Live data from Hacker News

Apple-Developer Relations

marco.org

211–220 of 275 posts

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#211
I still haven't come across a convincing argument why Apple should be compelled by regulation to open up the iPhone and let anyone do anything they want with it, ie be a general purpose mobile computer.

It sucks that they simultaneously have (1) such restrictive policies on what you can do with your device and (2) a well-designed hardware and software ecosystem that serves as a foundation that's hard to move away from.

However, what's stopping others from coming out with a better, less restrictive alternative that benefits from the publicly visible work and lessons that Apple has done/taught us to get us to the great products we have today?

This would be a lot of work. It would require lots of investment of resources. But there's nothing explicitly stopping anyone else from doing this. With global hardware and software advances, and the mobile ecosystem becoming more mature and less changing, the technical moat between only Apple being able to make a good phone vs others doing the same is decreasing.

If Apple's behavior is unacceptable, we should move on to an alternative even if we have to create one to do so. An analogy of a relationship seems fitting. At the start of the relationship, it was all love, roses and fun dates. Now, years into the relationship, we are seeing that Apple is actually kind of a control freak and maybe not so good for us after all. Instead of futilely fighting with someone who won't change after so many fights, maybe we should use the free market to move on to a healthier relationship. There is no gun to our head forcing us to stay with Apple.

I personally dislike the fact that we aren't free to do what we want on our iPhones. But instead of being obsessed with Apple, maybe we should let Apple be Apple, and appreciate what they have contributed to the world. And then create the change in the world that we would like to see.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#212
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that this is a bit like saying “if McDonald’s burgers are so good, they should be able to withstand putting competing restaurants’ burgers on their menu.”

A restaurant only sells its own merchandise so this comparison does not make any sense. The App Store is a 'store' in this case (it's in the name) and is the only store where you can buy items for your Apple home. Imagine if Walmart sold homes and you could only put items in it that were bought at Walmart.

McDonald’s sells other companies’ products too, like Coca-Cola. Also, you actually can buy an entire McDonald’s and I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t be allowed to sell Burger King products there.

I’m not sure why you introduced homes to the analogy. That’s a very different scenario.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#213
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that this is a bit like saying “if McDonald’s burgers are so good, they should be able to withstand putting competing restaurants’ burgers on their menu.”

It's more like saying "if McDonald's burgers are so good they should be able to withstand competing restaurants in the same town." The users buy the phone, not Apple. It's amazing this is even contraversial.

I don’t see how an individual iPhone is analogous to an entire town. Is a video game console also analogous to an entire town?

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#214

Yep. It is not surprising at all that the term “insulting” appears three times because that’s how it feels for so many reasons. Remember: - They pretend with a straight face like it was somehow impossible to sell software or reach customers before their magical store made it happen. - They pretend like the current “search” feature of the App Store is not a sad reduction of what it used to be (or what it could be if a…

> They pretend with a straight face like it was somehow impossible to sell software or reach customers before their magical store made it happen. I never heard them claim it but speaking as a developer it's obvious that Apple was a driving force here. Sellable desktop software became obsolete due to piracy. Everything is server-based now. Mobile apps, particularly on iOS, is the only place where the general public co…

There's piracy, sure, but I'm not losing 30% of sales due to it.

I currently run a freemium software business just fine for Windows and macOS. Just sign the code for Windows, notorize it on macOS and sell it through a service I use called Paddle that handles payment, international sales tax and licensing for about 6%.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#215
post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it, how would you be paying more for an AppStore?

If Apple reduces platform fees the price of the phone could go up to compensate for that. Also, my experience aligns with this too. I dont game on my phone and basically use default apps. I use the United app to book flights but could easily use the mobile website. Same with Twitter

The profit margin on the iPhone is 35%. The App Store currently runs at a large profit (estimated to be 70%) primarily from in app purchases in the gaming category.

Your purchasing habits are not indicative of the mainstream; further, the iPhone isn't priced based on cost to the cost to design or manufacture.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#216

It's a two-way street. Despite selling less than 20% [1] of smartphones across the world, its App Store accounts for over 64% [2] of app revenue. Apple and its developers somehow built an App Store that people are willing to spend more money on. If it's purely thanks to developers, why isn't there more revenue on Google's Play Store? [1] https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-share... [2] https://sens…

The comments in this thread are pulling this idea apart, but the fact of the matter is that before the App Store, people were not willing to pay for apps. Apple created the market singlehandedly.

