10 ms·

"Before they go on our store, all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playi

by bsaul 6y ago

"Before they go on our store, all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playing field to developers." As an iphone customer and an iphone developer, let me just say apple can just go f* themselves... This hypocrisy is making me mad. the OS is secure, the access permissions are secure, at this point the only thing they need to ensure is that the game store isn't a scam and then it'll be fine. So, please, stop pretending it's to protect anyone (or in this case macOS doesn't provide a secure environment, right ?). Just admit it's for your own personal greed, and that you're leveraging a totally unfair position to impose your app store to win against its competitors.

marta_morena_25 6y ago
You must be mad a lot. This is how the world works and Apple is nothing to single out here.
- echelon 6y ago
  > This is how the world works It's broken, and the government is going to slap the shit out of Apple. The App Store eats away more profit than taxes, and is single handedly responsible for teaching the public that an eternity of app updates are for free. They drove the public to expect apps should be cheaper than coffee.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    > They drove the public to expect apps should be cheaper than coffee. I don't understand - did Apple set app prices? Or did the app developers?
    - spanhandler 6y ago
      It's exactly what you'd expect from a low-friction, highly competitive marketplace. They eat everyone's profit in a hurry. That Apple was able to take a 30% cut while this happened leads me to believe they did an incredibly good job of creating a low-friction, highly competitive marketplace. Now, contrary to econ 101 thought experiments, you don't always want to approach the ideal of perfectly-competitive marketplaces too closely. It can be bad for overall market health and even, ultimately, harm choices available to consumers for exactly the reasons cited. [EDIT] actually it could also indicate that they've done one part of market-creation really poorly, which is that they're making reliable information other than price way too hard to discover, though again, that the market has not just survived this defect/cost but thrived indicates they did an uncommonly good job at other parts.
  - mimsee 6y ago
    > They drove the public to expect apps should be cheaper than coffee. While still continuing to charge the developer 99USD a year.
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      This is the least of the problems of trying to earn money on the App Store.
  - zepto 6y ago
    How did Apple teach the public this? My recollection was that if anyone taught this to the public it was the press and the blogosphere. This argument was had at the time, and review sites vilified anything that wasn’t $1 as greed. Can you say what Apple did that contributed to this?
    - hboon 6y ago
      Couple of things: * iOS upgrades were free and macOS upgrades turned free a few years after the iOS App Store became available * the lower price tiers available for app developers started with 0 and $1, and in steps of $1 * for many years, the iOS App Store free and paid charts were huge drivers for downloads. It was worth making an app much cheaper and making it up in volume. That strategy worked for many years. Apple cultivated that environment and developers lived it
      - zepto 6y ago
        I don’t think Apple set the standard for free software updates - they just needed to do that to compete with VC and Adversing funded Browsers and web apps. That is where the idea that software should be free or cheap came from. As for ‘allowing’ one dollar apps. It seems like you are proposing that Apple should be punished for not entering into a price fixing arrangement to artificially inflate software prices. I have some sympathy for wishing they had done this, but this is exactly what they tried with books, and they were subjected to antitrust action. Keeping prices artificially high is illegal - you can’t blame Apple for not doing it. Making software free or cheap was already a fait accompli, thanks to the web and VC funded startups. Apple actually reversed that partially by creating a store that was trustworthy enough for people to spend some money on software again. It is simply not true that Apple caused the race to the bottom. Look back at media from the time and you can confirm this.
        hboon 6y ago
        I don’t think they had to do anything illegal. One of the things they could have done much earlier can be felt in the App Store nowadays. Notice the lack of emphasis on charts now. It’s not perfect now, but developer laments that getting featured doesn’t drive sales like it did before (because chatting didn’t have the kind of up front visibility and that features don’t last for an entire week anymore). That’s a good thing. There is always downward pressure on prices because well-funded startups can provide their product free. But charts and the emphasis on them were very very unhealthy. I don’t think Apple can ever fix it now. This is a serious problem for the entire consumer and prosumer industry. While competition that drives prices down is often good, but past a certain limit and it can do long term harm to the industry that is irreversible. I fear we might have already crossed that threshold.
  - vezycash 6y ago
