I’ve been diving into the Mona 7 upgrade controversy, specifically the requirement for Mona 6 Pro users to buy a "Bridge Upgrade" to Pro Max ($10) in the old app just to unlock the *privilege* of buying the Ultra One-Time Purchase ($20) in the new app.

While a developer is absolutely allowed to release a new App ID and charge for it (that is standard practice), this specific "Bridge Purchase" mechanism appears to violate Apple's App Store Review Guidelines in two critical ways.

If you are frustrated by this, here is the technical breakdown of why this flow is likely non-compliant:

1. Violation of Guideline 3.1.1 (In-App Purchase Mechanics)
The core rule of IAP is that purchases must be for content/features *consumed within the app*.

Guideline 3.1.1 states: "Apps may not use their own mechanisms to unlock content or functionality... Apps and their metadata may not include buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms other than in-app purchase."

By forcing users to buy an upgrade in Mona 6 (App A) specifically to unlock a price tier in Mona 7 (App B), the developer is effectively selling a "coupon" or "license key" for a different app.
* The $10 spent in Mona 6 is not primarily for Mona 6 features (since the user is abandoning that app for Mona 7); it is a fee paid in App A to modify the behavior of App B.
* Apple historically rejects apps that sell access to other apps. The "Loyalty Discount" should be native to Mona 7 (e.g., detecting the Mona 6 receipt), not gatekept behind a fresh paywall in a deprecated binary.

2. Violation of Guideline 2.3 (Accurate Metadata & Misleading Terms)
This is the "Bait and Switch" clause.

Guideline 2.3.1 states: "Customers should know what they’re getting when they download or buy your app... Don’t include any hidden or undocumented features in your app."

When users bought Mona 6 Pro as a "One-Time Purchase," the reasonable expectation was a perpetual license for that major version. By creating a *new* tier (Pro Max) and retroactively declaring it the *only* tier eligible for future loyalty benefits, the developer has obfuscated the value of the original purchase.
* Forcing a user to upgrade a "dead" product (Mona 6) to access the "live" product (Mona 7) is a "Junk Fee" structure that confuses the purchase flow and misleads users about the true cost of the upgrade ($11.99 original + $10 bridge + $20 new app = $41.99 total, vs the advertised $20).

The Bottom Line:
The developer has every right to charge $20 for Mona 7. They do NOT have the right to force you to spend $10 in Mona 6 to "unlock" that button.

If this flow remains, it sets a dangerous precedent where developers can tax users in legacy apps to gatekeep access to new ones. The "Loyalty Offer" should be available to *all* paid Mona 6 users, or the upgrade path should be handled entirely within Mona 7.

#MonaApp #AppStore #iOSDev #TechPolicy #Mastodon

reshared this

The similarities between #accessibility and #cybersecurity continue to amaze me.
These are both areas of standards, recommendations, legal precedents etc. that SHOULD, in theory, give companies the tools, as well as the insentive, to do what their clients/customers need them to do.
Is that the reality? Sadly, often, no it isn't. I just saw a renowned voice in the cybersecurity space repost a post that essentially states that if the infraction is cheaper/more lucrative than the fine, companies will choose the fine every single time. Frustrating, innit?

So what if I say the exact same thing is true for #accessibility and that the majority of GUI-based cybersecurity tools are not #accessible enough to be productive?

Here's a callout to #cybersecurity vendors. Are you going to fix this, or be a hypocrite? :) #tech

Zach Bennoui reshared this.

in reply to Zach Bennoui

@ZBennoui Oh it's perfectly doable with a bit of elbow grease I would say. A lot of tools are commandline which, while not necessarily efficient out of the box, does dodge around some of the UI issues, and yet others are web-based which means one can get quick at them with a bit of practice, but there's also scary Legacy Java UIs that ...kinda work but are not exactly pleasant to use. I'd say if youre not passionate about it you probably won't have a great time, but if you are, it is certainly learnable/doable and quite fun once you get good at it :)

I don't think people are ready for what's coming: Bots that look and talk like real humans, which can actually control things in the real world. Imagine the unbelievable mess it's going to create in our society when we can't tell who is real anymore. We need to be thinking about these problems now, because the technology isn't far off. I've already had conversations that were in the "uncanny valley" where I wasn't sure if who I was speaking to was a bot. Those came and went, replaced by ones that actually crossed over the valley and sound real. Next up: "live" video.

producthunt.com/products/truge…

This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)

do you think millennial or gen Z leaders can build on the legacy of the civil rights movement and build a better world, or will expectations keep being diminished?

