221–230 of 457 posts
This is a sad story It is repeated many times, this is not the first here Illustrates the problem with building businesses based on those "walled garden" services We have seen reports like this not just about the apple store, but about YouTube and Facebook too
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm not GP, but your condescending attitude is not only rude but wrong. Money laundering through things like app sales is a classic technique. It's the modern version of buying "art" that isn't valuable at insane prices. Laundering through an app store incurs a 30% haircut, but the funds are very clean afterward and every money laundering technique is going to cost that much or more. It is not unusual for the launder…
>It's the modern version of buying "art" that isn't valuable at insane prices.
That was possible because the art world (at some point in time) enabled this. Apple and its App Store actively prevent this from happening, it's the complete opposite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just don't use the third party app store if you're worried about scams. Requiring that apple permit 3rd party app stores does not force users to use said 3rd part stores.
This sounds like a fair point until remembering that things like Boss-ware exist. An insurer/ health insurer, employer, government, etc will require it, and just like that the "just don't use them" crowd will hold up their hands and pretend that no one could have imagined this disaster. If the problem is truly Apple exhibiting favouritism or limiting competition through their app approval process: then the EU should…
If my company is mandating the installation of software on my devices, I'll request a corporate device and assume the company has root access on said device.
It's heartwarming to see finally someone take Apple to court on this! So many small developers have no chance to do that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just don't use the third party app store if you're worried about scams. Requiring that apple permit 3rd party app stores does not force users to use said 3rd part stores.
This sounds like a fair point until remembering that things like Boss-ware exist. An insurer/ health insurer, employer, government, etc will require it, and just like that the "just don't use them" crowd will hold up their hands and pretend that no one could have imagined this disaster. If the problem is truly Apple exhibiting favouritism or limiting competition through their app approval process: then the EU should…
On Android where alternate storefronts are a possibility, I have yet to be made aware of a single instance of this happening. Not even Epic in their crusade against established mobile stores made its' own platform.
If you truly believe you were treated unfairly against Apple, you think they are in breach of contract or violating the law, and they are threatening your livelihood, then sue them. Complaining on the Internet is unlikely to give you the relief you seek.
The whole business model of living off of App stores, controlled by tech giants, is flawed, and no sane person should ever make this their sole source of income. It's like being held hostage.
If you truly believe you were treated unfairly against Apple, you think they are in breach of contract or violating the law, and they are threatening your livelihood, then sue them. Complaining on the Internet is unlikely to give you the relief you seek.
Unlikely but not impossible. In this case, it's less about the apps or the developer and more about the lack of specificity. If Apple suspend accounts without due process, that affects everyone within that ecosystem, and people should be concerned and should ask questions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I guess the App Store fraud prevention team hasn’t necessarily found a good solution yet. The most essential device of the century is owned by two companies. The ability for them to completely control software and business activities on top of something that is almost as essential as public transportation is appalling. The DOJ needs to remove the "app store" racket for essential computing devices. Software needs to…
> The most essential device of the century is owned by two companies. As long as people play along, yes it is indeed. If more people were installing a free mobile OS, and thus take back ownership of their hardware and digital lives, the story would be much different. It's the same story with PCs. If you actually want to control the hardware you own, install Linux. It's not as if the alternatives to corporate control…
The fact is most of the stuff that makes phones what they are, is hidden behind closed hardware and firmware. Even Android, which as you know is Linux, has closed binary blobs in its kernel tree.
You can get away with that somewhat for devices like the SoC on the Raspberry Pi. But things get a lot more complex when half the stuff that makes your phone usable is closed hardware and firmware blobs. What you ultimately end up with is still a device you don’t fully control but with the added inconvenience of a less mature software ecosystem too.
I don’t see this problem being solved any time soon. In fact quite the opposite, I think it’s getting increasingly difficult with each passing year.