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

Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 60 posts

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#31

Post by moe »

TomOfTTB wrote: post #28
moe wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

laws like those that forbid people from not hiring a person based on skin color? ask yourself if it's fair for some developers to be forced to develop on platforms with 30 million fewer customers You didn't just seriously draw a line between those two statements, did you? Moreover please show me a developer who is forced to develop anything for any platform.

Yes, I did. I assume your objection is that racism isn't in the same league as what Apple is doing. I agree with you on that. But the government doesn't take a stance on racism. If Government was taking a stance on racism then they wouldn't allow racist literature to be distributed (as just one example). But they do allow that meaning racism isn't the issue. So the question at hand is fairness not racism. Which bring…

First off, please stop mixing labor law and human rights into this. That's so idiotic, it's not funny. Especially since there isn't even an employment relationship involved here.

The app-store is a digital retail store. You are free to develop an iPhone app and offer it to them. They are free to reject it.

Just like you are free to develop a better mousetrap and offer it to WalMart - and they are free to reject it.

If you don't like their rules then don't develop an iPhone app. It's really as simple as that.

And in case you are wondering what their rules are: They are explained in this big blob of text presented to you when you sign up. The one with the checkbox labeled "I understand and I agree" at the end.

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#34

Post by jacquesm »

moe wrote: post #31
TomOfTTB wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I did. I assume your objection is that racism isn't in the same league as what Apple is doing. I agree with you on that. But the government doesn't take a stance on racism. If Government was taking a stance on racism then they wouldn't allow racist literature to be distributed (as just one example). But they do allow that meaning racism isn't the issue. So the question at hand is fairness not racism. Which bring…

First off, please stop mixing labor law and human rights into this. That's so idiotic, it's not funny. Especially since there isn't even an employment relationship involved here. The app-store is a digital retail store. You are free to develop an iPhone app and offer it to them. They are free to reject it. Just like you are free to develop a better mousetrap and offer it to WalMart - and they are free to reject it. I…

You can not understand and agree to that which is not published, such as the official rulebook on which apps will make it through approval and those that do not.

A transparent approval process would solve this instantly.

And even Apple would benefit.

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#35

Post by moe »

jacquesm wrote: post #34
moe wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, please stop mixing labor law and human rights into this. That's so idiotic, it's not funny. Especially since there isn't even an employment relationship involved here. The app-store is a digital retail store. You are free to develop an iPhone app and offer it to them. They are free to reject it. Just like you are free to develop a better mousetrap and offer it to WalMart - and they are free to reject it. I…

You can not understand and agree to that which is not published, such as the official rulebook on which apps will make it through approval and those that do not. A transparent approval process would solve this instantly. And even Apple would benefit.

You can not understand and agree to that which is not published, such as the official rulebook on which apps will make it through approval and those that do not.

You are mistaken, the official rulebook is published and it's right there in the blurb that you agree to during sign up.

It's really short, too, as there is only one rule: Apple decides whether an app is accepted and they will neither tell you the criteria nor the reasons for a rejection.

If you don't agree with that then you should not tick that checkbox. Easy, huh?

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#36

Post by jacquesm »

moe wrote: post #35
jacquesm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can not understand and agree to that which is not published, such as the official rulebook on which apps will make it through approval and those that do not. A transparent approval process would solve this instantly. And even Apple would benefit.

You can not understand and agree to that which is not published, such as the official rulebook on which apps will make it through approval and those that do not. You are mistaken, the official rulebook is published and it's right there in the blurb that you agree to during sign up. It's really short, too, as there is only one rule: Apple decides whether an app is accepted and they will neither tell you the criteria n…

So, you're arguing that there exists no other Apple internal rulebook than the arbitrary one that says 'apple decides' ?

I find that hard to believe. I think a rulebook does exist, but that they avoid publishing it because they want to have the 'final say' even if somebody would play within the rules as specified in the book.

And that makes sense, because it would open apple up to being sued for breach of contract, and that is exactly what this whole thing is about. A one-sided contract is no contract, consideration is to be given to both parties. Developing an application is an investment and you should be allowed to inspect the full terms of the contract under which you make your investment.

