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

521–530 of 535 posts

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#521

Post by Forgeties79 »

sowbug wrote: post #98
Forgeties79 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get around it though? Genuinely asking. I guess you try to source your own parts outside of controlling companies and only work on open source OS's and software run by super transparent groups? It just seems like a ton of work for something that might not even be viable. I don't know how I could possibly operate outside of apple, microsoft, google, etc. all of which have massive ethical issues. To be very…

Apple products are good but not unique. Plenty of alternatives exist. There are some people who prefer to be friends only with other friends whose iMessage bubbles are the right color. That problem solves itself through attrition. Developing for that ecosystem is a tougher question, because Apple has made it hard to do so legally without buying their products. But if your objections are based on personal values, pres…

>Apple products are good but not unique. Plenty of alternatives exist.

It's less about Apple and more that I need to be able to stably/reliably run Adobe Premiere, FCPX, DaVinci Resolve, and more + plug-ins

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#522

Post by wepzen »

Terretta wrote: post #465
josephg wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I joke that modern devices with modern social media act more like a taxi for the mind. Programming on an iPad? Forget it. Have you thought about doom scrolling instead?

> Programming on an iPad? Forget it. Have you thought about doom scrolling instead? Current 13" iPad Pro beats original Macbook Airs for dev, plenty people used them. I'd argue toolchains readily available on iPad Pro with real keyboard and trackpad today is better than any laptop any devs did work on two decades ago. Stage Manager, in particular, lets you have main + 4 more windows open to swap with a thumb tap, not…

I completely agree that the latest iPad Pro is a powerful device that can handle development tasks with ease, but I'd like to offer a few points of consideration:

1- While VDIs can be useful options for remote development, I have found that the user experience can be negatively affected by lag or other performance issues.

2- I would not consider Cloud9 to be a recommended solution, as it might be considered outdated compared to newer solutions.

3- While Codespaces could be an alternative solution, it does not offer the same level of security as other options like VDIs.

One alternative that I would suggest exploring is the use of secure containerized environments (CDEs), such as those offered by Strong Network (https://strong.network/). I work there myself, so I may be biased. But from my experience, these environments offer a more secure and stable environment for development work, without the potential lag and other issues that can come up with VDIs or other web-based IDEs.

Of course, the choice of tool ultimately depends on your specific needs and preferences. If you're looking for personal use, GitPod handles things very well. And if you prefer to stay within the GitHub ecosystem, then Codespaces may be the way to go.

Hope that helps!

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#523

Post by NoLinkToMe »

stakhanov wrote: post #247
_trackno5 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn’t he complain about it though? If nobody complains there’s no chance things will change. Sure people could vote with their feet, but not everyone is willing to do that. They should still be allowed to ask for improvements.

But his unwillingness to vote with his feet is the actual message here. He's basically saying: Here are the horrible things that Apple is doing to me and yet I'm still giving them my money and investing myself in their developer ecosystem. That's how much I love them, for some reason that remains unstated in the article. That's what the parent commenter alluded to: There's some really weird psychology happening here,…

Meh, bit of a knee-jerk reaction. Literally every bad thing that happens in one's life, triggering a complaint, could be met by the response: 'then just vote with your feet.'

Bad marriage? Find another partner. Bad employer? Find a different job. Crappy friends? Ditch em and try another.

Of course that's an option that should always be on the table. But I hope you agree the first approach is to try to fix things, to try to start a dialogue, to raise awareness and come up with solutions. It adds little to the conversation to just say: 'why don't you just ditch it altogether?' It's lazy and in fact it's often bad advise to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Apple provides tremendous value to its customer base (hence the trillion dollar market value, that isn't just from consumer charity or corporate monopoly, but mostly from real value) and having to pay $8 a month for the 0.1% of Apple users who build Apps but don't distribute and cannot be bothered to renew a weekly certificate, is generally not a good enough reason to exclude yourself from using one of the world's most mainstream personal computing & communications platforms.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#524

Post by sowbug »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #521
sowbug wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple products are good but not unique. Plenty of alternatives exist. There are some people who prefer to be friends only with other friends whose iMessage bubbles are the right color. That problem solves itself through attrition. Developing for that ecosystem is a tougher question, because Apple has made it hard to do so legally without buying their products. But if your objections are based on personal values, pres…

>Apple products are good but not unique. Plenty of alternatives exist. It's less about Apple and more that I need to be able to stably/reliably run Adobe Premiere, FCPX, DaVinci Resolve, and more + plug-ins

As someone else pointed out, your reply expanded the parent's concern from anti-Apple to anti-all-big-tech. My reply continued with the original "I never buy Apple products" sentiment. I'm not an Apple fan. I don't have much of a problem with the other companies.

