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

Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 208 posts

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#171

Post by natch »

jasonm23 wrote: post #149
bruce511 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point of view here will depend somewhat on your level of success. In the current model, the barrier to entry is pretty low. $99 gets you xcode, plus you need done hardware. Once you've made something you need to reach a market. A good market place (like a regular super market) brings together suppliers and customers. That market has costs. One model for costs is to charge each app the same amount. Say, for examp…

> But its your choice to join their game, or not. There's no bait-and-switch here. You are saying flagrantly anti-competition without saying it directly. Android platform has multiple sources of apps, and side-loading. Ruthless exploitation of a market has never been tolerated for long.

But from what I hear of it Android is a mess, rife with malware, and a blatant rip-off of the success of iPhone and iOS. The sideloading support while convenient also opens up opportunities for abusive apps like spyware that unethical people use to track their household members without permission. I would not hold any of that up as a model.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#172

Post by natch »

fastball wrote: post #103
musicale wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple didn't help deliver my ebook or podcast How true. Well, except for: - designing and manufacturing the hardware - marketing and selling the hardware - creating and promoting the Books app - popularizing podcasts with the iPod - creating and promoting the Podcasts app etc. > They don't deserve 30% of that. This illustrates my point: the core dispute is over platform fees charged by the App Store.

I think you're misunderstanding the GP. They're talking about services provided entirely by other people, e.g. buying ebooks from Amazon. In that light, here are the responses to your bullets: - the hardware I already paid for - this should be included in the price of the hardware (and certainly is in the case of Apple) - I don't use the Books app, I use the Amazon Kindle app - I never listened to a podcast on my iPo…

Even granting that not everyone uses every app, Apple made and continues to maintain, improve, update, and support the thriving ecosystem (including many free apps) in which Amazon and Spotify can find the best audience.

Including, with help from fees charged to developers and the 30% revenue cut, funding development of all the tools and platforms that make it all possible.

Amazon and Spotify (and their customers) would not do as well without this ecosystem and its tools, devices, and platforms.

I think the value of the ecosystem including all the aspects mentioned is huge. Device sales alone would not ever come close to paying for it all, if you want devices to be in reach of normal people and you don’t want to build your business off of intrusive personalized advertising.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#173

Post by natch »

realusername wrote: post #146
shaboinkin wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, 30% pays for all of the frameworks Apple develops that is available to you when you fire up Xcode, as well as everything involved with running the store, and they take their cut when you post on their store and sell stuff. If a law comes by and says Sorry Apple, you need to provide a way for other stores to exist in your ecosystem, well, something is going to have to pay for the development of the…

I don't want to use xcode either, their tooling is terrible and the only reason I use it is because of Apple intentionally obfuscating their build and release process. That's strange people think as it's providing some kind of "value" which needs to be paid, in reality it's the opposite, it's a problematic byproduct of the monopoly which I would get rid of given the choice.

Just compile with command line tools and use any editor you want. The xcodebuild command line tool, which is distinct from Xcode lest there’s any confusion, is pretty well documented.

Under the hood it uses clang, which was developed with Apple support and which I guess has some value…

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#174

Post by restore_creole_ »

modeless wrote: post #125
fingerlocks wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can install whatever you want on an iPhone if you’re willing to compile it yourself with one or two shell commands. You do need access to a Mac. Contrary to popular belief, you can even install a non-safari browser: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...

... with a $700+ Mac purchased from Apple, and usually a $99/yr subscription purchased from Apple, plus a network connection to Apple's servers to obtain code signing permission, which must be periodically refreshed or your code will stop running, to ensure you are never independent of Apple's ongoing approval.