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#37

Post by lg »

Force companies to decide exactly what they're doing, and declare it to the government in unambiguous language so that it can be broadcast to the public. Yeah. While we're at it we should force them to submit a document declaring the types of all their variables too, and have it notarized.

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#38

Post by randallsquared »

jrockway wrote: post #12

I agree that the government should not be able to tell AT&T and Apple what to do ... ... as soon as Apple and AT&T deliver phone service without using any public infrastructure. As long as they want to use the public airwaves, though, the public should have some oversight into what goes on. (Remember, "the big bad government" isn't telling them what to do, the people that own the infrastructure, us, are telling them…

"Airwaves" are not infrastructure.

Apple and AT&T do have government-granted privileges (such as limited liability and the huge swath of regulations which assist larger and existing corporations against their customers and smaller competitors), but regulations for and against don't "balance"; handing someone a candy bar does not give you the right to tell them what to do.

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#39

Post by plinkplonk »

randallsquared wrote: post #38
jrockway wrote: post #12

I agree that the government should not be able to tell AT&T and Apple what to do ... ... as soon as Apple and AT&T deliver phone service without using any public infrastructure. As long as they want to use the public airwaves, though, the public should have some oversight into what goes on. (Remember, "the big bad government" isn't telling them what to do, the people that own the infrastructure, us, are telling them…

"Airwaves" are not infrastructure. Apple and AT&T do have government-granted privileges (such as limited liability and the huge swath of regulations which assist larger and existing corporations against their customers and smaller competitors), but regulations for and against don't "balance"; handing someone a candy bar does not give you the right to tell them what to do.

"Airwaves" are not infrastructure."

Sure, but radio spectrum (which is what the OP meant by "infrastructure") is owned by the government and licensed to corporations subject to public good and review isn't it?

(pS: I don't have a dog in this fight. I've never used Apple Hardware or software and never will. So I don't really care what Apple does. Where I live Apple is a very very minor player anyway. Just trying to confirm my knowledge of how radio spectrum is owned and allotted).

Re: Poll: Do You Have A Problem With This Statement

#40

Post by moe »

jacquesm wrote: post #36
moe wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can not understand and agree to that which is not published, such as the official rulebook on which apps will make it through approval and those that do not. You are mistaken, the official rulebook is published and it's right there in the blurb that you agree to during sign up. It's really short, too, as there is only one rule: Apple decides whether an app is accepted and they will neither tell you the criteria n…

So, you're arguing that there exists no other Apple internal rulebook than the arbitrary one that says 'apple decides' ? I find that hard to believe. I think a rulebook does exist, but that they avoid publishing it because they want to have the 'final say' even if somebody would play within the rules as specified in the book. And that makes sense, because it would open apple up to being sued for breach of contract, a…

So, you're arguing that there exists no other Apple internal rulebook than the arbitrary one that says 'apple decides'?

Excuse me? I said nothing like that.

Yes, they probably have an internal rulebook but that's completely irrelevant because they chose to not disclose it. They are free to make that choice, just like you are free to not do business with them on these terms. It's called "Free Market", wikipedia can tell you more.

A one-sided contract is no contract, consideration is to be given to both parties

I'm starting to think you have serious reading comprehension problems. The contract is not one-sided. You get to read it and you must agree to it.

Developing an application is an investment and you should be allowed to inspect the full terms of the contract under which you make your investment.

You are not only allowed to inspect the full terms, you are required to inspect and agree to the full terms.

The full terms are: Apple may or may not accept your application and they are not obliged to tell you any reasons for their decision.

If you think apple "should" be operating differently then don't do business with them.

You seem to think there is some sort of godgiven right to get into the App store. There is not. It is Apple's personal playground. If they choose to accept apps only on mondays then they are free to do so. If they choose to reject apps because they would compete with their own products then they are free to do so. If they choose to reject apps without even telling you the reason then they are free to do so.

They have this freedom because you, the developer, checked that little "I agree"-checkbox, remember?

Post reply on HN