    > It's broken, and the government is going to slap the shit out of Apple. I doubt it. Apple would get out it like they got out of their European Tax-ish.
- mitchdoogle 6y ago
  This article and thread is about Apple though. Why would they not be the subject of consternation? The world has worked in many different ways before, and will work in different ways in the future. Let's have a discussion about how we'd like to see it work, ya?
- bravoetch 6y ago
  > This is how the world works "It is what it is"
- patmorgan23 6y ago
  Doesn't mean we have to be happy about it or accept it
grecy 6y ago
> "all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playing field to developers." It's impressive Apple so blatantly say this when we know for a fact big companies get a different/better deal. Everyone is equal, some are just more equal, it seems. I hope a large company/developer/celebrity with a massive following will pressure Apple/Tim Cook into responding to this hypocrisy. I realize Apple are in the business to make money, but it's insulting for them to say "Everyone gets the same deal" when that is clearly not true.
- coldtea 6y ago
  A better deal (money wise etc) is different than "the same set of guidelines" (code check, features wise). They've cut apps from big companies like Microsoft (now, with their game platform) and Amazon (Kindle purchases) in the past...
  - madeofpalk 6y ago
    Select developers get special entitlements and access that other developers do not get https://twitter.com/steipete/status/1288156232717606912 https://twitter.com/steipete/status/1288156232717606912
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    Apple does not use the same set of guidelines.
Shivetya 6y ago
Just two thoughts. We do not know if the MacOS store will undergo a similar transformation if not outright rebranding so that it follows the same rules. It is possible if they continue down this path they will be the only members of their walled garden and this segment of the industry will pass them by; streaming of games and shows and possibly just hosting apps remotely. addendum, there are times where I think they are asking to be regulated, perhaps just to see how far they can go or to get regulation which prevents or limits future competition
- tornato7 6y ago
  I really appreciate having the MacOS app store as a sort of "trusted" alternative to downloading off the web. That said I can't ever see Apple removing the ability to download applications from untrusted sources, like they did with iPhone.
  - encom 6y ago
    Really? I can absolutely see that. It seems OSX has been creeping towards that for some time, and now they're moving to ARM and stuffing their machines with "security" chips, it's getting more and more locked down. Macintosh computers are steadily becoming iPads with hardware keyboards.
    - madeofpalk 6y ago
      That is just not backed up in the actual events of what they are doing. If there was ever a time to do this it would be right now as they undergo changing Mac to ARM, but they're not.
      - olyjohn 6y ago
        I don't think the right time to make that transition is while they're trying to switch to ARM. Right now, they're probably trying to get things switched by making as few changes as possible. That eases the transition for everybody. I'm not sure why they would want to deal with both things at the same time. They are both huge undertakings. Not to mention, the two things are really unrelated. Besides, how does CPU architecture affect the ability to lock the OS into only running App Store apps?
coldtea 6y ago
>So, please, stop pretending it's to protect anyone (or in this case macOS doesn't provide a secure environment, right ?). Well, ultimately, it is. If a "store within a store" (or a second independent store) gets too much traction, it will hold the platform back. If such a store/third entity becomes powerful Apple can't direct the future and make the changes it wants (the jump to Apple Sillicon is just a recent example, deprecating Carbon, notarization, etc) but has to placate to that too, or risk the ire of tons of dependent users. Apple has seen that play out when it gave too much power to Adobe, MS and others, and has been correcting for that ever since Jobs came back...
- echelon 6y ago
  > Well, ultimately, it is. If a "store within a store" (or a second independent store) gets too much traction, it will hold the platform back. A better solution would be for the DOJ to force Apple to allow other app stores and open installs. > If such a store/third entity becomes powerful Apple can't direct the future and make the changes it wants (the jump to Apple Sillicon is just a recent example, deprecating Carbon, notarization, etc) but has to placate to that too, or risk the ire of tons of dependent users. Where is that a problem in reality? They've changed their desktop architecture, and that's a completely open platform. > Apple has seen that play out when it gave too much power to Adobe, MS and others, and has been correcting for that ever since Jobs came back... Apple built something that is now widely used for conducting business, finance, communication, etc. They no longer deserve to have a singular stranglehold on it. The world depends on iPhone, and it needs to be opened up.
  - ryandrake 6y ago
