4 ms·

>A game deployed to an iPhone could theoretically be acquired through an alternative app store or just direct download This is false; unless theoretically mean

>A game deployed to an iPhone could theoretically be acquired through an alternative app store or just direct download This is false; unless theoretically means there's no concept of "money" involved in our world. A game deployed to an iPhone must be compatible with the hardware chip supplied on the iPhone, must be built using APIs designed, built and committed to be supported by the iPhone. Apps can't be built out of thin air. Programming languages, debuggers, IDEs, distributions channels, commitment to support cost money, time and people's energy. Apple, as a private business, can choose to monetize however they wish to. It would be really dumb for the govt or other parties to dictate what pricing policies Apple has to set for a product they're building. Heck, they're free to ask for a million dollars for each copy of Xcode people use. Apple is trying to balance the costs of building an iPhone ecosystem with the benefits of ease of accessibility to that ecosystem. Customers pay Apple to handle _everything_ from rearranging sand to naming functions accessible to developer to make the iPhone.

chipotle_coyote 6y ago
> > A game deployed to an iPhone could theoretically be acquired through an alternative app store or just direct download. > This is false; unless theoretically means there's no concept of "money" involved in our world. I am fairly sure that Apple has already produced a general purpose computing device that also requires applications deployed to it to be compatible with its CPU and to be built using APIs designed and built by Apple, but nonetheless lets applications be acquired for it through other means, including direct download.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Not only that Apple has produced the exact same platform with the same CPU and development tools and APIs as iPhone which it is set to launch later this year where sideloading is completely allowed.
  - cafed00d 6y ago
    Yep that is true. That doesn't justify that Apple _should_ enable side-loading on the iPhone. Just because they _can_ do it doesn't mean they're _legally, ethically or morally_ obligated to do so. Ultimately, it's their product. I mean, can you imagine the world we'd live in if some arbitrary group of people (who are _not_ the product developers) decided that the iPod should be opened up to side-load any arbitrary software, such as a music store, run by some other company. In what world is that legal? Just because the iPhone has majority profits of the smartphone market doesn't mean they ought to share that platform with everyone else. If developers don't like Apple's policies they should not build for Apple's platforms. It's pretty simple. Go make your iPhone, and App Store, and Retail distribution channels and marketing that works to your specification. Isn't that what competition means?

chipotle_coyote 6y ago

> > A game deployed to an iPhone could theoretically be acquired through an alternative app store or just direct download. > This is false; unless theoretically means there's no concept of "money" involved in our world. I am fairly sure that Apple has already produced a general purpose computing device that also requires applications deployed to it to be compatible with its CPU and to be built using APIs designed and built by Apple, but nonetheless lets applications be acquired for it through other means, including direct download.

saagarjha 6y ago
Not only that Apple has produced the exact same platform with the same CPU and development tools and APIs as iPhone which it is set to launch later this year where sideloading is completely allowed.
- cafed00d 6y ago
  Yep that is true. That doesn't justify that Apple _should_ enable side-loading on the iPhone. Just because they _can_ do it doesn't mean they're _legally, ethically or morally_ obligated to do so. Ultimately, it's their product. I mean, can you imagine the world we'd live in if some arbitrary group of people (who are _not_ the product developers) decided that the iPod should be opened up to side-load any arbitrary software, such as a music store, run by some other company. In what world is that legal? Just because the iPhone has majority profits of the smartphone market doesn't mean they ought to share that platform with everyone else. If developers don't like Apple's policies they should not build for Apple's platforms. It's pretty simple. Go make your iPhone, and App Store, and Retail distribution channels and marketing that works to your specification. Isn't that what competition means?