APP STORE LOCK-IN CAN BE AN ADVANTAGE IN TERMS OF ACCESSIBILITY
Amidst the hoopla around the latest round of curated Vision Pro demos with press ahead of launch—more on that in a later piece—Apple has tweaked its guidelines for developers which now allow app makers to “include a link to the developer’s website that informs users of other ways to purchase digital goods or services” using the StoreKit API’s External Purchase Link Entitlement. The change comes following the Supreme Court’s ruling that the company acted anticompetitively by barring developers from alerting users of available payment methods outside of the App Store.
At first blush, that Apple has capitulated on the anti-steering ruling seems not relevant whatsoever in an accessibility context. This inclination is mostly true—for the record, I do believe it’s not unreasonable for people to know of alternative payment methods and have thought Apple’s rules silly and needlessly punitive—but it’s worth examining why the App Store is a great first option for a segment of users. It’s here where the accessibility-oriented argument comes into play.
As ever, the argument transcends sheer convenience, which goes hand-in-hand with ease of use.
In a nutshell, the argument is the App Store is the most accessible way to make purchases for certain members of the disability community. Payment information is stored within a person’s Apple ID profile and purchases can be authenticated using biometrics like Face ID or Touch ID. Privacy and security notwithstanding, the reality is using the App Store for purchases—which includes in-app purchases—can be far more accessible than being jettisoned off to Safari to do so on a third-party website. This is mainly for cognitive reasons; for a certain type of person, it may prove overwhelming to choose between using the App Store or not. It seems like a trivial thing but it isn’t: it’s highly plausible that it can be jarring (and thus worsen the user experience) for someone to start in the App Store for something, then need to go elsewhere to complete the task for an app they downloaded in the App Store. Moreover, once someone leaves the App Store, however momentarily, the question then becomes determining the user flow for checkout. Does the site accept Apple Pay? Is personal information needed? Is the website itself accessible? These considerations are not at all trivial and all have major influence on shaping the user experience. What’s more, using an external payment system may exacerbate visual and motor friction, which may involve lots of typing and tapping, that’s eliminated with a few taps using the App Store.
Any retort that these issues are immaterial because users aren’t forced to venture outside of the App Store misses the point. The anti-steering conversation is an entirely separate matter. The salient point is simply that, as with everything in life whether digital or physical, accessibility touches the App Store in more ways than one. In this case, the ostensible disadvantage of being “confined” to the App Store isn’t necessarily unilaterally bad for every single user. Maybe as a business owner it’s bad, but not absolutely so for a customer. To cite one personal anecdote on macOS, I’m nerdy enough and technologically savvy enough to download software from the web. I used to do it during my Windows days all the time. Given a choice, however, I generally prefer the Mac App Store because I find the process more streamlined and, pointedly here, more accessible. The same is true for my iPhone and iPad. I know the App Store integrates with accessibility features I use every day—Hover Text on the Mac, for one—whereas I’m uncertain externally.
The accessibility case for the App Store (and using Apple’s StoreKit framework as a developer) is admittedly esoteric and nuanced in context of the legal issues. Still, that doesn’t make accessibility any less noteworthy or valid. Reasonable minds can debate Apple’s stewardship of its storefront. It’s also reasonable to contend the App Store’s lock-in is not as terrible as regulators say it is. From a usability perspective, it very well can be advantageous depending on one’s needs and tolerances. Disabled people use the App Store too, but I doubt the EU thinks about them.
I don’t presume to speak for every disabled person on the planet who uses an iPhone. Likewise, I don’t have an app on the App Store. It’s just really important to note that, like with accessibility writ large, the App Store is the path of least resistance. That matters a lot for access and inclusion.