    As a former iOS developer and a user, I'm torn. AppStore's rules are frustrating and unevenly applied, and it sucks that AppStore is the only way to distribute apps. On the other hand, as a user I don't want 20 goddamn app stores on my device. Want Portal 2? Go download Steam! Want Fortnight? Go download Epic store! Minecraft? Windows store! It's horrible.
    - ubercow13 6y ago
appleflaxen 6y ago
> As an iphone customer and an iphone developer... if you really cared, you would vote against them with your dollar.
- EForEndeavour 6y ago
  I think it's implied that they likely will in the future. They just mention their experience an Apple developer to convey that they know more about what they're talking about than average.
- prewett 6y ago
  The problem with that argument is that you don't get a line-item vote. I can't vote security +1, privacy +1, curated app store +1, no streaming services -1. I can't go to Apple and say "I'd love to buy an iPhone, but I want a $50 discount because you won't enable streaming games."
- bsaul 6y ago
  that's absolutely what i intend to do with my next phone. However, as a professional, i'm a bit stuck with that ecosystem (or google's one, which isn't much better, for other reasons)
mdoms 6y ago
> As an iphone customer and an iphone developer, let me just say apple can just go f* themselves But you keep buying their product, so apparently... you can?
- untog 6y ago
  What are they supposed to do, try to return their phone months after buying it?
m3kw9 6y ago
Just as bad is a Dev that feels righteous it don’t understand the finer details on both sides.
tradertef 6y ago
Greed. That's the problem underneath all of this issues Apple is having.
pchristensen 6y ago
I have kids, and one of my primary difficulties is limiting their screen time, and to a lesser extent, content. I appreciate having Apple as one gatekeeper that I can trust and learn to operate. I don't want a Wild West, and I consider these restrictions one of the reasons I pay Apple's premium.
- tpush 6y ago
  The need to filter out content seems orthogonal to Apple not allowing certain content in the first place.
- sarakayakomzin 6y ago
  is it really Apple's responsibility to watch your children for you? maybe we should have our cars locked down to 15MPH to prevent more accidents too.
- bsaul 6y ago
  i'm really having trouble understanding how giving the choice to the people that want to to install a different app store is going to change anything to your situation... I'm not for removing apple's store...
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  Apple allows Candy Crush, Clash of Clans, and all manner of other games using addictive psychological tactics onto the App Store. If you're more concerned about "gamer-centric" titles, there's also Fortnite and F2P versions of Call of Duty. How is not allowing streaming Xbox games limiting screen time?
- Darmody 6y ago
  Your kids could now use my linux machine and they wouldn't be able to install or do any harm at all. Apple's restrictions don't matter at all here.
- kyriakos 6y ago
  Google's Family Link allows very granular control over what your kids do with their devices. The the extend that you get a notification if you want for every app they try to install and won't get installed unless you permit it. You can set time limits not just for screen time but on on a per app basis as well. I don't know how this works but from my experience I found that Google's got this one right.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
faangFar 6y ago
You gave them money after they had been doing this for a decade. You can only blame yourself.
- chrisandchris 6y ago
  While I agree with you from an economical point, I totally disagree because phones are quite a duopoly. Either you go with Apple or you cut your market size in half (depending on where you are, or then it‘s the same with Google). It‘s not like a car dealer where there are probably more than one in your small town each dealing with different brands. There you can ignore one dealer and one brand and you still have enough dealers & brands to select from. With phones you have exactly 2. And at some point you‘ll also want to eat food and not only don‘t do stuff because of reasons.
- wayneftw 6y ago
  Right. Because nobody else will buy an iPhone if I don’t. As a developer, you can’t have a successful app and not be on the Apple app store. Anyway, even if neither of those were true, as human beings we certainly always have the right to talk shit about Apple and tell them to go fuck themselves. Even while we’re using their products. I make sure to cost Apple money by convincing entire companies to not use their stuff. And any Apple products that my family buys aren’t new. We also never buy apps from their app store.
- 013a 6y ago
  If you want to change the US Government, you don't do it by packing up and moving to Japan. "Voting with your wallet" isn't voting for change; it's giving up. Apple can do better, Apple must do better, and they don't listen to people who aren't their customers. Why should they?
  - MrLeap 6y ago
    This positions literally made me guffaw. '"Voting with your wallet" isn't voting for change; it's giving up.' I love the subtext I'm reading that boycotting companies that are doing bad things is for dirty quitters who lack grit. This brings to mind a Musashi quote, from the book of five rings. “You should not have any special fondness for a particular weapon, or anything else, for that matter. Too much is the same as not enough. Without imitating anyone else, you should have as much weaponry as suits you.”

