On April 19, 2017 (March 23, 2017 in the lunar calendar), Apple and Tencent exchanged views. WeChat, as a national App, has recently made headlines in various technology sectors because of "a small matter." On April 19, 2017, WeChat officially announced that it would cancel the appreciation function of the WeChat public platform in the iOS client from 17:00 on the same day and replace it in the form of a QR code. However, the matter did not end. At 0:00 on April 20, WeChat official issued another notice to cancel the QR code appreciation function and completely closed the appreciation channel. For WeChat, turning off the praise function must be a "difficult decision." After the official announcement, both Tencent executives and self-media outlets poured out their grievances and pointed the blame for the incident at Apple. What happened behind this? Why did WeChat officials suddenly turn off the praise function? You should know that turning off the praise function will definitely dampen the enthusiasm of some self-media users. Without the output of excellent content from self-media, it will affect the user stickiness of the platform. We at PConline also learned that WeChat officials have been preparing for the paid reading function for a long time. The closure of the appreciation function this time will inevitably have an impact on the launch of paid reading. No matter how you look at it, WeChat officials have no reason to do so. However, the initiative in this matter does not lie in WeChat's hands. On June 13, 2016, Apple updated the terms of the AppStore Review Guide, clearly stating in Rule 3.1.1 that "the App must not contain buttons, external links, or other call to action language that guide users to use non-IAP (in-App Purchase) mechanisms to make payment purchases." If you feel like reading is confusing, here is a popular explanation. According to Regulation 3.1.1, Apple stipulates that all virtual items purchased within the App must go through Apple's own payment channel (IAP mechanism). For example, purchasing coupons in games, purchasing e-books in reading software, or purchasing paid skins in chat apps all need to go through Apple's payment channels (not required for Android, you can jump to Alipay/WeChat and other channels to pay). The key to the problem is that if we use the IAP mechanism stipulated by Apple, 30% of application sales revenue will be allocated to Apple. Such application sales share is actually an important source of revenue for Apple's AppStore. Obviously, Apple believes that praise in WeChat is an in-app virtual item and should follow the IAP mechanism in accordance with regulations. However, Tencent disagreed with this because the public account reward function was jointly built by the author and the WeChat platform, not facilitated by the AppStore. Why should Apple share the reward money? However, after a long period of unsuccessful communication, Tencent finally chose to compromise and turned off the praise function. Because of Apple's IAP mechanism's application sales sharing model, the application services of the iOS client will be different from those of the Andriod client. For example, why are the services of some apps on the iOS client more expensive than other platforms? Or why the data between iOS and Andriod clients is not interoperable for the same game. On the other hand, although requiring the WeChat reward function to follow the IAP mechanism can increase revenue, this is not the main reason why Apple is using WeChat. You know, WeChat's appreciation function does not contribute much revenue to Apple. In addition, the shutdown of the praise function has far less impact on many self-media than everyone thinks. According to Xinhuanet data, praise only accounts for 3.8% of self-media revenue. Some media also linked this incident to ApplePay, believing that Apple suppressed WeChat in order to promote ApplePay. Xiaobian cannot agree with this point. You know, Bank of China's ApplePay method is different from ApplePay methods in other parts of the world. We know that Apple has had in-depth cooperation with UnionPay to introduce ApplePay into China. After all, domestic ApplePay is more like a new payment method for UnionPay, which is absolutely different from Alipay/WeChat. ApplePay is just a convenient payment method, while Alipay/Weixin Pay is a financial service provider. The competition between the two is far less than everyone thinks. In the final analysis, Apple's suppression of WeChat is more to regulate the ecological environment and ensure the maximization of its own interests. If we follow Apple's rules, virtual gifts on live streaming platforms and Weibo rewards should all follow the IPA mechanism. Therefore, Apple's WeChat interview may be just the beginning. If Apple strictly implements the corresponding rules in the future, each platform will pay a considerable fee. As we all know, Tencent, which holds WeChat and QQ, has a very large number of users and has considerable influence in the industry. So, what is Apple's confidence in attacking Tencent? If WeChat insists on not adjusting it, then Apple can only remove WeChat. For WeChat, long-term removal from the shelves is tantamount to suicide. But some people may also ask, since WeChat has so many users, why not directly attack Apple? Will anyone use an iPhone without WeChat? Of course, Tencent chose to compromise, which was actually a good result. After all, the two companies have not completely torn up, so users don't have to worry about giving up WeChat or giving up iPhone. The main reason why Apple is so strong is that it also has a large number of users and a very complete application ecosystem. The core of Apple's success is not the iPhone, but the App Store. The AppStore's strict censorship mechanism has enabled the iPhone to gain a large number of high-quality applications, which in turn has won the favor of a large number of consumers. You know, the iPhone contributes 54% of total mobile game revenue with a market share of less than 15%. With such a strong ability to attract money, developers will obviously not give up easily. In fact, this is also one of the reasons why Tencent admitted defeat this time. You know, the game business is Tencent's most profitable business, and mobile game revenue accounts for a large part of Tencent's game business. Looking at the game list of AppStore China, Tencent's mobile games occupy three seats in the top ten. If the disturbance of the removal of the mobile app involves mobile apps, this is obviously not something Tencent can afford. In this case, it is difficult to say that Apple was wrong. Because Apple is still playing by the rules. Since WeChat is available on the AppStore, we should abide by the rules set by Apple. For Apple, we don't need to criticize its power. For a commercial company, following the rules is normal. This is not to say that Apple is not wrong. In fact, the expression of the 3.1.1 Regulation is not clear and the wording is vague, resulting in the "definition" of virtual objects still needing to be deliberated. What is illegal is that the ultimate power of interpretation lies with Apple. If it considers violations, that is violations. This will lead to the emergence of selective law enforcement. There is nothing wrong with following the rules, but the rules must be clear. It is absolutely impossible to hold on to the right of interpretation like Apple. The debate between closure and openness continues to this day. Although we have insisted on freedom for so many years, countless examples tell us that closed systems often provide a better user experience. Whether it is Apple or WeChat, both are working hard to build their own closed platforms and build their own ecosystems, so naturally they will have differences on certain issues. Perhaps Tencent's confrontation with Apple is the first test of each other's bottom line. After all, for companies like Apple, the grievances they had when WeChat launched Mini programs have not yet been settled. However, how to resolve conflicts and achieve a win-win situation is something really worth thinking about. Finally, let me make a digression. That is, if you could only choose one WeChat or iPhone, how would you choose?