161–170 of 355 posts
Here, I think that we can clap for all the "Apple products" fanboys that have led us to this new world where a lot of people are thinking that it is normal that 2 companies have the arbitrary and dictatorial right to decide what is allowed to run on an user device just because they sold it... Imagine, a car manufacturer that would remotely block cars for using highways that they don't like or have not paid the "tribu…
I know I really don't matter to Apple, but this walled garden and app store dictatorship is what finally made me move away from iOS to Android last year. I had used Android in the past, but it was with Samsung Galaxy's which where very bloated and awful when compared to Apple. But when a friend told me that Samsung just ruin Android [1] and I should try an actual Google phone, I bought a Pixel and it's honestly great…
> I haven't even needed to sign up for a Google account since using it (although I have to use an alternative app store). This means you can't use any Google apps like Maps, Photos, etc, right? What Google alternatives do you use?
Photos works just fine without an account too.
Tweet thread - it looks like Apple is requiring in-app purchases to sign-up for wordpress.com accounts, despite it being an open-source app for any WordPress site: > Heads up on why @WordPressiOS updates have been absent... we were locked by App Store. To be able to ship updates and bug fixes again we had to commit to support in-app purchases for .com plans. I know why this is problematic, open to suggestions. Allow…
This is really sad. On the one hand, sure Apple should be able to make a cut on their app store, on the other hand, they shouldn't be allowed to force apps to do this sort of thing. This will only drive domain prices higher on iOS in order to compensate (in the case of Automattic). If I were in a position where Apple is forcing me to pay a 30% tax, I would literally add "30% Apple Tax" to the check out screen on top…
I wonder if corporations would be more efficient long term if each layer in the hierarchy simply collected 30% tax from the layer below like capitalism, instead of being run like a dictatorship / communism that they currently run as... I mean if 30% ownership of everything via taxes is good for capitalist governments, maybe it’s good for corporations also ?
The problem there is that it's impossible to quantify that. VAT works in-practice in retail sales because the value added is trivial to calculate - but you can't do that with open-source libraries or internal components - or the value created by a platform (e.g. what value does Spotify add on-top of the existing iOS audio and internet capabilities that they're using?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not true. Both Spotify, when they were in the App Store, and NYT have higher prices in the App Store than outside.
Apple enforce the rules capriciously, and change them on a whim. Almost certainly, they allow Spotify and the NYT because iOS customers and potential customers would object too much if they were removed from the store. A well as the 30% tax making all apps worse in quality by removing money from development, the unpredictableness and unfairness destroys many businesses before they even start.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The App Store TOS specifically prohibits you from redistributing any app you download from it. GPLv2 specifically prohibits that, so any distribution of an app under GPLv2 terms is a license violation. GPLv3 would be even worse as you cannot provide Installation Instructions. However, WordPress/Automattic has copyright ownership, which means GPLv2 terms don't apply. If you get the app from the App Store, then the App…
They openly encourage users to submit contributions in the form of pull requests ^1; they seem to accept pull requests without any special statement of licensing contrary to the GPLv2 repo license ^2; and, they do not openly state in the GitHub repo's Contributor Guidelines any CLA requirement that would permit them to relicense GPLv2 contributions that they merge ^3. (IANYL) ^1 https://apps.wordpress.com/contribute/…
I know I really don't matter to Apple, but this walled garden and app store dictatorship is what finally made me move away from iOS to Android last year. I had used Android in the past, but it was with Samsung Galaxy's which where very bloated and awful when compared to Apple. But when a friend told me that Samsung just ruin Android [1] and I should try an actual Google phone, I bought a Pixel and it's honestly great…
Google Play services track nearly everything on the device with system level access.
I switched to an iPhone a few years ago to get further from Google, but the crap with the App Store is getting so out of hand now. My next device will probably be a Pine Phone.
What should be the price of accessing a billion users? Does any platform allow anyone to charge its users without going through the platform? Nevermind charging, does -any- platform allow anyone to interact with its users at all without adhering to the platform's terms and conditions? Can we post anything we want on HN? How about spamming Patreon or GoFundMe links on forums and servers? Why not?
The price should be zero. Then platform can offer a service e.g payment gateway at a price but not prevent other payment gateways. Google search and other search engin do allow. They are platforms, not purely marketplace, so what. The problem is not whether it is legitimate for a platform to enforce terms and conditions, the problem is what are those terms and conditions. A physical market place can and probably shou…
From the replies (@mysl_co): > Hey Matt, When I open the Help Center from the app, I can get guidance about upgrading to one of your paid plans. If I tap on “Plans” as seen the screenshot, the app opens Safari and shows the plans. This is a violation according to App Store Review Guidelines. > Here is the relevant term that your app violated: 3.1.3(a) Apps may allow a user to access previously purchased content or co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are betting on the fact that arent a majority in any space. Its the best situation for them, then dont have majority market share but make the most revenue. They see Google being split up and therefore being the only game in town.
It bugs me how this is an argument in "app store is not a monopoly". App stores (both Google and Apple) have a huge profit margin which is based on abusing it's position and they are milking the fact that creating competition would cost billions of dollars - this is exactly the situation where a pure market situation ends up being sub-optimal and hurting the consumers. Consider what would happen if Mastercard and Vis…