11–20 of 147 posts
Meanwhile, it's a bit hypocritical for the US Government to accuse private corporations of ‘highway robbery’ when they themselves are committing (or failing to outlaw) literal highway robbery in the form of civil forfeiture.
Apple may be robbers, but they're not trolling a public highway, they're demanding fees if you want to drive on the highway that they built. Build a better ecosystem around better devices, better software, better marketing, and better services, and you can also charge whatever you want, or make it free. That is competition. Wanting to drive on someone else's walled highway (which leads directly to eyeballs and open w…
How is this beneficial for innovation and for consumers?
I believe Apple just don't see any reason to be nice. And probably that's what many companies would do if they were in that position. We know that we can't stay dominant forever, We know someone will force us to reduce Apple-tax later, So we have to get as much as we can, for as long as we can.
#mafiatax
If you could choose between a fee decrease to 15% or the ability to sideload apps bypassing the store, which is more important? To me, the only reason I avoid iOS is specifically because I cannot install my own apps without using the store.
If you could choose between a fee decrease to 15% or the ability to sideload apps bypassing the store, which is more important? To me, the only reason I avoid iOS is specifically because I cannot install my own apps without using the store.
If you could choose between a fee decrease to 15% or the ability to sideload apps bypassing the store, which is more important? To me, the only reason I avoid iOS is specifically because I cannot install my own apps without using the store.
Sideloading makes the other point moot I'd say since competing third party stores would appear?
Apple may be robbers, but they're not trolling a public highway, they're demanding fees if you want to drive on the highway that they built. Build a better ecosystem around better devices, better software, better marketing, and better services, and you can also charge whatever you want, or make it free. That is competition. Wanting to drive on someone else's walled highway (which leads directly to eyeballs and open w…
So are we establishing that if you want to create a paid email service with a custom app without wanting to pay 30% of your revenue to Apple, you need to create a competing mobile ecosystem that can rival that of Apple's ($260 billion yearly revenue) and Google's ($162 billion yearly revenue)? How is this beneficial for innovation and for consumers?
Oh I don't know. The "small developers who can't survive" he's talking to here have multiple hypercars and I don't think they are small or facing survival challenges.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagani_Zonda#HH
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_Agera
Sure there are smaller developers. But the sense of entitlement is a bit much. Once you've written some software, that does not mean you are entitled to have people pay for your life from here on out.
I mean you have developers who have written software once, do not maintain it, and would charge subscription fees if they could, for software they don't update. There is a spectrum of behaviors, and there is a cost for running a store to corral all those behaviors into some order that average consumers can deal with. And then there are even legal bills to pay, for fighting off people who own hypercars and feel wronged.
There could be some room for the fees to come down now that the App Store is well established. But it's not quite how it's being portrayed… highway robbery? Way too dramatic.
As much as I agree with the stance against I hate the coverage and the press this is getting with people evangelicizing the CEO. He's regularly referenced on this site by his initials (which even as a regular reader of tech news I had to look up) which comes across as cult of personality at best and astroturfing at worse.