301–310 of 1001 posts
Can this be done with Android? Perhaps I could release for Android-only and allow the app to be downloaded with Chrome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even worse. Imagine if the World Wide Web was not open and you had to go through a closed WWW like AOL and websites were "under review" by the providers and would take a 30% cut of your revenues or clicks on your web app or subscription service and websites require going only through that provider. Thank goodness that wasn't the case.
It could be the case if AMP grows dominant; given the market share of Google Search, it could be enough to create a controlled (er, "curated") web in a similar spirit.
Mind.blown.
"iPhone/iPad is a console" A $1000+ device with a moniker "Pro" is not a console. If you're trying to sell me the concept that something is "Pro" to be used for work, and can even replace a laptop, don't try to tell me its equivalent to a games console.
"Pro" means absolutely nothing. It is a marketing label. Also the price means nothing. What's $1,000 (iPad Pro) to you is $500 (PS4 Pro) to me.
Imagine if Microsoft did this on PCs. a) prohibiting the installation of non-windows store software (sideloading) and b) insisting that all purchases done via apps give them a 30% cut. I think this is a ridiculous practice on the behalf of Apple.
Isn't Apple's 30% cut way more than even the mafia charge local businesses when they force folks to pay protection fees? Or is that standard for monopolists?
Imagine if Microsoft did this on PCs. a) prohibiting the installation of non-windows store software (sideloading) and b) insisting that all purchases done via apps give them a 30% cut. I think this is a ridiculous practice on the behalf of Apple.
This is also a security vulnerability: one decision by Apple, or by a court of law in a far-away country, and an app is gone from your phone. You lose access to the data held by this app. Easy, reliably DoS -- and the user has no means of fixing this vulnerability, other than rooting the phone and hacking around. Which is made ever less feasible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a consumer, why can't there be an alternative App Store on IoS if I don't like the Apple terms? Apple shouldn't force consumers and developers to provide them with 30%.
If you don't like the service or product, don't buy it. There are Android, Sailfish, Postmarket, Mer. It's extremely unethical in my opinion to force some service provider to adjust the service to your needs/preferences.
It’s well within the governments rights to say a transactional middleman service can only charge a certain fee. What is important to society is the success of the producers, not the rent seeking middleman.
I get hung up in the semantics of monopoly. I don't think it really applies here because Android exists. But if we frame this as an anti-competitive question I think it is very clear Apple's practices are anti-competitive. I'm not a fan of diluting the term "monopoly", I think we need modern laws to encourage competition. Maybe I just need to get over my pedantry.
And those apps can charge you money without giving Google a single dime.
Imagine if Microsoft did this on PCs. a) prohibiting the installation of non-windows store software (sideloading) and b) insisting that all purchases done via apps give them a 30% cut. I think this is a ridiculous practice on the behalf of Apple.
Imagine if Microsoft did this on PCs. a) prohibiting the installation of non-windows store software (sideloading) and b) insisting that all purchases done via apps give them a 30% cut. I think this is a ridiculous practice on the behalf of Apple.