Hacker News Reader

>While I agree that Apple should probably relax their rules, this list of "exceptions" is not particularly compelling.

Yeah, the first few items on the list were relatively convincing, but the convincing-ness takes a nosedive further down the list. I mean, who in their right mind would compare hey to a companion app for a car?

View on HN

It's not about that. It's about the VP's explanation being disingenuous. Apple's issue isn't that the app doesn't work, despite their claim. It's that they can't collect money. They should just be honest.

I agree that's a crappy explanation by the VP but that's not the actual reason for the rejection.

I too think it’s a poor response from the head of the App Store but we shouldn’t pretend to think we know the “actual” reason that much better because we are given a link to the ever-changing App Store regulations webpage.

The actual reason is the app does not follow the rules for in-app purchases. This hasn't really been in question. Anyone who has been an iOS dev for more than a year or two will be familiar with the App Store review guidelines.

Are the rules overly restrictive? Yes. Due they place an unfair burden on third party developers? Probably. But let's not pretend they are a mystery.

You can purchase upgrades for your car via the tesla app.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com