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

Avoid the Apple App Store

heyman.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 271 posts

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#251

Post by deadmutex »

pmarreck wrote: post #211
chaosharmonic wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also blue texts Not that Google has an attention span here (I'm still annoyed at them for what they did to XMPP), but RCS exists, and Apple is perfectly capable of at least supporting a fallback spec written this century. Their choice to instead just actively degrade the messaging experience, for everyone involved, when any one involved isn't their customer, makes the entire market worse . See also: Safari

Apple absolutely has zero incentive to support RCS as a fallback. Not only that, it's not only been inconsistently supported by Google despite existing for... decades, now?... but isn't even supported by all carriers! https://www.androidauthority.com/rcs-google-3090142/ > In a word, RCS is like SMS, but better. Except that it isn’t. Not every operator has enabled it yet. Not all phones support it. Not every implement…

> Apple absolutely has zero incentive to support RCS as a fallback

Wouldn't their users gain better security and privacy with RCS (because of e2e support)? Or are you saying that an Apple user's security and privacy is not an incentive for Apple?

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#252

Post by raydev »

dkonofalski wrote: post #249
raydev wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For all we know, Apple believes this too and is attempting to make this reality It doesn't matter what Apple plans, it's been more than a decade. They've made reviews faster and rejections more arbitrary. Resubmissions with 0 changes can lead to approvals. Useful apps are rejected because they don't meet a particular reviewer's standards on a particular day of the week. It's only become more inconsistent. > It's no…

>be honest and accept that their rules will always be inconsistently applied at current scale Isn't that currently what's happening?

No, they aren't honest about it at all.

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#253

Post by ksec »

imoverclocked wrote: post #176
_fat_santa wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple needs to reign in subscriptions. I was looking for a "photo vault" app the other day, basically a place to store photos that is password protected. I didn't need cloud storage, no fancy features, just a place to store photos with a passcode lock. So I went looking for an app and I must have reviewed close to 50, every single one had a "subscription". Now I get it, apps aren't easy to make and aren't free either…

> But to charge for a subscription to just use an offline app? So, if they make you sign in to their service to use the app, you would be ok with a subscription? Do you want/expect that app to be updated/supported over time? As someone who grew up with purchased box software followed by the pervasive availability of open source software, I severely dislike subscriptions for software products. In fact, auto-renew subs…

I think we should go back to upgrade pricing. Software subscription doesn't work, it makes sense from a developer and business perspective, but makes zero sense to consumer. Apple trying to court consumer to subscription has largely failed.

A fair way would be the Apps wont be updated to include iOS (new) support. So after a few years if you decide to upgrade iOS, you will have to upgrade the Apps as well. Or basically buy the new version of App with upgrade pricing like you did in the old days.

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#254

Post by curt15 »

scarface74 wrote: post #92
aaomidi wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I on the other hand really am excited. Apple devices turn into expensive ewaste when a country gets sanctioned by the US. There are millions of apple phones in Iran, that can't do anything other than browse the web. There are millions of talented developers in the world that have to avoid iOS because of the $100 fee. Anyway I'm really really really excited for being able to use a general computer as a general compute…

So it’s the $100 a year fee that stops “talented developers” who would also have to have a phone that costs at least $400 and a computer that costs at least $700?

A computer can in principle be shared among several people. Unix is a multi-user system after all.

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#255

Post by curt15 »

ryandrake wrote: post #137
eps wrote: post #5

Well, this does look like a straight Wordle copy. It is also disingenious to say that's a copy of Lingo, when it's bloody obvious it's a Wordle clone. The fact that other clones were approved by Apple points at another issue.

> The fact that other clones were approved by Apple points at another issue. It's also irrelevant when evaluating whether OP's app is also a clone. If 100 cars on the highway are speeding and I happen to be the one that gets pulled over, the judge isn't going to care that the cop didn't pull over the other 99 drivers.

Those situations are incomparable. Even if 100 cars are speeding, a cop can only pull over one driver at a time (although I've heard in some states police can do a bit better by patrolling in groups). But apps aren't speeding past app store reviewers onto the store; every app that makes it is explicitly approved. The problem here is not limited resources (at Apple for crying out loud!) but rather inconsistent application of the rules.