Switch to Windows. All those programs are available on that platform (I have never heard of FCPX, so that might be an exception). You'll be just as productive, and you won't find the ecosystem as stifling as Apple's.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#525

Post by fragmede »

sowbug wrote: post #524
Forgeties79 wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Apple products are good but not unique. Plenty of alternatives exist. It's less about Apple and more that I need to be able to stably/reliably run Adobe Premiere, FCPX, DaVinci Resolve, and more + plug-ins

As someone else pointed out, your reply expanded the parent's concern from anti-Apple to anti-all-big-tech. My reply continued with the original "I never buy Apple products" sentiment. I'm not an Apple fan. I don't have much of a problem with the other companies. Switch to Windows. All those programs are available on that platform (I have never heard of FCPX, so that might be an exception). You'll be just as producti…

FCPX = Final Cut Pro X, Apple's NLE.

Almost all the same functionality can be found in the other NLEs, but if your workflow involves handling client's FCPX (and/or iMovie - which is very popular on iPhone) projects, you're forced to use macOS.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#526

Post by jjav »

yamtaddle wrote: post #514
jjav wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that I constantly have to fiddle with the damn things is why I don't ride more. Nothing turns more people away from riding bikes than entry-level bikes. Which is unfortunate. Yes, they're constantly needing work and adjustment and never quite shift or brake well. It doesn't have to be that way though. Mid to top tier components are very reliable and work so much better, even when old. It makes a night and…

I think I'm kinda in the same place I was with computers, years ago: I've bought very-cheap, I've bought a notch or two above very-cheap, and I've seen both suck about equally, so it's damn hard to convince myself that the solution to my problem is spending more money. But it's probably true. And I know it's not exactly fair but I can't stop comparing bikes to cars. The amount and preciousness of the materials, the l…

> But no, $200 won't do it. $300 probably won't, even. Not for a new bike, anyway.

These days more like 5K to 10K+ unfortunately.

The trick is buying used. But for someone new to cycling, it's easy to get scammed into a bad deal when buying used, so that's not a great solution either.

If you're familiar enough with the components to evaluate them on a used bike, great deals can be had. My first mountain bike (which I still have) was a very expensive model when new (S-Works, which is the Specialized top of the line) that I got for cheap when it was 5-6 years old. It's almost 20 years old now and still everything works perfectly, buttery smooth shifting, etc.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#527

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

burnte wrote: post #462
sokoloff wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right-click open, click open one time ever is well below my personal threshold for annoying.

How do you right-click on an iPhone or iPad? That's what his comment is about.

It wasn't and I'm not a guy.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#528

Post by gjpolly »

closeparen wrote: post #176
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…

I grew up at a time when a computer was a thing that any website you accidentally clicked on could totally and permanently hijack. I don't miss it. One-click zero-friction execution of arbitrary code with the full privileges of your user account was a bad and wrong design. Malware scanning, signatures, and heuristics were a hilariously inadequate answer to the risks. One of the best things that's ever happened in com…

Those are the same concerns I hear from my grandma.

Fortunately systems are designed for multi users, with sandboxes and access controls and heuristics now, and it's less of a problem for most people.

Our ability to sideload apps, or install pwa that are full featured doesn't need to affect your safe little bubble of protection. You'll be ok, I promise.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#529

Post by phendrenad2 »

latexr wrote: post #472
phendrenad2 wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft does the same thing. Apple hardware is also said to be overpriced compared to comparable Windows hardware. So, how much do these factors play into Apple charging $99/year for XCode, and Windows having a free IDE? Or can we just give up on trying to track a few dollars through a trillion-dollar company already? Sheeesh.

> Microsoft does the same thing. Yes, I responded to and directly quoted someone making that point. > Apple charging $99/year for XCode, and Windows having a free IDE? Apple doesn’t charge for Xcode. It is free and you can get it as a direct download or from the Mac App Store. The $99/year is so you can sign software. > Or can we just give up on trying to track a few dollars through a trillion-dollar company already?…

My point was pretty clear. Apple is a huge company, and allowing every single developer on earth to skip the $99/year fee is unlikely to make any difference to their bottom-line. So why do they do it? There's some obvious reason that this article is missing, because it's focusing on this tiny monetary amount as though it's a huge onerous fee (which might be true in the author's country, to be fair). If you look at the bigger picture, there's more to it than Apple making $99 bucks off of devs.

Re: Apple doesn’t want you developing hobby apps

#530

Post by ib33 »

bobleeswagger wrote: post #337
ib33 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is 20% of the monthly minimum wage in some countries.

> if you are truly spending time with the platform I don't think folks who make $500 a month are going to have an Apple computer and the time to develop. Why are you using illogical examples to make your point?

A few years ago I was earning less than $500 a month (based on exchange rates), had an Apple computer (years behind the latest) and had time to develop. I've left the country now.

If I remember correctly, I discovered this timeout existed when I tried to show someone a mobile game I had built with Unity3d.

Privilege is blinding.

Post reply on HN