6 ms·

If you make something like say, oh an email client, excluding the 1.5 BILLION people on the iOS platform is not just a handicap, it makes your entire business n

If you make something like say, oh an email client, excluding the 1.5 BILLION people on the iOS platform is not just a handicap, it makes your entire business non-viable. So now Apple is the gatekeeper of new businesses and services. Fortune 500's and small one man shops alike have been terrified to speak up against Apple, because Apple has the ability to deliver a death-sentence by kicking you out of their store on a whim or simply because an app reviewer takes a personal interest in you. I think what the Basecamp folks want is entirely reasonable, and Apple's behavior is entirely anti-competitive: Basecamp doesn't care to be in the app store, nor do they want to benefit from the app store discovery and other services for free. What they want is the OPTION to have a link on their web page, that when clicked, prompts the user to install the notarized/signed/whatever application. Basically you'd just have the "double click the power button twice to install" card pop-up immediately, bypassing the entire store. Do that, and Apple can charge whatever they want in the store. Suggestions that this somehow subverts the quality of the platform or the experience is entirely bullshit, Basecamp pays their developer fees and notarizes their apps on Mac, there's zero reason this wouldn't work on iOS except Apple's greed and anti-competitive behavior, and let's not forget that sweet, sweet 30% cut of every single business and service under the sun.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago
This is simply not true. There are more on the android platform, and therefore enough for viability. The reality is people want all the benefits of the iOS world without paying anything for it.
- learc83 6y ago
  >There are more on the android platform, and therefore enough for viability. Is that true for customers who are interested in a high end email service that costs $100 a year? I'd wager that the vast majority of people in that segment are on iPhones.
  - ntsplnkv2 6y ago
    Honestly, I don't think that segment really exists. The ones that would search that out will just as likely be on android as iPhone. If 33% of such an app is enough to cause this much angst, it makes me think it just isn't that popular.
    - learc83 6y ago
      >Honestly, I don't think that segment really exists. The ones that would search that out will just as likely be on android as iPhone. Why. The type of people who want a curated mail experience might just happen to be the type of people who like the curated iPhone experience. >If 33% of such an app is enough to cause this much angst, it makes me think it just isn't that popular. Why 33%? If you're right and they're just as likely to seek out android it's going to be 50%. If I'm right it's going to be much higher than that. Where are you getting 33% from?
      - ntsplnkv2 6y ago
        > Why. The type of people who want a curated mail experience might just happen to be the type of people who like the curated iPhone experience. Even if this were true (doubtful), that doesn't mean there is a segment. A handful may like this application. I can't imagine the market for a ridiculously expensive email client that isn't functional is large. In fact, it's so small, that it can't take the shock of paying 15-30% fee for the advertisement, easy transfer to customer, easy place for reviews, and updates, in other words, a platform with access to a large array of consumers willing to spend for good software. What's more likely is this - the app is struggling to make money, they cheated the rules and they know it, so why not turn it into a marketing campaign. Apple the big bad (meanwhile the company cheated the system, while developers who followed the rules get screwed). > Why 33%? If you're right and they're just as likely to seek out android it's going to be 50%. If I'm right it's going to be much higher than that. Where are you getting 33% from? I'm not sure what you're talking about, could you be more clear? 33% really means the 15-30% of revenue that apple takes. I just rounded up to about a third. The fact is the App Store wall entry fee is fair. It's not exorbitant. If you don't like it make a web app. There are too many remedies for this, and there are far bigger fish to fry in anti-trust than this.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago

This is simply not true. There are more on the android platform, and therefore enough for viability. The reality is people want all the benefits of the iOS world without paying anything for it.

learc83 6y ago
>There are more on the android platform, and therefore enough for viability. Is that true for customers who are interested in a high end email service that costs $100 a year? I'd wager that the vast majority of people in that segment are on iPhones.
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  Honestly, I don't think that segment really exists. The ones that would search that out will just as likely be on android as iPhone. If 33% of such an app is enough to cause this much angst, it makes me think it just isn't that popular.
  - learc83 6y ago
    >Honestly, I don't think that segment really exists. The ones that would search that out will just as likely be on android as iPhone. Why. The type of people who want a curated mail experience might just happen to be the type of people who like the curated iPhone experience. >If 33% of such an app is enough to cause this much angst, it makes me think it just isn't that popular. Why 33%? If you're right and they're just as likely to seek out android it's going to be 50%. If I'm right it's going to be much higher than that. Where are you getting 33% from?
    - ntsplnkv2 6y ago
      > Why. The type of people who want a curated mail experience might just happen to be the type of people who like the curated iPhone experience. Even if this were true (doubtful), that doesn't mean there is a segment. A handful may like this application. I can't imagine the market for a ridiculously expensive email client that isn't functional is large. In fact, it's so small, that it can't take the shock of paying 15-30% fee for the advertisement, easy transfer to customer, easy place for reviews, and updates, in other words, a platform with access to a large array of consumers willing to spend for good software. What's more likely is this - the app is struggling to make money, they cheated the rules and they know it, so why not turn it into a marketing campaign. Apple the big bad (meanwhile the company cheated the system, while developers who followed the rules get screwed). > Why 33%? If you're right and they're just as likely to seek out android it's going to be 50%. If I'm right it's going to be much higher than that. Where are you getting 33% from? I'm not sure what you're talking about, could you be more clear? 33% really means the 15-30% of revenue that apple takes. I just rounded up to about a third. The fact is the App Store wall entry fee is fair. It's not exorbitant. If you don't like it make a web app. There are too many remedies for this, and there are far bigger fish to fry in anti-trust than this.