4 ms·

Apple gear is no longer as comparatively expensive as it used to be -- they aren't ripping you off, they have put a lot of work into delivering different 'gear'

by rbrtl 7y ago

Apple gear is no longer as comparatively expensive as it used to be -- they aren't ripping you off, they have put a lot of work into delivering different 'gear' to what's available in the rest of the market. Shed a tear for people who buy HP and need a new laptop every year or two. I'm typing this on a 7-year old MacBook Pro, which works better than the day I bought it. Hosting an app marketplace is not a free endeavour either. They host infrastructure to facilitate all of this, and they review app code in an attempt to prevent malware being distributed by underhanded developers. Maybe they could vary the price based on the use case, but why should they? No one is compelled to publish on the App Store, why complicate their business model to give themselves more work for less money.

dessant 7y ago
> Apple gear is no longer as comparatively expensive as it used to be It still is if one can't afford it. Apple could provide macOS and iOS VirtualBox images for developers to build and test their apps. > why complicate their business model to give themselves more work for less money. Because that's the right thing to do when you shut out indie developers using expensive equipment and annual developer fees. Developers who aren't affluent or don't get into app development solely for profit may stay away from the Apple ecosystem, and that's a loss for everyone. Apple is now also selling access to their user base on macOS. Apps distributed outside the Mac App Store must be notarized to run on macOS, which requires a developer account ($99/yr). Yes, workarounds do exist for now, but all of them are inconvenient enough that they seriously hurt the distribution of open source apps, unless maintainers pay up.
- scarface74 7y ago
  If you can’t afford $900 for a Mac Mini and a 1 year developer license and can’t sell anyone on letting you borrow the money, is it really a great idea that would stand out among the million of apps out there? Also, you don’t have to buy a Mac. You could always pay Mac Mini Colo $80 a month and develop remotely.
  - dessant 7y ago
    There are places where people make less than $80/mo, but they still have dreams and awesome ideas, and to deny them the opportunity to start programming and share their work because they can't afford to pay up is apalling.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      A quick Google search shows you can buy a perfectly usable 2014 refurbished Mac Mini for $300 and you would still need at least one iPhone to test on. How much would a PC cost that could hypothetically run MscOS in a VM well enough to run XCode? Is it also “appalling” that if I had a great idea for a PS4 game I would have to pay at least $2500 if Sony would even let me buy one? https://www.polygon.com/2013/7/24/4553842/so-how-much-does-it-cost-to-develop-for-playstation-4 https://www.polygon.com/2013/7/24/4553842/so-how-much-does-i...
      - jhasse 7y ago
        > Is it also “appalling” that if I had a great idea for a PS4 game I would have to pay at least $2500 if Sony would even let me buy one? Yes.
  - codetrotter 7y ago
    > You could always pay Mac Mini Colo $80 a month and develop remotely. In my country, one of the electronics stores has this thing where you pay about 35 USD per month, each month for 24 months, to have a MacBook Air in your possession, but which you don't own. So I guess in a way it is sort of rent/leasing. But the nice thing is that after the 24 months are up, you will be able to exchange it for a new model. It's sort of like how mobile carriers do with mobile phones also sometimes. Except in this case of the MacBook Air that you are paying to have in your possession, there is no additional subscription to anything (unlike with the cellphones that mobile carriers charge you in a similar way for, but where in addition to paying for the phone you also need a to pay for subscription to a carrier plan). I looked at the deal, considered it, and took it. My reasoning went that, over the span of 2 years battery life will probably degrade to the point that I want to replace the laptop after that. (Battery life was one of the major reasons I was looking to replace my previous laptop in the first place). And for the amount of money that you'd sell a two year old laptop, it will probably have lost about as much in value as what I am paying these guys to rent/lease the thing. (Obviously not quite the same, since they are making money from this deal. But close enough.) So I went ahead and took the deal. They tried to sell me on insurance for it too. Guess that is one way for them to make a bit extra on the deal. I am generally careful with my stuff and I do have some home insurance plan already that should cover at least a bit of it if I do end up accidentally damaging the laptop. I was very happy with that decision and continue to be so. It might not be for everyone, but for me it was a very suitable deal.

by rbrtl 7y ago

dessant 7y ago

> Apple gear is no longer as comparatively expensive as it used to be It still is if one can't afford it. Apple could provide macOS and iOS VirtualBox images for developers to build and test their apps. > why complicate their business model to give themselves more work for less money. Because that's the right thing to do when you shut out indie developers using expensive equipment and annual developer fees. Developers who aren't affluent or don't get into app development solely for profit may stay away from the Apple ecosystem, and that's a loss for everyone. Apple is now also selling access to their user base on macOS. Apps distributed outside the Mac App Store must be notarized to run on macOS, which requires a developer account ($99/yr). Yes, workarounds do exist for now, but all of them are inconvenient enough that they seriously hurt the distribution of open source apps, unless maintainers pay up.

scarface74 7y ago
If you can’t afford $900 for a Mac Mini and a 1 year developer license and can’t sell anyone on letting you borrow the money, is it really a great idea that would stand out among the million of apps out there? Also, you don’t have to buy a Mac. You could always pay Mac Mini Colo $80 a month and develop remotely.
- dessant 7y ago
  There are places where people make less than $80/mo, but they still have dreams and awesome ideas, and to deny them the opportunity to start programming and share their work because they can't afford to pay up is apalling.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    A quick Google search shows you can buy a perfectly usable 2014 refurbished Mac Mini for $300 and you would still need at least one iPhone to test on. How much would a PC cost that could hypothetically run MscOS in a VM well enough to run XCode? Is it also “appalling” that if I had a great idea for a PS4 game I would have to pay at least $2500 if Sony would even let me buy one? https://www.polygon.com/2013/7/24/4553842/so-how-much-does-it-cost-to-develop-for-playstation-4 https://www.polygon.com/2013/7/24/4553842/so-how-much-does-i...
    - jhasse 7y ago
      > Is it also “appalling” that if I had a great idea for a PS4 game I would have to pay at least $2500 if Sony would even let me buy one? Yes.
- codetrotter 7y ago
  > You could always pay Mac Mini Colo $80 a month and develop remotely. In my country, one of the electronics stores has this thing where you pay about 35 USD per month, each month for 24 months, to have a MacBook Air in your possession, but which you don't own. So I guess in a way it is sort of rent/leasing. But the nice thing is that after the 24 months are up, you will be able to exchange it for a new model. It's sort of like how mobile carriers do with mobile phones also sometimes. Except in this case of the MacBook Air that you are paying to have in your possession, there is no additional subscription to anything (unlike with the cellphones that mobile carriers charge you in a similar way for, but where in addition to paying for the phone you also need a to pay for subscription to a carrier plan). I looked at the deal, considered it, and took it. My reasoning went that, over the span of 2 years battery life will probably degrade to the point that I want to replace the laptop after that. (Battery life was one of the major reasons I was looking to replace my previous laptop in the first place). And for the amount of money that you'd sell a two year old laptop, it will probably have lost about as much in value as what I am paying these guys to rent/lease the thing. (Obviously not quite the same, since they are making money from this deal. But close enough.) So I went ahead and took the deal. They tried to sell me on insurance for it too. Guess that is one way for them to make a bit extra on the deal. I am generally careful with my stuff and I do have some home insurance plan already that should cover at least a bit of it if I do end up accidentally damaging the laptop. I was very happy with that decision and continue to be so. It might not be for everyone, but for me it was a very suitable deal.