  • the good thing, definitely (50%, 4 votes)
  • the bad thing :( (12%, 1 vote)
  • maybe a big rock will hit the earth instead (37%, 3 votes)
8 voters. Poll end: 1 week ago

I speak to you today bearing the burden of a family struggling to survive💔❤️‍🩹We have endured more than anyone could bear, yet we cling to what little strength we have left.
Please be with us🫂✊️
My child needs to survive and live.I just want to feed him.Please...We need your help now. Every bit of support can change my child's fate.🥺🙏
gofund.me/74c01145
#Gaza #Palestine #GazaVerified #israel #genocide #StopTheGenocide #fediAid #mutualAid
@kathimmel
@neutrinoceros
@bagder
@Chasteen

I'm going to make this loud and clear for every single one of my blind brethren out there in the world. No! Absolutely not! I will not, and do not at all feel comfortable touching a person's face to see what they look like. I do not spend my time being curious about what others look like, and I'm not going to walk around touching people's faces like a weirdo. That is a myth. A creepy, awkward myth. Nothing more. Not one blind person that I have ever spoken to in life has ever been comfortable being put in this situation. Not one! Do not do this! Do not put any of us in that situation.

reshared this

in reply to garo

Hmm, does it delete posts which are older, or, so rephrase it. Does enabling this also count for posts sent before enabling it. Hope that made sense. I don't know. I think I like to go back sometimes, and at some point I feel like it could be cluttered having several archives with different spans of data, but on the other hand, Mastodon kinda flows on anyway. I don't think I'll do it, but I totally get why you would...
in reply to Cassandra is only carbon now

That in turn seems, according to html5-parser documentation (not yet taken the time to confirm this myself), to cause *both* lxml and html5-parser to dynamically link libxml2 so that they can share the same C-level data structures.

Effectively, html5-parser seems to rely on internal implementation details of lxml in ways that completely break Python packaging. I get it gives a performance advantage, but at a steep cost.

in reply to Cassandra is only carbon now

I don't want to be too mean about this... Calibre is almost half a million lines of code, and has been around longer than Python 3 has. But also? I'm trying to point out that a large part of how we archive and read electronic books without fear of retroactive censorship is load-bearing on those five hundred thousand lines.

That is not sustainable, and not something that ever should have been placed on one person's shoulders.

a high-profile software project proudly announcing that it's going to start "using AI" is basically the same thing to me as seeing a big "this repo is archived" banner. perhaps even worse in some respects? intentionally or not, the message it sends is "we don't really enjoy programming and we don't want to work on this anymore, but rather than retire the project we're going to do a really lackluster job from now on". like if your favorite coffee brand proudly announced "now 20% more sawdust"

reshared this

in reply to feld

@feld @mirabilos It's not even the hype, a language might need that in a way.

It's more like:
- Cargo and the packaging ecosystem is a disaster, stuff like Tarmageddon will probably stay an exploitable vulnerability for years even on the open-source side of things.
- I've had to edit parts of the Rust stdlib once… urgh, I hope I never look in there again.
- They love citing gccrs as "hey it'll be there soon as an alternative!" while they've been at it for years and are still at doing core (so stdlib… yeah that doesn't seems soon): rust-gcc.github.io/2025/11/17/…

This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to James Scholes

In some web platform circles, there's a push for a move away from walled garden distribution methods like the App Store and native apps in general.

Broadly, I think progressive web apps (PWAs) should be easier to distribute and install. And Apple should definitely do more to make those a viable option on iOS.

Unfortunately, purely web-based apps are currently not able to take advantage of several important #accessibility features, primary among them the ability to add actions to elements (e.g. for the VoiceOver rotor).

reshared this

in reply to James Scholes

Totally that. A webapp on a desktop can be a joy to navigate if it has enough keyboard shortcuts. On mobile, something like Mastodon is just not as efficient. Even if you have posts marked up with headings or articles performing other actions requires a lot more gestures. Both iOS and Android have a version of actions so a web API for them would make a lot of sense.
in reply to Jamie Teh

@jcsteh @pitermach It's a start. It's not quite the same, given that for privacy reasons it can only invoke concrete controls in the DOM rather than arbitrary event handlers, and it's not clear how those controls can be adequately hidden from SR users without disadvantaging other audiences.