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#256

Post by realusername »

sleepybrett wrote: post #203
dawnbreez wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Begging the question, what part of the Apple app store prevents a bricked phone, and why would that not be a feature of non-Apple stores?

Part of their app review process is static analysis and determining if you are using any of the 'private' parts of their apis. Another app store might decide that they don't care to do that level of work and just rubber stamp everything that comes into their queue.

In other words, the iOS sandbox isn't that secure...

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#257

Post by ratww »

vinceguidry wrote: post #243
bastardoperator wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the M1 chip is blowing your argument out of the water. The performance and battery life are nothing short of impressive. Find me another OEM that isn't just cobbling parts together and selling it to you in a plastic shell versus actually designing an SoC/CPU.

It's a new processor. Great. What about the rest of the machine?

The rest of the machine is kind of amazing. Better audio than a 2013, WAY better microphones, great battery life, better screen than all the early Retinas, non-mechanical trackpad that lasts longer, keyboard is great again. And that's an entry-level machine, whereas an Air in 2013 wouldn't be as powerful as this. Don't be fooled, the products are great despite your personal feelings on the company.

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#258

Post by Turing_Machine »

vinceguidry wrote: post #59
ectospheno wrote: post #13

I love the App Store. If you want my money then you will be on the App Store. I have purchased zero items for use on my phone from places outside the App Store. I am very happy with this. I love my walled garden. I purchase apple products for this as I consider it a feature. I understand why some people don’t like this and don’t participate. I spend very little time discussing it as people should be able to make thei…

If you think Apple is doing this because they care about you, gentle user, then you will get burned, eventually, probably really badly, and you won't even have any kind of inkling as to why or how you could have avoided it. Behind the cutesy facade is a rapacious, consumer-hostile monster. The facade is paper-thin, and it's only a matter of time until you rub it the wrong way and it flakes off, then the monster will…

> Apple would rather die than ship GPL later than v2.

So would I, so I'm not about to blame them for that.

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#259

Post by Turing_Machine »

amelius wrote: post #103
squeaky-clean wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it sounds likely people in this case do not want the apple ecosystem. If you want the apple ecosystem, you want the app store.

But this explains the problem. When there are only 2 companies, both providing a multitude of features, then the more features there are, the easier you run into the problem that the features you want are not covered by both companies. Therefore, the features should be decoupled from the platform companies as much as possible. Features should be orthogonal to the platform. For example, imagine you cannot buy shoes se…

> When there are only 2 companies

There are at least a dozen companies selling Android phones, each of which is free to customize it to their heart's content. For that matter, Android users are free to customize their phones to their heart's content, download apps from sketchy app stores, sideload them....

Re: Avoid the Apple App Store

#260

Post by jonatanheyman »

dkonofalski wrote: post #237
jonatanheyman wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the writer of the post, I would love to hear Apple's side of the story. The reason I didn't include more quotes from Apple was that they never cited anything other than "resembles Wordle" and "leverages Wordle" in their replies. But clearly, given that they don't apply these rules when it comes to other apps (such as Scrabble, Minesweeper, Tetris, etc.), there is something else going on.

With respect, you don't know that they aren't attempting to take action on those other apps. Wordle may be a recent copyright issue since NYT has purchased the original. It seems like their rules do apply to these other apps but they just haven't gotten the attention that Wordle has so there's less bias towards those.

Thankfully (IMO), you can't patent game ideas. There's no legal action NYT can take (and expect to win) to shut down any games that build on the same game rules.

However, even if you disagree with me, and think that there should be no app implementing Wordle-style gameplay on App Store. What's your opinion on Minesweeper, Tetris, or Tic-tac-toe? Should no iOS versions of those games exist? Remember that Apple only ever refers to the original Wordle website in their rejections and never even acknowledges the existence of Wordle clones.

What about Scrabble? If they were applying their rules consistently they would surely kick out Words With Friends, but what about Wordfeud? Should they kick out Wordfeud because Scrabble implementations already existed on the web?

Post reply on HN