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

Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 259 posts

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#171

Post by etrautmann »

hnlmorg wrote: post #169
gambiting wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a triple A game I worked on, the PlayStation button enums were CROSS, SQUARE, TRIANGLE, and...... CRIRCLE. Would drive me absolutely livid. But of course no one was allowed to fix is since it was already in a few different games, countless script files, network-controlled configs etc.....

I feel your pain. A company I work for has a weird name that doesn't follow the rules of English spelling correctly (I can't say more without giving away the company name). This was an intentional decision and poses enough of a problem for guests visiting the company. But the absurd thing is this company decides to double down on it's troubles by naming all of it's projects using the same broken rule as the company t…

Googol?

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#172

Post by manquer »

TheTon wrote: post #51
jimhi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some quick googling told me a lot of things Apple hides how much it makes in the app store by combining it into their iPhone product segment. "Apple doesn’t disclose how much revenue its App Store makes per year. Instead, since 2013, it has released data points in January that include the total that Apple has paid to developers since the beginning of the App Store in 2008." The low estimates for the app store are $64…

I’m pretty sure the App Store is accounted under “Services” not “iPhone.” $64B sounds about right, but even if services had a 70% margin and hardware had only a 30% margin, hardware would still be the more profitable side of the business at the moment. https://sixcolors.com/post/2021/04/apples-record-second-quar...

Maybe so, however if they drop their take to 15% from 30% it will drop their annual profit by 30Billion , which will influence the stock price massively.

Senior management who have a large chunk of their salary in stock arent going to do it easily.

Apple can survive without this money yes, but no one at apple is likely to let it go without fighting for it.

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#173

Post by asddubs »

Someone wrote: post #138
dhosek wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lets not forget the misspelling of guillemet as guillemot that is now firmly embedded into PostScript and Adobe software with no chance of ever being fixed. Unicode sidestepped the issue by naming the characters RIGHT/LEFT-POINTING DOUBLE ANGLE QUOTATION MARK.

Unicode also documents its mistakes in technote 27 “Known Anomalies in Unicode Character Names” ( https://unicode.org/notes/tn27/ ), with remarks such as “U+034F COMBINING GRAPHEME JOINER The name does not describe the function of this character. Despite its name, it does not join graphemes” “The use of the spelling lamda derives from ISO 10646. This does not mean that it is more correct than lambda, merely that the…

Why can't unicode change the names of the glyphs?

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#174

Post by collaborative »

>Developers can communicate directly with customers about alternative payment options. Customers have to consent and be given the right to opt-out.

>Apple ceded some ground on issues of interest to developers but gets to keep (at least for now) key structures of its App Store, including the overall commission structure of the store as well as its prohibition against using rival app stores or in-app payment mechanisms

So are alternative payment methods going to work? Or is it that this is only allowed after you direct a user to an external URL? Would embedded browsers be ok to process the IAPs?

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#175

Post by Razengan »

jacquesm wrote: post #166

Meanwhile, as long as you understand that you are allowed to sell your wares to Apples customers - and not yours - you may proceed. This is the key element, that Apple continues to own the customer relationship, rather than that your customers make use of their eco-system and hardware.

Yes, because iOS users will ask Apple for refunds if your app screws them over.

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#176

Post by Daedren »

collaborative wrote: post #174

>Developers can communicate directly with customers about alternative payment options. Customers have to consent and be given the right to opt-out. >Apple ceded some ground on issues of interest to developers but gets to keep (at least for now) key structures of its App Store, including the overall commission structure of the store as well as its prohibition against using rival app stores or in-app payment mechanisms…

It'll be as it has always been. Apps can't show or hint at alternative payment options.

This is in regards to letting users know about such options outside the iPhone's scope (email for instance)

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#177

Post by Someone »

asddubs wrote: post #173
Someone wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unicode also documents its mistakes in technote 27 “Known Anomalies in Unicode Character Names” ( https://unicode.org/notes/tn27/ ), with remarks such as “U+034F COMBINING GRAPHEME JOINER The name does not describe the function of this character. Despite its name, it does not join graphemes” “The use of the spelling lamda derives from ISO 10646. This does not mean that it is more correct than lambda, merely that the…

Why can't unicode change the names of the glyphs?

From that page:

“Because Unicode Standard is a character encoding standard and not the Universal Encyclopedia of Writing Systems and Character Identity, the stability and uniqueness of published character names is far more important than the correctness of the name. The published character names are normative for the purposes of the Unicode standard and the large number of other IT standards that reference it. These standards require stable identifiers and character names must therefore be immutable — any change of character names is almost as disruptive of the standards as changing code points for characters would be. Accordingly, the Unicode Consortium has adopted the Name Stability Policy, preventing changes in character names. As a result, errors in character names cannot be corrected. Instead, important character name anomalies anomalies (SIC) are documented with annotations in the Unicode Character Code Charts.”

Also because somebody, somewhere, might have used those names to look up Unicode code points.

Part of each Unicode release is a file named “UnicodeData.txt” (https://unicode.org/Public/13.0.0/ucd/UnicodeData.txt), so those strings are public information.

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#178

Post by TheJoeMan »

Daedren wrote: post #176
collaborative wrote: post #174

>Developers can communicate directly with customers about alternative payment options. Customers have to consent and be given the right to opt-out. >Apple ceded some ground on issues of interest to developers but gets to keep (at least for now) key structures of its App Store, including the overall commission structure of the store as well as its prohibition against using rival app stores or in-app payment mechanisms…

It'll be as it has always been. Apps can't show or hint at alternative payment options. This is in regards to letting users know about such options outside the iPhone's scope (email for instance)

I was hoping Apple was ceding some ground in this, it’s what puts the dirtiest taste in my mouth. If you go to even Walmart (a company very strict on their suppliers) and pick up some object, on the back of the packaging will be www.exampleproduct dot com. And on that website you could theoretically sell your product directly.

What does Apple do? “Oh on that privacy policy we mandated you could click here and then here and then pay online - REJECT”

So now people only know that Netflix can be paid online, but few think to sign up for DuoLingo or the like online :/

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#179

Post by guerrilla »

mike_hock wrote: post #159
int_19h wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

umount() is actually legit - early C limited extern identifiers to 6 chars (or rather it would allow more than that, but the rest would be silently ignored for linking purposes), hence why we also have strlen() etc. creat() is weird because create() would fit that constraint just fine, so there's no obvious reason as to why it had to be shortened. The 1978 K&R C book actually notes it with [sic].

When you're dumping loads of short, generic, common words into the global namespace (well ... the only namespace in C), it's nice to have them misspelled so user code is still free to use the real word.

> well ... the only namespace in C

Technically there are several namespaces since you can, for example, name a struct the name as its type.

Re: Apple agrees to settle potential class action suit by U.S. developers

#180

Post by collaborative »

TheJoeMan wrote: post #178
Daedren wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll be as it has always been. Apps can't show or hint at alternative payment options. This is in regards to letting users know about such options outside the iPhone's scope (email for instance)

I was hoping Apple was ceding some ground in this, it’s what puts the dirtiest taste in my mouth. If you go to even Walmart (a company very strict on their suppliers) and pick up some object, on the back of the packaging will be www.exampleproduct dot com. And on that website you could theoretically sell your product directly. What does Apple do? “Oh on that privacy policy we mandated you could click here and then he…

Seems like a massive PR trick then. The only difference is that they will set up $100M for US devs. Probably the ones that brought the court case?
Post reply on HN