10 Sep 2021 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref> Despite the case mostly failing, the discovery process provided significant insight into Apple's decision-making process regarding App Store policies, including decisions made in major app review disputes. In one case, executive Phil Schiller argued for reducing the fee by 30%.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gurman |first=Mark |date=4 May 2021 |title=Apple’s Schiller Floated Cutting App Store Fees a Decade Ago |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-03/apple-s-schiller-floated-cutting-app-store-fees-a-decade-ago |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/R7Zus |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[Bloomberg]]}}</ref>

Epic Games and Apple both appealed the decision. 35 state attorneys-general, the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] (EFF), [[Microsoft]], among others, filed amicus briefs in support of Epic Games.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Peters |first=Jay |date=29 Jan 2022 |title=Epic largely lost to Apple, but 35 states are now backing its fight in a higher court |url=https://www.theverge.com/2022/1/28/22907106/epic-games-v-apple-amicus-briefs-states-eff-microsoft-appeal |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/P0TZY |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref>

On 11 December 2023, the jury in the case against Google decided on all 11 counts in favor of Epic Games.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Bensinger |first=Greg |last2=Scarcella |first2=Mike |date=13 Dec 2023 |title=Epic Games wins antitrust case against Google over Play app store |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/google-epic-games-face-off-app-antitrust-trial-nears-end-2023-12-11/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/WaLBK |archive-date=12 Dec 2023 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[Reuters]]}}</ref>

On 1 May 2025, Rogers found that Apple willfully chose not to comply with the 2021 injunction, commenting "that it thought this court would tolerate such insubordination was a gross miscalculation".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Peters |first=Jay |date=1 May 2025 |title=A judge just blew up Apple’s control of the App Store |url=https://www.theverge.com/news/659246/apple-epic-app-store-judge-ruling-control |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/IThaV |archive-date=1 May 2025 |access-date=1 May 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref>

In August 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Facebook introduced the ability for small businesses to accept an entrance fee for events. Previously, Facebook would only serve as a way to RSVP for the event; the organizer had to use a third-party event ticketing system to collect fees. The company pledged not to collect any fee on event sales "until 2023".<ref>{{Cite web |date=14 Aug 2020 |title=Paid Online Events for Small Business Recovery |url=https://about.fb.com/news/2020/08/paid-online-events/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/7X7KH |archive-date=6 Sep 2020 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Meta]]}}</ref>

Apple disagreed, requiring the feature to use the in-app purchases system. This introduced Apple's 30% fee. As this increases the price the user pays, with no benefit to the small business the user intended to support, the cost was displayed as a line item in checkout. Apple did not accept this disclosure of the price, referring to it as "irrelevant".<ref name="facebook" /> Facebook was allowed to compromise on displaying the fee, but ''without'' indicating that it is specifically an App Store fee.

After successfully launching the initial version of the app on the App Store, the company announced that an update was rejected due to a complaint about the business model. The app does not support in-app purchases; instead, users are expected to have an account with the service already. Apple did not like this arrangement and demanded that the company build an in-app subscription option. The company argued that it is being held to a different set of rules than apps such as [[Netflix, Inc.|Netflix]], whose app does not provide any way to purchase a subscription.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kastrenakes |first=Jacob |date=17 Jun 2020 |title=Hey.com exec says Apple is acting like ‘gangsters,’ rejecting App Store updates and demanding cut of sales |url=https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/16/21293419/hey-apple-rejection-ios-app-store-dhh-gangsters-antitrust |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/OERP2 |archive-date=28 Jun 2020 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref> After a suggestion from Apple executive Phil Schiller in the media, HEY introduced a 14-day free trial mode, which was approved.<ref>https://www.hey.com/apple/path/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251114230238/https://www.hey.com/apple/path/ Archived])</ref><ref>https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/18/interview-apples-schiller-says-position-on-hey-app-is-unchanged-and-no-rules-changes-are-imminent/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20251113115149/https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/18/interview-apples-schiller-says-position-on-hey-app-is-unchanged-and-no-rules-changes-are-imminent/ Archived])</ref>

In August 2024, [[Patreon]] announced a change in arrangement with Apple for its App Store app. From November 2024, subscriptions started from the iOS app would be required to use the in-app purchase system, bypassing Patreon's own long-standing payment practices.<ref>{{Cite web |date=12 Aug 2024 |title=Apple’s requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon. Here’s what you need to know. |url=https://news.patreon.com/articles/understanding-apple-requirements-for-patreon |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/3Wid0 |archive-date=14 Aug 2024 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Patreon]]}}</ref><ref name="patreon" /> This change does not affect the Android app.

A similar case occurred with the app Fanhouse in 2021.<ref>{{Cite web |last=@jasminericegirl |date=9 Jun 2021 |title=#fuckapple, a thread I cofounded @fanhouseapp 8 months ago to empower creators to monetize their content. We pay creators 90% of earnings. Now, Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse from the app store unless we give them 30% of creator earnings. This is theft and exploitation. |url=https://x.com/jasminericegirl/status/1402691047940100100 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/U0qQw |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[X]]}}</ref>

In August 2021, [[Twitter]] introduced a feature named Super Follows (now Subscriptions), in which users can pay a subscription fee to access more of a creator's content. For each user who enables Subscriptions, Twitter must submit a new in-app purchase SKU to the App Store, which will become available with the next update to the app.<ref>{{Cite web |last=@wongmjane |date=2 Sep 2021 |title=Each Super Follow is an In-App Purchase on the App Store, but because there are too many IAPs for the Twitter app, the App Store only shows 10 instead of the full list |url=https://x.com/wongmjane/status/1433372120080261120 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/3gqwM |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[X]]}}</ref> This, of course, is subject to the 30% fee. At the time of writing in January 2025, viewing the App Store listing reveals Elon Musk's $4.00 subscription as the fourth most popular IAP item.

