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

Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 346 posts

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#151

Post by pdonis »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #147
pdonis wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> software users are the customers of the software developers Yes, but the users are also customers of the owner of the software platform that the developers are developing for. And the owner of the platform gets to set the platform's rules. Microsoft's standard practice for many years was to watch for which third party Windows applications were becoming popular, and build those features into one of their own product…

Except Apple did exactly what you just said Microsoft did to third party devs, and then also banned their apps off the appstore to boot because they do what their OS now does out of the box, like the famous keyboard for the Apple Watch.[1] At least Microsoft can't ever ban you from selling Windows apps since you're not forced to use their store to sell to Windows users. Apple's grip of the iOS AppStore can be a poiso…

> At least Microsoft can't ever ban you from selling Windows apps

True; but that also means third parties can lose even more when MS pulls the rug out from under them. The developer of the third party keyboard app you refer to said, according to the article you referenced, that they lost a year of revenue. Some third party Windows devs were forced into bankruptcy.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#152

Post by MilaM »

pflats wrote: post #129
curt15 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In the vast majority of cases, these are not your customers. These are apple's customers they have given you access to. Unless I am misreading somehow, this is an unusual position. Software developers don't sell their software to Apple. They sell to the end users. Unless an intermediary rebrands the software and takes ownership of customer acquisition and support, software users are the customers of the software dev…

Suppose an author uploads their book to ExamplePrint Inc, a one stop shop that prints made-to-order books for customers. The reader goes to ExamplePrint and buys the book. ExamplePrint prints a softcover copy of the book on the spot and ships it out to the reader. The user pays ExamplePrint, who pays the author some fraction of the user's money. The reader is a customer of ExamplePrint and reading the author's book.…

Nice analogy. The problem is, that ExamplePrint is the only shop the author can use to reach his customers. There is also PrintExample (Android), but it's customer base has zero overlap with ExamplePrint. Therefore the author has no choice but to use ExamplePrint's service.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#153

Post by pdonis »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #137
pdonis wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What would happen if this had been the standard applied to Windows? Microsoft had no problem taking features from popular third party Windows applications and building them into their own products, basically stealing the third party developers' markets. That looks worse to me than what Apple is doing.

Plese stop repeating this FUD in every reply on this thread, you already posted the exact same comment here[1] and here[2] as well, and I already explained you why it's false. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39348035 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39348077

> I explained you why it's false.

No, you explained that Apple has done the same thing. That doesn't mean MS didn't do what I said or that it didn't have a huge impact on third party Windows devs.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#154

Post by lucianbr »

bitcurious wrote: post #59
orev wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, laws are taken as very literal, and any technicality that can be exploited usually will be. In Europe, they’re far more focused on the spirit of the law and don’t put up with games. On one hand it seems like Apple is trying to take a US style approach, but on the other they must have European lawyers on staff explaining how that won’t work. One might conclude that it’s a calculated risk, or a stalling tact…

> In the US, laws are taken as very literal, and any technicality that can be exploited usually will be. In Europe, they’re far more focused on the spirit of the law and don’t put up with games. I was looking to confirm or deny that statement and came across a fun detour in the form of an article entitled "What's So Special About American Law?". It doesn't address the point about spirit vs. detail at all, but is an a…

> Our legal system, like our society, places great emphasis on the value of equality.

Is this satire? Must be satire, right?

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#155

Post by arthie »

dkuznetsov wrote: post #149

Let's say a subscription costs $10. Why not charge $14.29 through app store and $10 through online registration? With both logins acceptable in the login form... If Apple users want to pay more for the privilege of paying through Apple, why not let them?

Apple does not allow different pricing

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#156

Post by FirmwareBurner »

pdonis wrote: post #151
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except Apple did exactly what you just said Microsoft did to third party devs, and then also banned their apps off the appstore to boot because they do what their OS now does out of the box, like the famous keyboard for the Apple Watch.[1] At least Microsoft can't ever ban you from selling Windows apps since you're not forced to use their store to sell to Windows users. Apple's grip of the iOS AppStore can be a poiso…

> At least Microsoft can't ever ban you from selling Windows apps True; but that also means third parties can lose even more when MS pulls the rug out from under them. The developer of the third party keyboard app you refer to said, according to the article you referenced, that they lost a year of revenue. Some third party Windows devs were forced into bankruptcy.

So according to you, Apple's copying an app then banning that developer's app off the Appstore is better than Microsoft's copying an app's features while still allowing it to be sold, because in Apple's documented case one developer lost "only" a year of revenue, while in your imaginary Microsoft example, a company we don't know of went bankrupt?

You're just a gift that keeps on giving. How do you come up with this reasoning?

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#157

Post by pdonis »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #144
pdonis wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not FUD, it's historical fact. MS did exactly what I described, repeatedly. PG even commented about it in one of his essays years ago (his comment was that you could invest a lot in developing a third party Windows application and then find out you were just doing market research for Microsoft).

Then please post some source for your historical facts. Plus, Apple did the exact same things.

Here's the pg article I referred to:

https://paulgraham.com/road.html

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#158

Post by TillE »

musictubes wrote: post #39
orev wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, laws are taken as very literal, and any technicality that can be exploited usually will be. In Europe, they’re far more focused on the spirit of the law and don’t put up with games. On one hand it seems like Apple is trying to take a US style approach, but on the other they must have European lawyers on staff explaining how that won’t work. One might conclude that it’s a calculated risk, or a stalling tact…

I find it far fetched that Apple would either hire terrible lawyers that lead them astray or competent lawyers that they then ignore. I agree that they are probably hoping to go to court. Maybe I’m just too American to understand but the idea of “the spirit” of the law seems ridiculous. If you want the law to force Apple to allow slide loading then pass a law that says that. If you want a law that forces Apple to all…

Notably, the DMA includes words like "fair" and "reasonable" for which there is no strict robot-like interpretation.

Apple's plans will be evaluated as such by regulators, and there are several provisions which are just plainly anti-competitive, especially the 50 cent per user per year fee just to run an app store. It's really hard to see that holding up.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#159

Post by threeseed »

standardUser wrote: post #101
doublepg23 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These users can't buy an Android phone?

Why can't other companies emulate iOS?

They can: https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/IOS_emulators

The issue is trying to make a business out of it.

Re: Developers revolt over Apple's new app store rules

#160

Post by nozzlegear »

callalex wrote: post #88
graeme wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re a Netflix customer you just log into the app. There’s no issue. The debate is around people who are Apple customers but not Netflix customers, and who download the Netflix app through the App Store.

I don’t understand why I become the exclusive property of a specific corporation through the simple act of using a phone (which is something I am required to do in the modern day).

But you’re not required to go on the App Store and discover apps like Netflix. Presumably you do that because the corporation built a nice App Store ecosystem where you want to do such a thing.
Post reply on HN