Apple Has Removed Dash from the App Store

Post by mavrc » Wed, Oct 05, 2016, 9:48 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #81

edoceo wrote: post #43

I make a regulatory compliance software. Apple refused to list my App until I removed functionality at their request. Functionality that is required for compliance. Apple's arrogance in running their store may eventually cause it's decline.

I wouldn't expect Apple to understand compliance for every possible use case. Apple doesn't have to bend their rules to comply with apps that want to comply with local/state/provincial/federal laws, they can just say "We don't support x feature, and therefore you can't distribute through our store."

Post by DominikR » Wed, Oct 05, 2016, 9:49 PM UTC

zeveb wrote: post #148

DominikR wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get why people downvote this comment, it is factually correct. You are not entitled to do whatever you feel is right on the platform of someone else. I don't like giving Apple a cut but I recognise that it is their property and I cannot dictate that Apple has to change their rules to accommodate me.

> You are not entitled to do whatever you feel is right on the platform of someone else. An iPhone-owner's phone is not Apple's platform: it's its owner's platform. It is not Apple's property once money has been exchanged for the phone.

Post by prashnts » Wed, Oct 05, 2016, 9:51 PM UTC

chillacy wrote: post #139

stuaxo wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the first time I've heard of this (not a mac user but am a developer). At least as this is software for developers, I reckon most won't mind buying it outside the appstore, it sounds really useful.

It's a lifesaver on planes where you won't have internet. If only I could download an archive of stackoverflow too, then I'd be set.

Post by threeseed » Wed, Oct 05, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

DiabloD3 wrote: post #50

latj wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is going after Google for allowing third party stores. Google's trouble in Europe is about: 1. Not paying taxes 2. Using their dominance in Search to promote their other products and services while obscuring competitors 3. Using their dominance in mobile to promote their search and web browser 4. Not allowing third parties to use the Play Store which is the default and dominate store for android devices. Allow…

Not allowing third party stores in the Store is a security feature because they can install APKs that have not passed through Google's security scanner. Google does not prohibit you from installing third party stores. Also, how are they using their dominance for search and browsers to do something? I can install Firefox on Android, I cannot install Firefox on iOS. I can do "Hey, Cortana" if I install Cortana on my An…

Post by megablast » Wed, Oct 05, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

izacus wrote: post #149

eridius wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give up? I wish more apps were sandboxed! If an app can function inside the sandbox (and the overwhelming majority of apps have no problem with being sandboxed) then they absolutely should be. It's a major security benefit.

Except that there are whole swaths of tools and applications that cannot be published at all due to limitations of Sandbox, making your computer limited to a whim of someone on the other side of the world.