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

211–220 of 346 posts

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

#211

Post by vdaea »

kjreact wrote: post #86
stavros wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course he can? "Trusted" doesn't have to mean "trusted by Apple", I want it to mean "trusted by me ". The thing that can't be had here is both Apple being the sole keymaster of the device and the user being the sole keymaster of the device.

Can someone more familiar with iOS app development explain why people can’t just use developer mode on their iOS devices to run untrusted code? Can’t you bypass the App Store entirely with this method?

You can only install 3 apps at once, they are somewhat limited in the APIs they can use, and they expire every 7 days (you need to reinstall them using a computer)

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

#212

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

anfilt wrote: post #170

A huge problem is the DMA falls short in addressing a significant violation of property rights concerning the hardware. At the core of property ownership lies the right of exclusion – the ability to exclude or include something on one's personal property. This right is quite important and can even be used to derive most other property rights; please see the linked paper at the bottom. However, Apple's policies with i…

I don't think it is super complicated .

You can enshrine a company's right to define its market or the price for its products, hold those rights sacrosact and still punish apple.

The issue at the core is not a company's right to X. Instead, it is: Has this company thru dominance of their market have achieved a monopolistic power ? If so, that's the avenue you take to undo their abuse. If the abuse cannot be rectified by market actors or new entrants, they you slap the anticompetitive monopoly with restrictions of what they can or cannot do.

EDIT: I personally think that there should be straightforward threshold criteria to be defined as a monopoly automatically, such as (numbers made up) exceeding:

- 0.1% of revenue in aggregate political donations, or

- 0.5% of profits in aggregate political donations, or

- Annual Revenue > US per capita x 100,000, or

- Annual profits > US per capita x 10,000

- Etc.

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

#213

Post by e63f67dd-065b »

sleepybrett wrote: post #135
e63f67dd-065b wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That said, I really don't understand the issue with their cut, or insisting on handling payments. In the vast majority of cases, these are not your customers. These are apple's customers they have given you access to. This is not true at all. Netflix customers are Netflix customers, not Apple; the same goes for Amazon Kindle, Spotify, etc. Netflix literally cannot include a link to netflix.com in their app, otherwi…

It is absolutely true. Apple doesn't take a cut from any of your examples EXCEPT if they make that payment through the app on their phone. If they redirect you to a website to subscribe, apple sees nothing. If your customers use the rails that apple has greased up FOR YOU then they take a cut.

I would agree with you if the app could redirect you to a website to subscribe, but that's explicitly against the rules and not currently possible. This wouldn't be an issue at all if a redirect is allowed, or even a sentence saying "please subscribe on our website". Both are currently banned and this banned is strictly enforced.

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

#214

Post by skeaker »

snapcaster wrote: post #89
sjwhevvvvvsj wrote: post #31

This is a great way to encourage developers to build the app that will show an essential use case for the Vision Pro. It’s not like Vision Pro is a solution in need of a problem, desperately waiting for a killer app, or that apps built the iPhone ecosystem into the juggernaut it is now. Apple doesn’t need developers, right? Right?

I can't even understand your point here. People aren't developing for apple hardware to be nice to apple or help out the ecosystem, they're doing it for money. As long as Apple is creating a platform that people love, adopt and trust people will develop for it (while complaining the whole time no doubt) By the amount of bitching on this issue, it really sounds like developers need Apple not the other way around. If t…

People are developing for money, yes, money that Apple intends to take a large cut of for no good reason, hence why they would avoid developing for it because they would not make enough money.

Developers do not need Apple because there are other viable platforms. Users that are locked to an iPhone for whatever reason (iCloud being impossible to export, costs are prohibitive, family uses it, etc) would like to be able to sideload or generally run whatever they want on their own device. People aren't complaining just to complain and they're definitely not being entitled, that's just the expectation when you buy a computing device and Apple is failing to uphold their end of it. I do not touch the Apple ecosystem but would like to see their behavior squashed before it can spread to any devices that I do use.

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

#215

Post by riversflow »

burnte wrote: post #127
riversflow wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't about developers, it's about Apple customers. to them iPhone = Apple, not developers

This is definitely about developers.

> "these warnings would dissuade 50 percent of users from proceeding with their purchase."

How is user activity/behavior about developers?

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

#216

Post by fooker »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #212
anfilt wrote: post #170

A huge problem is the DMA falls short in addressing a significant violation of property rights concerning the hardware. At the core of property ownership lies the right of exclusion – the ability to exclude or include something on one's personal property. This right is quite important and can even be used to derive most other property rights; please see the linked paper at the bottom. However, Apple's policies with i…

I don't think it is super complicated . You can enshrine a company's right to define its market or the price for its products, hold those rights sacrosact and still punish apple. The issue at the core is not a company's right to X. Instead, it is: Has this company thru dominance of their market have achieved a monopolistic power ? If so, that's the avenue you take to undo their abuse. If the abuse cannot be rectified…

The issue with straightforward thresholds is you can escape those with creative accounting.

There’s is a reason it’s more subjective.

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

#217

Post by beacon294 »

nprateem wrote: post #106
standardUser wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone downvote this? Would love an explanation. Why not let Apple keep building their wall higher and higher but also let other's emulate and create interoperable alternatives. The best of all worlds.

Because it's divorced from reality. In no world will volunteers maintain parity with a trillion dollar hardware and software company covered by a multitude of patents.

Is this a joke? I was obviously calling back both to PC compatibles and UNIX compatibles. Both open systems have completely dominated the closed systems. It is obvious that Apple is doing everything to prevent this.

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

#218

Post by [deleted] »

frizlab wrote: post #186
arthurofbabylon wrote: post #71

This is a rather misleading headline. The vast majority of developers are not in “open revolt” – just a handful of developers are making a lot of noise about it, while continuing to ship software (ie, not in revolt at all). Further, those developers making great noise are often close to “platform” designation themselves, making their appeal less righteous than a superficial reading might have you believe. It’s a stru…

I am too. I’m tired of the virulent minority making like they’re the majority (on this subject or others)

[deleted]

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

#219

Post by happyopossum »

Jensson wrote: post #54
musictubes wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Trying to cover every case explicitly and rigorously just results in the legal mess the US has where you need way more lawyers than other countries to get stuff done, and still results in more abuse from companies since there will always be abusable holes in laws but there wont typically be holes in the spirit of the law. So the main end result with the US system is that companies employs armies of lawyers so that th…

> Trying to cover every case explicitly and rigorously

Removing a gate but still charging and entrance fee isn't even close to a far-fetched corner case. I have to believe that the regulators understood they were only regulating the technical side of things, and not the financial side.

If the lobbyists for Spotify and Epic dropped the ball there, that's on them.

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

#220

Post by turtlebits »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #191
anfilt wrote: post #170

A huge problem is the DMA falls short in addressing a significant violation of property rights concerning the hardware. At the core of property ownership lies the right of exclusion – the ability to exclude or include something on one's personal property. This right is quite important and can even be used to derive most other property rights; please see the linked paper at the bottom. However, Apple's policies with i…

Yeah, this is the fundamental issue at play here. I don't care what fees or rules Apple puts in place for developer access to its app store. I care that I'm digitally restricted from running anything other than software approved by Apple on my device. If that problem was solved and Apple had to compete with other app stores on a level playing field, that would naturally resolve any issues with their rules or fee stru…

It's just a different business model. See: game consoles.
Post reply on HN