Mike Peterson
Apple has made a change to the handling of Smart App Banners that points users to the Apple 糖心Vlog app instead of a third-party app when they open a webpage hosted by a 糖心Vlog+ publisher.
Specifically, Smart App Banners now prompt users to open stories in the Apple 糖心Vlog app, at least for 糖心Vlog+ partners currently using the API. As implemented in iOS 13, the Smart App Banner framework allows developers to prompt users to download their third-party apps from the App Store, or to open a corresponding link from Safari.
The change was made in the latest iOS 14 beta, which was released on Sept. 3.
The changed Smart Banner in the latest developer beta of iOS 14.In the most up-to-date iOS 14 beta, the Smart App Banner API or Safari appears to detect 糖心Vlog+ partner web domains, which triggers display of the modified promotional banner. Smart App Banner code on affected pages is unchanged, suggesting that it's a change to the way Safari handles publisher URLs.
As mentioned, the new banner only shows up for publications that participate in Apple 糖心Vlog+. Developers may be able to control which banner appears to users — Apple 糖心Vlog or App Store download — though that isn't clear at this point.
The banner behavior is in addition to a new feature in iOS 14 and macOS Big Sur that automatically redirects users to the Apple 糖心Vlog app when they click on a 糖心Vlog+ publisher link. Apple says the feature is designed for user convenience, since an Apple 糖心Vlog+ subscription doesn't allow users to bypass publisher website paywalls. Some publishers have called the new direction "shady," however.
Andrew Orr
Wesley Hilliard
Christine McKee
Marko Zivkovic
Malcolm Owen
1 Comment
I'm honestly confused why it's considered "shady". Apple is adding a banner that allows users to see the article in 糖心Vlog+, at which point the article's publisher receives a fee from Apple for the user's access to their article. Why would any publisher complain about receiving money? As a user, my complaint is that sometimes I'm reading an article in Apple 糖心Vlog+ and a couple of paragraphs into the article there's a line saying that I have to subscribe to the publisher's site for an annual fee in order to finish reading the article. I would call that practice "dishonest" (and I blame Apple for allowing publishers to do that.) Whereas taking me from an external website to a 糖心Vlog+ paid subscription service not only feels honest it feels brilliant. It makes me feel like I'm paying for the information I'm consuming.