When I most recently discussed it with a member of the ARIA WG and a screen reader engineer (in October), it seemed there were quite a few open questions about the relevant side effects too, like focus movement and restoration for e.g. actions that are toggles or open a piece of UI that can later be closed.

But as I say, it's a start and I'm hopeful it will make a difference. I like web apps, both as a developer and a user.

in reply to James Scholes

@pitermach Yeah, I've been thinking on those points. The privacy issues are pretty significant, so we really can't have it activating stuff that isn't visible in the DOM. I know native apps can, but native apps don't provide any privacy guarantees whatsoever, plus you explicitly choose to install them. One thing I've been wondering about though is whether we could just hide any target of aria-actions for mobile screen reader users or at least provide an attribute to enable that.
in reply to Jamie Teh

@jcsteh @pitermach The privacy aspects are definitely critical. Not to mention the fact that while this may be a solved problem on mobile for screen reader users, other groups haven't traditionally had a great experience when controls have been hidden or offloaded to custom gestures. AFAIK keyboard users on iOS only got access to actions when Full Keyboard Access was added, but on the web we're approaching it from the angle of having at least some keyboard access already.

Morning all. The first coffee is already down the hatch, and the second 750 ML mug is about to be poured. iPhone 17 Pro Max performance is pretty mind-blowing. iOS 26.1? Not so much. The focus jumping has me at least half way driven to toss this damn iPhone off the eleventh-storey balcony. But that wouldn't be too smart. But they had better fix this stupid thing in the next point release.
This entry was edited (2 weeks ago)
in reply to 🇨🇦Samuel Proulx🇨🇦

@fastfinge Not surprised. Its as if the navigation is happening too quickly for some part of the process to complete, so that secondary part of the process resets the position to some other element, usually the one or three post actual position. Its really weird. I imagine you've heard where focus hits the position you want, then quickly jumps out of position. Bah! It drives me batty!

2025 Video Game Accessibility Recap - Access-Ability

In this 45 minute video, I recap EVERY bit of video game accessibility news from 2025.

This video was a mammoth project, I hope folks check it out.

Text: access-ability.uk/2025/12/05/2…

Video: youtube.com/watch?v=sO76gjNPD5…

This is getting better and better, I come to find out that @MonaApp is expecting customers who bought Mona Pro in the current version as a “one-time purchase” (note the quotes around that phrase) to pay both for Mona Pro Max in the current version, and Mona Ultra in Mona 7 to maintain the same functionality as you currently get with Mona Pro already. Let’s add this all up, in US dollars of course since that’s my point of reference. The initial purchase of Mona Pro was $12.99 plus whatever Apple tax you have to pay as part of the purchase. The upgrade to Mona Pro, Max in the current version according to the developer is an additional $10 plus the Apple tax. Oh, but hold on now in order to upgrade to Mona ultra in Mona, 7, you have to shell out an additional $20 plus the Apple tax. Hope you can afford it… what was originally a high-quality, accessible Mastodon client now will cost you the same price as a halfway decent dinner at a nice restaurant. Essentially, you’re being punished for purchasing the more affordable tier of the premium version of Mona6. Yes, I know it sounds like I’m bitching about this, but something seems wrong about having to pay twice just to upgrade. The developer could have done a much better job of providing an upgrade path for customers who’ve already paid for a premium version of their software, but decided that double dipping into their customers wallets was a better idea 

À lire : LA GAUCHE ET L'ISLAM
#LFI a brouillé une frontière fondamentale : celle qui sépare le combat contre le racisme, que nous soutenons pleinement, et le soutien politique à des revendications religieuses qui viennent contester la laïcité et l’égalité des droits.
generation-athee.fr/.../la-gau…
@GenerationAthee

ITV could be Donald Trump’s next target in his media vendetta
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/itv-donald-trump-target-media-vendetta-4088985?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub

Posted into News (UK Edition) @news-uk-edition-FlipboardUK