4 ms·
The "walled garden" isn't really the issue most at stake here, it's the in-app purchases. To me, it's hard to argue against the benefits of having a one-stop-s
by bluedevil2k 6y ago
The "walled garden" isn't really the issue most at stake here, it's the in-app purchases. To me, it's hard to argue against the benefits of having a one-stop-shop safe-and-secure place to download apps on your phone which contains all your personal information.
However, to me, it's hard to argue that Apple should keep getting money from you once you've established a loyal customer base and they are giving you money.
And as a not-so-crazy take on this issue, why isn't Apple insisting on taking a cut of, say, the check I'm depositing into Chase and just uploaded a photograph of it. It's revenue, it's in the app ... why isn't Apple taking a piece of that?
- philwelch 6y agoThe only people paying the cost of that are companies like Epic, and if their games aren’t available for iOS that will affect the popularity of the iPhone. Maybe Apple backs down on the in-app purchases, or maybe they don’t and that decision drives away developers followed by users. Until then, we’re just seeing them negotiate with each other via PR.
- fastball 6y agoIndeed, that is exactly the argument made by the article.
- Traster 6y agoIf Apps are delivering new content and functionality in response to users directly giving them money then in what way is the walled garden walled? Just download the "door" app - now you're downloading arbitrary apps from a 3rd party. What happens when you download steam and suddenly people are downloading totally arbitrary code. Oh and that arbitrary code is hijacking whatsapp and sending itself to all your contacts?