Rumor

X's Standalone Messaging App XChat Disappears From App Store

MacRumors • Mon, 14 Sep 2026

X's XChat app is no longer available from the App Store , though it's not clear if Apple pulled it or X removed it. XChat allows X users to communicate with one another using end-to-end encryption and disappearing messages. The app's description says it is a "private, focused space built for conversation." XChat launched in April 2026 . The app does not come up when searching for it in the &zwnj;App Store&zwnj;, and clicking a link to it on the web returns an unavailable error. Tag: App Store This article, " X's Standalone Messaging App XChat Disappears From App Store " first appeared on MacRumors.com Discuss this article in our forums

What happened?

Story details

X's XChat app is no longer available from the App Store , though it's not clear if Apple pulled it or X removed it.

XChat allows X users to communicate with one another using end-to-end encryption and disappearing messages.

The app's description says it is a "private, focused space built for conversation." XChat launched in April 2026 .

Why it matters

This page keeps Apple rumors separate from official updates, so readers can follow early reports without confusing them with confirmed announcements.

Original source

https://www.macrumors.com/2026/09/14/xchat-app-disappears-from-app-store/

Related coverage

Apple Asks Supreme Court to Throw Out App Store Contempt Ruling

Apple today filed its opening merits brief with the Supreme Court as it prepares to fight the contempt ruling that forced it to change its App Store rules. Apple is asking the Supreme Court to reverse or vacate the contempt order, which would return the &zwnj;App Store&zwnj; to its pre–2025 rules. The Supreme Court filing is part of Apple's ongoing legal battle with Epic Games , which has gotten more and more complicated since it kicked off in 2020. Apple largely won the original ruling because it wasn't found to have violated antitrust law, but Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, the judge overseeing the case, ordered Apple to relax its anti-steering rules and let developers link to alternative purchase options in apps. Apple complied, but charged a 12 to 27 percent fee on link-outs, and few developers adopted the system. Epic went back to Gonzalez Rogers and said Apple violated her injunction, and she agreed. In April 2025, she found Apple in contempt of court and barred the company from collecting any fees on purchases made through links in the U.S. &zwnj;App Store&zwnj;. Apple changed its &zwnj;App Store&zwnj; rules to comply with the new ruling but appealed. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the contempt finding, and Apple appealed to the Supreme Court. Today's brief repeats Apple's main argument and asks the Supreme Court to decide whether a court can hold a party in civil contempt for violating the "spirit" of an injunction when the injunction does not address the conduct the contempt ruling is based on. The first injunction from Gonzalez Rogers had no mention of the fees Apple was or wasn't allowed to charge, but both the original contempt ruling and the court of appeals agreed Apple had violated the "spirit" of the injunction when it charged fees that were too high. Citing cases dating back to 1885, Apple argues the Ninth Circuit broke with precedent when it said Apple could be held in contempt for violating the spirit of an injunction. Apple says it cannot be held in contempt because there was no clear and unambiguous violation of the injunction's wording. Apple repeatedly points out the original injunction was just 75 words long. The Supreme Court is expected to hear the case in 2027. &zwnj;Epic Games&zwnj; will submit its response brief in November, and then Apple will be able to submit a reply brief. While Apple waits for the Supreme Court, it will be going back to district court for fee calculations that would be implemented if the higher court does not toss out the contempt ruling and resulting anti-steering order. Apple was ordered back to district court because the appeals court found the district court's total ban on commissions went too far, and sent it back to set a reasonable fee. Apple attempted to delay the proceedings but was unsuccessful. Tags: App Store , Epic Games , Epic Games vs. Apple , Apple Lawsuits This article, " Apple Asks Supreme Court to Throw Out App Store Contempt Ruling " first appeared on MacRumors.com Discuss this article in our forums