by bsaul 6y ago

marta_morena_25 6y ago

You must be mad a lot. This is how the world works and Apple is nothing to single out here.

echelon 6y ago
> This is how the world works It's broken, and the government is going to slap the shit out of Apple. The App Store eats away more profit than taxes, and is single handedly responsible for teaching the public that an eternity of app updates are for free. They drove the public to expect apps should be cheaper than coffee.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > They drove the public to expect apps should be cheaper than coffee. I don't understand - did Apple set app prices? Or did the app developers?
  - spanhandler 6y ago
    It's exactly what you'd expect from a low-friction, highly competitive marketplace. They eat everyone's profit in a hurry. That Apple was able to take a 30% cut while this happened leads me to believe they did an incredibly good job of creating a low-friction, highly competitive marketplace. Now, contrary to econ 101 thought experiments, you don't always want to approach the ideal of perfectly-competitive marketplaces too closely. It can be bad for overall market health and even, ultimately, harm choices available to consumers for exactly the reasons cited. [EDIT] actually it could also indicate that they've done one part of market-creation really poorly, which is that they're making reliable information other than price way too hard to discover, though again, that the market has not just survived this defect/cost but thrived indicates they did an uncommonly good job at other parts.
- mimsee 6y ago
  > They drove the public to expect apps should be cheaper than coffee. While still continuing to charge the developer 99USD a year.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    This is the least of the problems of trying to earn money on the App Store.
- zepto 6y ago
  How did Apple teach the public this? My recollection was that if anyone taught this to the public it was the press and the blogosphere. This argument was had at the time, and review sites vilified anything that wasn’t $1 as greed. Can you say what Apple did that contributed to this?
  - hboon 6y ago
    Couple of things: * iOS upgrades were free and macOS upgrades turned free a few years after the iOS App Store became available * the lower price tiers available for app developers started with 0 and $1, and in steps of $1 * for many years, the iOS App Store free and paid charts were huge drivers for downloads. It was worth making an app much cheaper and making it up in volume. That strategy worked for many years. Apple cultivated that environment and developers lived it
    - zepto 6y ago
      I don’t think Apple set the standard for free software updates - they just needed to do that to compete with VC and Adversing funded Browsers and web apps. That is where the idea that software should be free or cheap came from. As for ‘allowing’ one dollar apps. It seems like you are proposing that Apple should be punished for not entering into a price fixing arrangement to artificially inflate software prices. I have some sympathy for wishing they had done this, but this is exactly what they tried with books, and they were subjected to antitrust action. Keeping prices artificially high is illegal - you can’t blame Apple for not doing it. Making software free or cheap was already a fait accompli, thanks to the web and VC funded startups. Apple actually reversed that partially by creating a store that was trustworthy enough for people to spend some money on software again. It is simply not true that Apple caused the race to the bottom. Look back at media from the time and you can confirm this.
      - hboon 6y ago
        I don’t think they had to do anything illegal. One of the things they could have done much earlier can be felt in the App Store nowadays. Notice the lack of emphasis on charts now. It’s not perfect now, but developer laments that getting featured doesn’t drive sales like it did before (because chatting didn’t have the kind of up front visibility and that features don’t last for an entire week anymore). That’s a good thing. There is always downward pressure on prices because well-funded startups can provide their product free. But charts and the emphasis on them were very very unhealthy. I don’t think Apple can ever fix it now. This is a serious problem for the entire consumer and prosumer industry. While competition that drives prices down is often good, but past a certain limit and it can do long term harm to the industry that is irreversible. I fear we might have already crossed that threshold.
- vezycash 6y ago
  > It's broken, and the government is going to slap the shit out of Apple. I doubt it. Apple would get out it like they got out of their European Tax-ish.
mitchdoogle 6y ago
This article and thread is about Apple though. Why would they not be the subject of consternation? The world has worked in many different ways before, and will work in different ways in the future. Let's have a discussion about how we'd like to see it work, ya?
bravoetch 6y ago
> This is how the world works "It is what it is"
patmorgan23 6y ago
Doesn't mean we have to be happy about it or accept it

grecy 6y ago

> "all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playing field to developers." It's impressive Apple so blatantly say this when we know for a fact big companies get a different/better deal. Everyone is equal, some are just more equal, it seems. I hope a large company/developer/celebrity with a massive following will pressure Apple/Tim Cook into responding to this hypocrisy. I realize Apple are in the business to make money, but it's insulting for them to say "Everyone gets the same deal" when that is clearly not true.

