Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple-Developer Relations

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 275 posts

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#231

Post by tobr »

tshaddox wrote: post #137
tobr wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trust is supposed to be one of the things the AppStore provides, which is used as an argument against third-party stores. But since Apple is failing so miserably in this regard it’s not a good argument.

I agree that Apple is nowhere near restrictive enough with what makes it into the App Store, which is an argument that they ought to be more restrictive.

They should start by being more restrictive with the problems they’ve created for themselves, like ads in search, fake reviews, and editorial recommendations for the worst-of-the-worst adware.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#232

Post by kalleboo »

moosebear847 wrote: post #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 fro…

Lots of people with lots of resources tried, and made pretty good phones/OSes - Nokia, Palm, Microsoft, Blackberry.

They all fell down on the lack of apps.

If your phone doesn't have apps for Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, WhatsApp, LINE, tens of thousands of banks across the globe, credit cards, transit cards, various government ID schemes (try booking your vaccine in Sweden without an iPhone/Android) etc etc you'll never make it.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#233

Post by unityByFreedom »

emsy wrote: post #186
unityByFreedom wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Phrased differently you'll find these kind of statements in the testimonies by Apple execs in the Epic case. On the other hand your claim that: >Sellable desktop software became obsolete due to piracy. Is unfounded. Games are sellable desktop software and they're doing just fine. What people want is fair prices and easy availability, which is the business model of every digital store since itunes.

> Games are sellable desktop software and they're doing just fine.

Popular ones require an internet connection, and license authentication piggybacks on that. Blizzard and the original WoW's were among the first to do this successfully and the trend continues. Prior to that, people would either crack software and/or refuse remote connections for games that didn't require internet in order to avoid paying for and licensing them.

> What people want is fair prices and easy availability

And developers and investors want to be able to securely sell software. Apple's store provides ease of use along with a secure platform that users trust.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#234

Post by tarsinge »

actuator wrote: post #38
atonse wrote: post #2

I am deeply invested in the Apple ecosystem and yet, can’t wait for the DoJ to throw the gauntlet on the App Store. I really hope they get broken up, with the App Store being extracted into a separate business.

App Store should be just the start. Mobile web for more than 50% of the US users is also restricted to Apple's whims. They should be forced to allow competing browser engines(not just skins on Safari engine) on the platform. If Microsoft couldn't even bundle IE on Windows, it should be possible to make an alternative browser(along with engines) for iOS.

More than 50% of US users on iOS forced to use Safari is the last counter force to a worldwide Google hegemony on nearly everything (Android, Chrome, Search, Mail, ...). It's clearly a lesser evil for me.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#235

Post by moosebear847 »

kalleboo wrote: post #232
moosebear847 wrote: post #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 fro…

Lots of people with lots of resources tried, and made pretty good phones/OSes - Nokia, Palm, Microsoft, Blackberry. They all fell down on the lack of apps. If your phone doesn't have apps for Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, WhatsApp, LINE, tens of thousands of banks across the globe, credit cards, transit cards, various government ID schemes (try booking your vaccine in Sweden without an iPhone/Android) etc etc…

All those companies were around before and during the existence of the iPhone. At least some had apps, and had an equal or better chance at having all those apps, so I wonder why they weren’t successful.

You have to start somewhere. If there were a good alternative, then adoption of it would drive gradual availability of these apps.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#236

Post by actuator »

igornadj wrote: post #216
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #63

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 b…

> 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.

Umm.. this is some serious revision of the history.

- People did pay for apps. I along with plenty of other devs happily paid for Sublime Text while not going through an app store.

- There have been app stores that predate 'iOS App Store' like the Steam store, people paid for apps in it as well. It is infact cross platform and competes with other app stores.

Apple did not invent app distribution or the concept of paid apps.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#237

Post by salamandersauce »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #233
emsy wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phrased differently you'll find these kind of statements in the testimonies by Apple execs in the Epic case. On the other hand your claim that: >Sellable desktop software became obsolete due to piracy. Is unfounded. Games are sellable desktop software and they're doing just fine. What people want is fair prices and easy availability, which is the business model of every digital store since itunes.

> Games are sellable desktop software and they're doing just fine. Popular ones require an internet connection, and license authentication piggybacks on that. Blizzard and the original WoW's were among the first to do this successfully and the trend continues. Prior to that, people would either crack software and/or refuse remote connections for games that didn't require internet in order to avoid paying for and lice…

Games have used a form of content protection since the 80s. It's not a new thing. We traded code wheels to CD keys to online activation. Most games actually DON'T require an active internet connection, they require an online activation at install and then they can be played offline. With digital downloads it's basically moot and games can still be pirated anyways. Some big titles like the Witcher 3 are actually entirely DRM free.

Steam is a marketplace that gives developers and investors a place to securely sell software and is easy for consumers to use and have fair prices. And it doesn't require users to give up all control of their PC to the manufacturer. Nor do all purchases have to flow through Valve.

And Steam as a game store predates the App Store by a few years too.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#238

Post by clusterfish »

ballenf wrote: post #182
makecheck wrote: post #152

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…

I owned almost every iteration of Blackberry and Nokia's before that. I never once paid for an app on any phone prior to an iPhone. I remember people selling them, but it required me to visit their website on a desktop computer, trust them with my credit card info and then awkwardly get their app on my device through mobile websites or specialized cables plus software on my computer. In the mobile world I think Apple…

When Nokias were a thing, 15 years ago, all computer interfaces were much inferior to what we have today, not just mobile app downloads. Phone hardware was super basic. SaaS wasn't a thing even. Facebook was a hip new thing, only 3 years old. It was a different world not just because of Apple.

Re: Apple-Developer Relations

#239

Post by salamandersauce »

Silhouette wrote: post #219
saurik wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ar…

Why do you need one of the two major platforms if not for apps? Without your parking app available for example on iOS would you still pick the iPhone? Or would you settle for Google and Android? Without third party apps the iPhone would just be a feature phone with a very nice web browser.

Now there's probably people that get away entirely with just the built in set of apps but I bet that's eroding day by day as more and more things require or are greatly simplified by apps, like banking, parking,eetc .

Post reply on HN