Apple, Epic, and the App Store • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#201

Post by spanhandler » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #78

smnrchrds wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On every discussion about this topic on HN, there has been at least one but typically many more commenters saying they love the walled garden and they would pay a premium for it. They trust Apple so they are OK with paying them 30% more instead of paying the app developers directly. They would never dare recommend Windows or Linux or Android to their parents but they would happily recommend them to get iPhones and iP…

Personally, this is so different from the way I think that I find it utterly surprising Seven billion people on the planet. It shouldn't be surprising to learn that not everyone thinks the way that you do. I wonder if it's an age thing. When you're young and have more time than money, tinkering with the technical hassles of your phone is worth it to save a buck or two. When you're older and have more money than time,…

Age was it, in part, for me. I used to do lots of hardware and OS tinkering. Now the last goddamn thing I want to do is troubleshoot graphical glitches in x-windows, or try to get my audio to handle changing outputs correctly, or cross my fingers while "dist-upgrade" runs, or fix scaling and font rendering in GTK apps, or whatever, when I'm just trying to do something else.

At some point I became acutely aware of every time I was doing something with a computer that was simply fucking with the computer, and not actually getting anything that I wanted or needed to get done, except to the extent that making my computer be not-broken is required for those things. Around that time I was exposed to macOS and iOS and finally had an actual choice to (mostly) not have to do that when I don't want to, and if I decide I would like to tinker then I can use... any other option on the market.

I'd probably be screwing around with trying to run NetBSD on Android phones and turn them into mobile computers I can plug monitors and keyboards into and embedding RPis and Arduinos in all kinds of crap around the house, if I were 16 again.

At the age I am now, though, you'd literally have to pay me to even think about doing any of that. Even when I screw around with getting allegedly set-it-and-forget-it RPi media projects (think: kodi, lakka) working I usually end up regretting it. I do know how to work with those sorts of things. I also very much don't want to any more, but do still want computer-things doing stuff for me with few or no hassles. Luckily these days you can pay to get that, in some categories at least. Largely from Apple, if you want them to last a while—I do wish they had actual competition in that sense. More options that don't spy (much) and Just Work (mostly), please.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#202

Post by liability » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:39 PM UTC

gsich wrote: post #189

liability wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you can just play with friends who don't cheat. Cheaters are only a problem if your friends are jackasses or you play with strangers.

Have you played games before? Even in a 5vs5 game, it's hard to gather 9 friends at the same time, with a similar skill.

Of course I have.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#203

Post by prvc » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:41 PM UTC

cschneid wrote: post #27

The Hey saga emphasized that Apple has multiple products interacting in a single app store. * Screened apps - Apple only lets "safe" apps into the store. * Discoverability - Apple in theory lets users find apps that they didn't know about before. Customer Acquisition * Payments - Apple makes it easy to accept payments, for their 30% fee. One or all of those are useful and great. Where I have an issue is when they use…

>Screened apps

Screened, primarily to be in agreement with Apple's business interests. The user's concerns (privacy, functionality, avoiding other types of malware) are given far less (inadequate) consideration. Worse, they are lulled into a false sense of security due to such memes.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#204

Post by liability » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:41 PM UTC

spanhandler wrote: post #171

liability wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you can just play with friends who don't cheat. Cheaters are only a problem if your friends are jackasses or you play with strangers.

So... we're gonna throw out the freedom to play with non-cheating strangers when your friends are all busy, in order that every computing device, instead of just lots and lots of them, can have arbitrary software installed on it? This feels like losing options, not gaining them.

> we're gonna throw out the freedom to play with non-cheating strangers

Freedom? No. Opportunity? Maybe. I think communities would arise to fill the demand though. Pseudo-anonymous reputation systems tied to matchmaking could fill the roll. I have a group of pseudo-anonymous friends/acquaintances I frequently play games with online. None of us cheat and if any of us did, we'd stop playing with them. We don't need big brother. We don't need technical solutions to social problems.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#205

Post by runako » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:44 PM UTC

gsich wrote: post #200

runako wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> closed hardware (that owns its entire stack) even be legal to sell? Two thoughts: 1 - As software goes into everything, keep in mind that the universe of devices to which this applies will grow to include the set of "non-organic physical objects." 2 - And this will means that surprising outcomes could come of requiring everything to be open. Who do you trust to verify the software in your used car/refrigerator/ligh…

>Closed systems implicitly provide some level of assurance here. No they don't as I can't verify any of that. A perfect counterexample is the VW dieselsoftware.

(Edit: I did not downvote, this is a legitimate counterpoint.)

> perfect counterexample is the VW dieselsoftware

This is a great counterexample that inadvertently proves the point because in that case a) the software in question was exactly as delivered by the manufacturer so that b) consumers were able to receive compensation from rich VW for the faulty software.