coldtea 6y ago
A better deal (money wise etc) is different than "the same set of guidelines" (code check, features wise). They've cut apps from big companies like Microsoft (now, with their game platform) and Amazon (Kindle purchases) in the past...
- madeofpalk 6y ago
  Select developers get special entitlements and access that other developers do not get https://twitter.com/steipete/status/1288156232717606912 https://twitter.com/steipete/status/1288156232717606912
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Apple does not use the same set of guidelines.

Shivetya 6y ago

Just two thoughts. We do not know if the MacOS store will undergo a similar transformation if not outright rebranding so that it follows the same rules. It is possible if they continue down this path they will be the only members of their walled garden and this segment of the industry will pass them by; streaming of games and shows and possibly just hosting apps remotely. addendum, there are times where I think they are asking to be regulated, perhaps just to see how far they can go or to get regulation which prevents or limits future competition

tornato7 6y ago
I really appreciate having the MacOS app store as a sort of "trusted" alternative to downloading off the web. That said I can't ever see Apple removing the ability to download applications from untrusted sources, like they did with iPhone.
- encom 6y ago
  Really? I can absolutely see that. It seems OSX has been creeping towards that for some time, and now they're moving to ARM and stuffing their machines with "security" chips, it's getting more and more locked down. Macintosh computers are steadily becoming iPads with hardware keyboards.
  - madeofpalk 6y ago
    That is just not backed up in the actual events of what they are doing. If there was ever a time to do this it would be right now as they undergo changing Mac to ARM, but they're not.
    - olyjohn 6y ago
      I don't think the right time to make that transition is while they're trying to switch to ARM. Right now, they're probably trying to get things switched by making as few changes as possible. That eases the transition for everybody. I'm not sure why they would want to deal with both things at the same time. They are both huge undertakings. Not to mention, the two things are really unrelated. Besides, how does CPU architecture affect the ability to lock the OS into only running App Store apps?

coldtea 6y ago

>So, please, stop pretending it's to protect anyone (or in this case macOS doesn't provide a secure environment, right ?). Well, ultimately, it is. If a "store within a store" (or a second independent store) gets too much traction, it will hold the platform back. If such a store/third entity becomes powerful Apple can't direct the future and make the changes it wants (the jump to Apple Sillicon is just a recent example, deprecating Carbon, notarization, etc) but has to placate to that too, or risk the ire of tons of dependent users. Apple has seen that play out when it gave too much power to Adobe, MS and others, and has been correcting for that ever since Jobs came back...

echelon 6y ago
> Well, ultimately, it is. If a "store within a store" (or a second independent store) gets too much traction, it will hold the platform back. A better solution would be for the DOJ to force Apple to allow other app stores and open installs. > If such a store/third entity becomes powerful Apple can't direct the future and make the changes it wants (the jump to Apple Sillicon is just a recent example, deprecating Carbon, notarization, etc) but has to placate to that too, or risk the ire of tons of dependent users. Where is that a problem in reality? They've changed their desktop architecture, and that's a completely open platform. > Apple has seen that play out when it gave too much power to Adobe, MS and others, and has been correcting for that ever since Jobs came back... Apple built something that is now widely used for conducting business, finance, communication, etc. They no longer deserve to have a singular stranglehold on it. The world depends on iPhone, and it needs to be opened up.
- ryandrake 6y ago
  As a former iOS developer and a user, I'm torn. AppStore's rules are frustrating and unevenly applied, and it sucks that AppStore is the only way to distribute apps. On the other hand, as a user I don't want 20 goddamn app stores on my device. Want Portal 2? Go download Steam! Want Fortnight? Go download Epic store! Minecraft? Windows store! It's horrible.
  - ubercow13 6y ago

appleflaxen 6y ago

> As an iphone customer and an iphone developer... if you really cared, you would vote against them with your dollar.

