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

Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

bennettnotes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 535 posts

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#311

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

ozim wrote: post #161
bragr wrote: post #24

I doubt this is "Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps", so much as "Apple doesn’t want dev accounts to be an easy backdoor for sideloading apps" and hobby apps are an acceptable casualty.

I would say "Apple doesn’t want dev accounts to be an easy backdoor for trash apps". It is all about quality of the app store. Downside is that I see bunch of corporate apps that are total trash on app store.

Trash apps according to whom? Apple considers all browsers that don't use WebKit as "trash" as well as other entire categories.

Apparently the nanny state is repugnant to many, but nanny corporations that don't trust us to make our own choices, or have our own tastes and standards, is much more acceptable. The huge loss of customer freedom doesn't actually achieve the exclusion of "trash" apps nor malware.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#314

Post by iamcalledrob »

It feels like Apple doesn't even want commercial indie developers on their platforms either.

The whole process around entitlements and app review is absolutely maddening for small teams that don't have insider connections at Apple.

For context, there are things that your device is capable of, but the OS will prevent you from doing without Apple's blessing (an "Entitlement"). Even in test code that you're not shipping to the app store. Most apps you'll use day to day will use a bunch of these entitlements.

A pretty common scenario is that you want to be able to remove a notification that is no longer relevant. The process to do that is: 1. Pay the $99 (ugh, okay) 2. Build marketing materials for your app (even if you're the only user) 3. Write a proposal to Apple explaining why you need this entitlement and this is a good user experience. 4. Wait 4-8 weeks for Apple to deny your request without actually reading the proposal. Seriously, they only skim read what you write. 5. Go to 4

If you want to publish your app, you'll go through this all again with app review.

This process is absolutely maddening and is extremely time consuming. Apple's policies assume you have a large team to manage them, create marketing assets etc.

At bigger companies you escalate thus via your Apple internal contacts who chase things up for you. Indie developer? SOL.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#315

Post by giobox »

jedberg wrote: post #293
causi wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What bothers me is that it feels like an offense against the entire notion of what a computer is. Yep. One of the most glaring examples of this is the complete extinction of portable backups. Back when I was carrying around a PDA I could plug it in, hit one button, and have a total backup of everything on my device. Plug a blank device in, hit one button, and everything is restored. Today if you want a bulletproof de…

You don't need the internet to backup an iPhone. But you do need a ~Mac~ Computer. Edit: Mac -> computer

Exactly! You can still backup/restore an iPhone locally offline just like the PDA example, even with a Windows PC:

> https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/back-up-iphone-iph3ec....

I don't understand OPs problem with cloud backups being charged for? Many people (myself included) are storing terabytes of images/videos in their cloud backups. While I think the free tier could offer more than 5gb, its not unreasonable to charge for larger cloud backups, Android does the same thing.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#316

Post by frosted-flakes »

jedberg wrote: post #293
causi wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What bothers me is that it feels like an offense against the entire notion of what a computer is. Yep. One of the most glaring examples of this is the complete extinction of portable backups. Back when I was carrying around a PDA I could plug it in, hit one button, and have a total backup of everything on my device. Plug a blank device in, hit one button, and everything is restored. Today if you want a bulletproof de…

You don't need the internet to backup an iPhone. But you do need a ~Mac~ Computer. Edit: Mac -> computer

Itunes on Windows supports device backups just fine.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#317

Post by pmontra »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #168
sramsay wrote: post #68

What 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…

> What bothers me is that it feels like an offense against the entire notion of a computer is . Yeah, as others are also saying, welcome to the 21st Century where they're not really computers anymore that they're selling. Your mistake is to still believe that they are. I view the phone the way perhaps a ham (ham radio operator) viewed the transistor radio. For those of us where a computer is a tool to build with, a t…

Porting to mobile for my own projects means to build a web site that I can also use on my phone in Firefox.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#318

Post by Tijdreiziger »

closeparen wrote: post #265
JohnFen wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Crazy to me that people want to go back there. It's not so crazy if you understand that there are people who want to be able to have complete control over their own machines. These modern security measures trade that control for security. But there are many circumstances where that tradeoff is undesirable. Perhaps the machine will never be connected to a network. Perhaps the owner of that machine is willing and abl…

Then they can use devices and operating systems with that philosophy. A Linux sysadmin absolutely can and should be free to do whatever they need to their company’s servers. Instead people are angry about the existence of any consumer device with barriers to arbitrary code execution.

The broader problem then becomes the smartphone duopoly. You can choose Android instead of Apple, but this is a compromise in terms of privacy. You can also choose an alternative Android distribution or a Linux phone, but this is a compromise in terms of being able to run apps.

Video game consoles are just as locked down as iPhones, but ~nobody complains about that since you can just buy a PC instead. There is no good equivalent (in terms of compatibility and privacy) to iPhone/Android, though.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#319

Post by Tijdreiziger »

simonh wrote: post #296
sramsay wrote: post #68

What 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…

You can program iOS devices to do something new, but there are a few limitations on how that is made available. You can develop full blown iPhone and iPad apps right there on the device on an iPad using Swift Playgrounds. There are numerous third party development environments available that run on the iPhone and iPad, in languages like Python, Lua and Basic, some of which you can even publish to the App Store. I’ve…

I would call that 'somewhat programmable' at best, but certainly not 'highly' so.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#320

Post by gnarbarian »

anigbrowl wrote: post #259
gnarbarian wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

any tool can be used for good or evil. To stop people from doing bad things we need to focus on correcting people's behaviors not on crippling our tools.

This is generally correct. But at the same time, it's facile to ignore the existence of network effects that arise from increased connectivity, and the way they shift incentives. They are not just 'our' tools ( qua individual owners), because they leverage a massive shared infrastructure of standards, data sharing, and re-transmission. What you're offering here is not an argument but a mental block to actually thinki…

specific remedies cannot be prescribed for abstract problems. We deal with those problems as we always have, through cultural and legal reinforcement.

Our culture informs us of what is socially acceptable (theft, greed, dishonesty etc) and meters out justice through our real social networks of family and friends. For issues that raise to a level of criminality we use the legal system.

I also think it's perfectly fine to make use of technology for selfish ends. That's the real reason competitive market economies function more effectively than command economies. When we all act out of our own self interest we buy the best value good and reward the most efficient producer. (Thiel argues with this and I admit this pattern does not hold in markets with monopolies, cartels, or regulatory capture)

Post reply on HN