I'm pretty sure you can sideload without an Apple developer account($99) but you need to reinstall the app every 7 days and you can only have 3 installed at once. The processing on refreshing the install and swapping between more than 3 apps can be automated by using desktop software like AltStore.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#175

Post by agentdrtran »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #170
pjc50 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The platform fee for the IBM PC is zero. The platform fee for notorious quasi-monopolist Microsoft Windows is still zero. That is the standard to which all other platforms should be held. There is talk about the cost of designing and manufacturing the phone, which is irrelevant, especially in a world where users frequently buy new phones every two years. That cost should be borne by the purchaser of the phone. Now, t…

> The platform fee for notorious quasi-monopolist Microsoft Windows is still zero. While true, paid-for apps from the MS store - the option that should be recommended to laypeople, instead of the dodgy websites that have download button styled ads - charge a registration fee [0] and Microsoft takes a cut of 5 - 30% [1] [0] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/uwp/publish/accoun... [1] "Microsoft takes 5–15% of t…

You aren't forced to use the MS Store if you buy a Windows PC. You have the choice to use the "safe" store or the web.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#176

Post by pjc50 »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #170
pjc50 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The platform fee for the IBM PC is zero. The platform fee for notorious quasi-monopolist Microsoft Windows is still zero. That is the standard to which all other platforms should be held. There is talk about the cost of designing and manufacturing the phone, which is irrelevant, especially in a world where users frequently buy new phones every two years. That cost should be borne by the purchaser of the phone. Now, t…

> The platform fee for notorious quasi-monopolist Microsoft Windows is still zero. While true, paid-for apps from the MS store - the option that should be recommended to laypeople, instead of the dodgy websites that have download button styled ads - charge a registration fee [0] and Microsoft takes a cut of 5 - 30% [1] [0] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/uwp/publish/accoun... [1] "Microsoft takes 5–15% of t…

The Windows app store is .. extremely poorly used. I couldn't find any stats with a brief search, but it's not popular with either users or developers. And of course the existence of a free disintermediated alternative helps this.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#177

Post by modeless »

fingerlocks wrote: post #139
modeless wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about difficulty, like the number of mouse clicks or something. It's about who has ultimate control over your device. And with control comes the ability to extract rent.

Then you would agree it’s fair to rephrase your original post as “It’s quite possible to install native code on the device you ostensibly own unless you want ultimate device control”?

Your phrasing doesn't make sense. Whether you "want" ultimate device control or not is irrelevant because you can't have it. The relevant thing is that Apple retains ultimate control, you never have it, and Apple uses that control to extract rent. My original phrasing is correct and doesn't need to be changed.

BTW I forgot to mention that the "Chromium for iOS" that you linked to is not a "non-Safari browser". It is the same Safari-wrapper version of Chromium that you can already get from the App Store. The "popular belief" is correct. There is currently no port of any alternative browser engine for iOS. Why would anyone bother to maintain an iOS port for software that can't be practically distributed?

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#178

Post by lern_too_spel »

Someone wrote: post #135
thayne wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And pay for an apple developer license.

Technically, that isn’t necessary. You ‘only’ will have to redeploy your apps every two weeks or so with a fresh temporary certificate.

And lose your app data each time?

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#179

Post by HWR_14 »

Firmwarrior wrote: post #126
HWR_14 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon threw billions at creating an alternate storefront for Android devices. If they cannot achieve it, then who could? Maybe Samsung, and then it's a triopoly where which store still depends on who sells your phone.

Samsung actually used to bundle their own app store with their phones, but gave up eventually since it wasn't getting much traction

This is the opposite of my recollection. I thought Samsung just started bundling their own app store, and was referencing that it may yet succeed. Maybe this is attempt 2?

Amazon tried selling phones with their own app store built in, but Fire Phones never took off for whatever reason.

Re: Apple is top funder of lobby group that says it represents small developers

#180

Post by ksec »

alsetmusic wrote: post #4

I’m a longtime user and former employee and I can’t begin to summon any words to excuse this shitty look. Apple under Stelv Jobs may sometimes warrant a side-eyed glance. Apple under Tim Cook keeps coming up slimey af. I used to admire the man. I now think he’s slowly killing a company that I used to love.

Same here. Used to love Steve Jobs' Apple. The major difference I think Tim Cook has a moral compass that is somewhat different to say the least. He doesn't view doing that as wrong.

Just watch how many times he said Privacy is a Fundamental Human Right. It is now ingrained into the company to the point of using it as an argument in court.

And I haven't even mention China.

Post reply on HN