How far this extends into the current day is up for debate, and how much rent keeping Apple should be allowed to do, sure, but being dismissive of the instrumental role Apple played in the past and to this day is turning a blind eye.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#217
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A restaurant only sells its own merchandise so this comparison does not make any sense. The App Store is a 'store' in this case (it's in the name) and is the only store where you can buy items for your Apple home. Imagine if Walmart sold homes and you could only put items in it that were bought at Walmart.

McDonald’s sells other companies’ products too, like Coca-Cola. Also, you actually can buy an entire McDonald’s and I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t be allowed to sell Burger King products there. I’m not sure why you introduced homes to the analogy. That’s a very different scenario.

> I’m not sure why you introduced homes to the analogy. That’s a very different scenario.

In what way is a home that you fill with stuff you bought in a store different from a computer that you fill with stuff you bought in a store?

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#218

Yep. It is not surprising at all that the term “insulting” appears three times because that’s how it feels for so many reasons. Remember: - They pretend with a straight face like it was somehow impossible to sell software or reach customers before their magical store made it happen. - They pretend like the current “search” feature of the App Store is not a sad reduction of what it used to be (or what it could be if a…

> They pretend with a straight face like it was somehow impossible to sell software or reach customers before their magical store made it happen. I never heard them claim it but speaking as a developer it's obvious that Apple was a driving force here. Sellable desktop software became obsolete due to piracy. Everything is server-based now. Mobile apps, particularly on iOS, is the only place where the general public co…

> Sellable desktop software became obsolete due to piracy.

This is almost certainly not true. If anything hurt selling desktop apps, it was Apples policies encouraging dirt cheap apps on the App Store that then led to customer expectations of the cost of apps dropping dramatically.

There were recent stories about how software shops like Panic are going back to selling only desktop apps and ending their iOS apps.

If anything, the technology to prevent piracy had only gotten significantly better by the time ios came out, and companies were doing just fine even before.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#219
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mac developers have been bitching about Apple for 30+ years. There are lots of valid criticisms. At the same time I find the "Apple takes us for granted" complaints a little hollow. I think a lot of developers discount the platform and think it's all their apps that bring in iOS uses. This was more true in the 90s on the Mac. The platform Apple provided was good but it was the third party software that really made th…

The iPhone without then apps that run on it is somewhat interesting, but is largely a novelty; they happen to provide a platform on which I can conveniently access Facebook/Twitter/Instagram/TikTok, Lyft/Uber/DoorDash/Instacart, or Flippy Unicorn / Geometry Racer. Many people said Windows Phone's UI was amazing--I even know stanch Apple people who said that--and pretty much everyone I knew thought Palm's WebOS was be…

The iPhone without then apps that run on it is somewhat interesting, but is largely a novelty

Others might have a different perspective. For example, personally I use an iPhone because the following are my requirements in descending order of priority:

1. I now need a smartphone running one of the two major platforms.

2. I do not want anything to do with Google, ever.

3. I don't like a lot of what Apple do but they aren't as bad as Google.

I do use a small number of third party apps on my iPhone, because they are now a practical necessity to function as part of society without extreme restrictions. For example, I do not want to spend 20 minutes trying to navigate a phone system with bad voice recognition in a noisy environment just to pay for 30 minutes of parking, nor do I want to break the law, and that leaves exactly one other option in many of the places I visit: use one of the well-known parking apps.

Other than using those few essential apps when I have to, I mostly use my phone as it was when it came out of the box: for communications, as a poor-but-present web browsing device, and as a general tool with a useful camera, mic and light.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#220
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iOS apps are more profitable on a per install basis. So the discrepancy cannot be explained by there being multiple Android stores. Your hypothesis in brackets is the more likely explanation. Source: I worked on an app with millions of paid subscribers.

iPhone had first mover advantage and comes from an American company. As a result iPhones have 50% of the smartphone market in the US, and Americans have the highest disposable income per capita of any large country (>20 million people). iPhones tend to have much smaller market shares outside of the US. In some places they're maybe around 30% but generally they're much, much lower.

The demographic for our app was primarily the US.
Post reply on HN