If the software stack was open, a malfunction could be caused by aftermarket software (think: downloaded from Sourceforge) and therefore consumers would have no real remedy.

I suppose I could have been clearer on what's being assured. There is (obviously) value in being assured that you are buying what the manufacturer intended!

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#206

Post by gpm » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:46 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #6

In the spirit of this particular story, I'd like to ask HN the following question: Should closed hardware (that owns its entire stack) even be legal to sell? Yes, it's legal today but should we make it illegal? To try another example besides Apple iPhone, consider the $35000 Prima Cinema movie server to play 1st run movies at home on day of release: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22prima+cinema%22&source=ln... In m…

> Should closed hardware (that owns its entire stack) even be legal to sell

Yes (practically), but with a small exception.

If you are the only provider of the hardware. For example if you own a single patent protecting any component of the hardware. You are the sole manufacturer of any reasonably unique component of the hardware. You are the only manufacturer putting components together in this combination. Etc. Then it should be illegal. It should be an anti-trust violation. You are using your monopoly on the hardware to create a monopoly on the software running on the hardware. Moreover attempting to do so should constitute patent misuse and invalidate any patents that you previously owned on the hardware [1].

If the hardware is completely commoditized, consumers have the option to buy practically identical hardware from a competitor, then it should not be illegal. It's hard to come up with examples of such hardware

[1] Patent misuse is a doctrine where if you attempt to use a patent to create a monopoly on something else, you lose the patent. It is rarely but not never used by the courts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_misuse

(I acknowledge this is a fairly extreme position, and that it is partially created by motivated reasoning. But it is the most principled position I can find to reach the conclusion that I want)

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#207

Post by colejohnson66 » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:47 PM UTC

unchar1 wrote: post #194

jagged-chisel wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "...immediately afterward you become their product. You're being sold for the 30% tax." I don't understand the argument you're attempting. Apple doesn't sell my info "for the 30% tax." In fact, they charge app developers that 30% and then keep my data away from those same developers.

The same way that GMail isn't really "free", that 30% tax doesn't come from Apple or the Developer's pocket, it ultimately comes out of your pocket.

But I don’t pay for any Google product, so the comparison isn’t apt.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#208

Post by romanoderoma » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:47 PM UTC

spanhandler wrote: post #163

romanoderoma wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't address the issue: those who would can't. You don't lose anything if you don't want to. You should have to keep doing what you already do.

> That doesn't address the issue: those who would can't. Then buy any other general computing product on the market. I'd be more sympathetic to this concern if Android didn't exist. Meanwhile it does, and the users who picked Apple did it because they don't care about this, they don't care very much about this, or because they actively want the App Store restrictions and the ecosystem that they create. > You don't lo…

> Then buy any other general computing product on the market

That's not how free market works.

And it's a very silly objection.

Android is a licensed platform.from Google, but Google does not make the majority of devices.

Apple manufacturs the devices, but they sell them to me locked in the ecosystem they profit from.

Imagine being unable of refueling because your car does not work with standard oil pumps and you had to go to Apple licensed gas station whom Apple charges 30% to.

They would be prohibited from selling the car.

> I very well might, though.

But you wouldn't if you don't change your behaviour.

> Changes to rules change how actors behave in a system

That's exactly what many want from Apple.

Change the rules.

Nobody is asking Apple to relax their safety rules inside their walled garden.

If they can't allow sideloading, they're not as good as I thought.

> I could have bought Android.

I don't buy it.

If Apple sold Android powered iPhones you would still buy an iPhone, you're are buying the brand, not the product.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#209

Post by fastball » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:48 PM UTC

bluedevil2k wrote: post #85

noncoml wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some customers buy into the Apple ecosystem because of its walled garden. Not despite of it.

The "walled garden" isn't really the issue most at stake here, it's the in-app purchases. To me, it's hard to argue against the benefits of having a one-stop-shop safe-and-secure place to download apps on your phone which contains all your personal information. However, to me, it's hard to argue that Apple should keep getting money from you once you've established a loyal customer base and they are giving you money.…

Indeed, that is exactly the argument made by the article.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#210

Post by colejohnson66 » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

quijoteuniv wrote: post #48

Closed hardware should be opened when unsupported... meaning if apple cannot support old hardware anymore they should open it by law. There are so many ipads and phones that could still be in use but arent because you need to run their software. We need to stop the planet to be an electronics garbage bin. Same when they start with the new chip on apple computers.

They’re discontinued, but they don’t prevent you from doing what you want to those old devices. Sure, a first generation iPhone/iPod touch only runs iPhone OS 3.1.3, but you can still jailbreak it and do what you want.