EForEndeavour 6y ago
I think it's implied that they likely will in the future. They just mention their experience an Apple developer to convey that they know more about what they're talking about than average.
prewett 6y ago
The problem with that argument is that you don't get a line-item vote. I can't vote security +1, privacy +1, curated app store +1, no streaming services -1. I can't go to Apple and say "I'd love to buy an iPhone, but I want a $50 discount because you won't enable streaming games."
bsaul 6y ago
that's absolutely what i intend to do with my next phone. However, as a professional, i'm a bit stuck with that ecosystem (or google's one, which isn't much better, for other reasons)

mdoms 6y ago

> As an iphone customer and an iphone developer, let me just say apple can just go f* themselves But you keep buying their product, so apparently... you can?

untog 6y ago
What are they supposed to do, try to return their phone months after buying it?

m3kw9 6y ago

Just as bad is a Dev that feels righteous it don’t understand the finer details on both sides.

tradertef 6y ago

Greed. That's the problem underneath all of this issues Apple is having.

pchristensen 6y ago

I have kids, and one of my primary difficulties is limiting their screen time, and to a lesser extent, content. I appreciate having Apple as one gatekeeper that I can trust and learn to operate. I don't want a Wild West, and I consider these restrictions one of the reasons I pay Apple's premium.

tpush 6y ago
The need to filter out content seems orthogonal to Apple not allowing certain content in the first place.
sarakayakomzin 6y ago
is it really Apple's responsibility to watch your children for you? maybe we should have our cars locked down to 15MPH to prevent more accidents too.
bsaul 6y ago
i'm really having trouble understanding how giving the choice to the people that want to to install a different app store is going to change anything to your situation... I'm not for removing apple's store...
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
Apple allows Candy Crush, Clash of Clans, and all manner of other games using addictive psychological tactics onto the App Store. If you're more concerned about "gamer-centric" titles, there's also Fortnite and F2P versions of Call of Duty. How is not allowing streaming Xbox games limiting screen time?
Darmody 6y ago
Your kids could now use my linux machine and they wouldn't be able to install or do any harm at all. Apple's restrictions don't matter at all here.
kyriakos 6y ago
Google's Family Link allows very granular control over what your kids do with their devices. The the extend that you get a notification if you want for every app they try to install and won't get installed unless you permit it. You can set time limits not just for screen time but on on a per app basis as well. I don't know how this works but from my experience I found that Google's got this one right.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

faangFar 6y ago

You gave them money after they had been doing this for a decade. You can only blame yourself.

chrisandchris 6y ago
While I agree with you from an economical point, I totally disagree because phones are quite a duopoly. Either you go with Apple or you cut your market size in half (depending on where you are, or then it‘s the same with Google). It‘s not like a car dealer where there are probably more than one in your small town each dealing with different brands. There you can ignore one dealer and one brand and you still have enough dealers & brands to select from. With phones you have exactly 2. And at some point you‘ll also want to eat food and not only don‘t do stuff because of reasons.
wayneftw 6y ago
Right. Because nobody else will buy an iPhone if I don’t. As a developer, you can’t have a successful app and not be on the Apple app store. Anyway, even if neither of those were true, as human beings we certainly always have the right to talk shit about Apple and tell them to go fuck themselves. Even while we’re using their products. I make sure to cost Apple money by convincing entire companies to not use their stuff. And any Apple products that my family buys aren’t new. We also never buy apps from their app store.
013a 6y ago
If you want to change the US Government, you don't do it by packing up and moving to Japan. "Voting with your wallet" isn't voting for change; it's giving up. Apple can do better, Apple must do better, and they don't listen to people who aren't their customers. Why should they?
- MrLeap 6y ago
  This positions literally made me guffaw. '"Voting with your wallet" isn't voting for change; it's giving up.' I love the subtext I'm reading that boycotting companies that are doing bad things is for dirty quitters who lack grit. This brings to mind a Musashi quote, from the book of five rings. “You should not have any special fondness for a particular weapon, or anything else, for that matter. Too much is the same as not enough. Without imitating anyone else, you should have as much weaponry as suits you.”