Notarization of macOS software is not App Review. The Apple notary service is an automated system that scans your software for malicious content, checks for code-signing issues, and returns the results to you quickly. If there are no issues, the notary service generates a ticket for you to staple to your software; the notary service also publishes that ticket online where Gatekeeper can find it.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Notarizing macOS software before distribution |url=https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizing-macos-software-before-distribution |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/H4EO9 |archive-date=26 Nov 2024 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[Apple Developer]]}}</ref>

Whether this approach is actually better than that used by Windows antivirus, which only detects new malware samples when they are already on a user's computer, is a separate topic.

*Mysk: "iOS should enable alternative marketplaces to add their own links when users share their apps. Links still point to the App Store, and if the app is not available there, this happens."<ref>{{Cite web |last=@mysk_co |date=28 Jun 2024 |title=iOS should enable alternative marketplaces to add their own links when users share their apps. Links still point to the App Store and if the app is not available there, this happens: |url=https://x.com/mysk_co/status/1806638308455256242 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/DsQQH |archive-date=7 Jan 2026 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[X]]}}</ref>

The following paragraph is highly technical: JIT allows for speedy programs/apps, and due to its fast nature, it's used almost everywhere and represents a massive improvement over older code interpreters.

 

[[wikipedia:Just-in-time compilation|JIT]], which stands for Just-In-Time, is a method of code execution where code, instead of being compiled before being distributed (like an EXE), gets compiled into machine code in real time right before being executed. This method of code execution allows for much faster website loading times, speedier emulation, faster program execution (with programs written in JavaScript, Python, Lua...) compared to interpreters, which instead translate code into machine code line by line, which is much, much slower; JIT also employs many more optimization techniques meant to improve performance.

Safari is allowed to use JIT to compile code from any site, just like Apple's [https://apps.apple.com/app/swift-playgrounds/id908519492 Playgrounds] app on iPad. Playgrounds bundle Apple's [[wikipedia:Swift (programming language)|Swift]] compiler and share backend code with the version of Playgrounds found in [[wikipedia:Xcode|Xcode]].

Third-party apps, such as Pythonista (a Python IDE), emulators like Delta and UTM, and terminal environments like iSH, are not allowed to use JIT; instead, they must interpret code, which results in severe performance degradation and increased computational expense, potentially draining more battery.

An example of apps being heavily affected by this restriction is UTM. UTM is a port of [[wikipedia:QEMU|QEMU]] for iOS, iPadOS, and macOS, allowing users to create [[wikipedia:Virtual_machine|VMs]] that can run various operating systems, such as Microsoft Windows. The iPhone's hardware is capable enough to emulate various modern OSes at full speed. Still, due to Apple's JIT limitation, the team behind UTM had to create UTM SE (slow edition), which doesn't require JIT but is nowhere near as fast as UTM with JIT, only being capable of running MS-DOS and derivatives at acceptable speeds. While methods that enable JIT for apps other than Safari and Playgrounds exist (some are currently working on iOS 18.5, like [https://apps.apple.com/us/app/stikdebug/id6744045754 StikDebug]), Apple does not allow the use of JIT in notarized apps, meaning that apps that support JIT will have to be sideloaded, which comes with its own set of restrictions.

In the EU, Apple permitted web browsers to use rendering and JavaScript engines other than the built-in with Apple WebKit/JavaScriptCore, with the option for JS engines to use JIT. The browser still needs to be approved by Apple for an entitlement and must then work within the APIs provided by Apple. However, as of January 2025, no browsers using engines different from the built-in ones have been released, primarily due to arbitrarily imposed restrictions intended to discourage the use and development of third-party engines.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Mozilla says Apple’s new browser rules are ‘as painful as possible’ for Firefox |url=https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/26/24052067/mozilla-apple-ios-browser-rules-firefox |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/720xn |archive-date=26 Jan 2024 |access-date=16 Mar 2025 |website=[[The Verge]]}}</ref>

When apps want to display web content without opening the standalone Safari browser, app developers can use Apple’s [https://developer.apple.com/documentation/webkit/ WebKit] APIs, such as WKWebView. However, due to Apple’s [https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/app-sandbox application sandboxing] and WebKit’s data-isolation model, web content loaded inside one app does not have access to Safari’s cookies, browsing history, saved sessions, or extensions, nor to data from other apps’ embedded web views. Each app’s embedded browser operates with its own isolated website data store.

Apple states App Sandboxing "provides protection to system resources and user data by limiting your app’s access to resources requested through entitlements."<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-01-12 |title=App Sandbox {{!}} Apple Developer Documentation |url=https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/app-sandbox |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.ph/IkLXF |archive-date=2026-02-20 |access-date=2025-01-12 |website=Apple Developer}}</ref> However, developers have voiced frustration with how WebKit is sandboxed which can result in degraded user experiences, such as with repeated OAuth login flows between apps.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-01-12 |title=Impact of iOS 11 no longer providing shared cookies between Safari, Safari View Controller instances |url=https://github.com/openid/AppAuth-iOS/issues/120 |url-status=live |access-date=2025-01-12 |website=GitHub |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251113172345/https://github.com/openid/AppAuth-iOS/issues/120 |archive-date=13 Nov 2025}}</ref> Some developers have found workarounds for sharing information with the native Safari app, but it is unknown whether these methods still function in modern versions Apple's various operating systems.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Storey |first=Leon |date=2025-01-12 |title=Does WKWebView uses cookies from Safari? |url=https://stackoverflow.com/a/41486576 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260218231045/https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40148060/does-wkwebview-uses-cookies-from-safari |archive-date=2026-02-18 |access-date=2025-01-12 |website=StackOverflow}}</ref>