"I should be thankful they don’t make me pay a yearly developer fee for making python apps on my Macbook."
Just wait a few years... I predict that they'll charge to develop anything.
Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
111–120 of 535 posts
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, it's a difference, but not one that is actually meaningful to anyone outside of Apple. An affected customer doesn't care about why the policy exists (nor should they have to). The effects are the same regardless.
It's just a comment on the title of the posting. The title assumes an intention that's possibly incorrect. If intention doesn't matter, then why is it in the title?
Actions speak louder than words.
The actions Apple has taken prohibit using self-written apps without paying Apple a relatively large yearly fee (and in many cases, also going through pointless store review).
So at best - Apple does not care about hobby apps (written by owner, for owner) because they have taken no actions to mitigate this impact if it truly is just a side effect and not intended. At worst - Apple is actively hostile to this usage and the policy is working as intended.
That distinction is mostly moot from the view of a user outside of the internal discussions at Apple regarding that policy. The impact of the policy clearly discourages hobby app usage.
Because the policy exists, a reasonable interpretation is that Apple does not want you developing hobby apps.
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
> an iphone without any app developers is almost completely worthless The iphone has plenty of app developers even if there isn't a single third party app anywhere. Those app developers just work for Apple instead of a third party. I don't think Apple cares about having a thriving third party app ecosystem.
> I don't think Apple cares about having a thriving third party app ecosystem. And that's how you know a platform is obsolete.
I'm not so sure. Apple's selling point is tight control over the entire stack so that the experience is consistent everywhere on all of their devices. It seems like there is a substantial market segment that wants that and doesn't care what Apple has to do to get it.
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should be paying developers, yes, but not for the pain of going through review but instead for the simple fact that an iphone without any app developers is almost completely worthless. Apps make their platform more valuable.
> an iphone without any app developers is almost completely worthless The iphone has plenty of app developers even if there isn't a single third party app anywhere. Those app developers just work for Apple instead of a third party. I don't think Apple cares about having a thriving third party app ecosystem.
Not caring enough about that (or being too incompetent to do something about it) is why Microsoft products keep dying an early death:
Windows Phone, Zune, etc.
It is frustrating that HP got this right with WebOS and still fucked it up. Having a touchpad was a sublime pleasure for a few years.
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#115What bothers me about this -- and it bothered me enough to leave the platform -- is not fees, or "hobby computing," or "it's just for my own use," or trying to figure out why this or that would be in Apple's interest. What bothers me is that it feels like an offense against the entire notion of what a computer is. I am, of course, aware that many (perhaps most) computers in the world are effectively appliances, but a…
>> It's like giving someone a deck of cards and telling them that these cards can only be used to play blackjack. You can't invent a card game, or change the rules, or build a house of cards, or do card magic. Millions of people buy cards that can only be used to specifically only play, say; 'Magic: the Gathering' (MtG). You could probably invent some sort of new game with MtG cards, or do some sort of card magic wit…
> It is 'an offence against the entire notion of' what card games are?
It would be if a WOTC employee came to my table every time I tried playing, personally overseeing every turn of the game to ensure that I didn't break the rules, engage in unsportsmanlike conduct, use my imagination, taunt my opponent or profit unfairly with their platform.
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#116I wrote an Android app for my little programming news aggregator, and published that on the Play Store because it was basically free (IIRC there might be a one-time signup fee). $99/yr is a ridiculous sum for the "privilege" of publishing in Apple's walled garden, and it's just not something I'm willing to do. The arguments for paying for review, distribution, advertising, search, etc feel so disingenuous when the co…
> $99/yr is a ridiculous sum for the "privilege" of publishing in Apple's walled garden It’s a token amount, just enough to prevent spammers from creating thousands of accounts. It’s $99 for your entire organization for a year. Go check what Microsoft charges for a Visual Studio license per seat, per year. $99 doesn’t even buy you 1 hour of a developer’s time. Even if you develop apps a a hobby, this is not a large a…
> It’s $99 for your entire organization for a year.
This seems reasonable when you look from the point of view of a corporation. But hobbyists are single individuals, not corporations. So this basically makes development a privilege for corporations or for people in the first world for whom $99 is nothing.
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#117I’m not defending this, but after 15 years, I don’t see the point in complaining. We complain (rightfully) about the amount of crap in the App Store and Apple's capricious review policies that don’t stop the scammers, but for better or worse, the $99 fee IS a barrier to entry that I would argue has made the iOS ecosystem better than Android. I’ve been paying $99 a year for early access to iOS betas and for my own tes…
[flagged]
> Just because a company's gouging and gatekeeping has a side effects of keeping the great unwashed masses away, doesn't mean it's the right thing.
And yet, in a world filled with actors with malicious intent - cybercriminals, spammers, secret services, dark spyware vendors, scammers cashing in on "popular" brands or sometimes outright cloning applications - it is the only way to enforce some honesty.
I don't like it either, but I do not see an alternative.
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#118I've developed a little app (mostly for myself). After one week, I encountered the same and was a bit annoyed.
I'm waiting now for the new EU regulation that should open the apps store. I hope this also includes side-loading self-compiled apps.
One remark in favor of Apple: They provide a pretty good dev. environment. So a fee for distributing something could be acceptable.
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't view the iPhone and iPad as "computers" or "personal computers" any more than I view my cable TV set-top box or Sonos speaker that way. Both are very powerful devices with Linux operating systems. But I don't expect to be able to program them. The iPhone is an appliance that can download "apps" that Apple permits. When I want a "computer" I open up my MacBook.
How does letting people freely sideload apps conflict with this philosophy? You can still use your iPad as the world's most expensive e-reader if you want, letting other people run Linux on it doesn't somehow ruin your experience.
My philosophy is that Apple can do whatever they want (as long as legal and ethical).
They made a thing, and you bought it.
Why would anyone with a bent on free computing walk into what they know to be a closed ecosystem. Just buy an Android phone. It’s like flying to a foreign country and expecting everyone to English to you imo…
Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps
#120I’m not defending this, but after 15 years, I don’t see the point in complaining. We complain (rightfully) about the amount of crap in the App Store and Apple's capricious review policies that don’t stop the scammers, but for better or worse, the $99 fee IS a barrier to entry that I would argue has made the iOS ecosystem better than Android. I’ve been paying $99 a year for early access to iOS betas and for my own tes…
[flagged]
The citation is his own experience (and mine) and "doing the right thing" from whose perspective? All that matters is Apple's.