4 ms·

> I’m suggesting that consumers should buy a product that that suits their needs. It's cute you think this is why people buy things. Also, you're completely m

> I’m suggesting that consumers should buy a product that that suits their needs. It's cute you think this is why people buy things. Also, you're completely missing the point here. Developers have no choice but to developer for Apple and that means that whatever Apple says, Apple gets. That's called bullying, at the very least, and I'm not alone in asserting that it extends into behavior that should at least be regulated. Mind you, the only reason I think so is that their user base exceeds 1 billion users. There's a public interest in things when numbers are that big. If we were talking about some company with only a million users, the case would be much weaker.

sooheon 6y ago
> Developers have no choice but to developer for Apple and that means that whatever Apple says, Apple gets. Developers absolutely have a choice. They have one choice if they want access to Apple's customers.
- RonanTheGrey 6y ago
  I think it's widely recognized that Sophie's Choice is not a choice.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Sure, but this has nothing to do with Nazi’s or concentration camps. This just has to do with wanting to sell your apps to more people from the developer side, or wishing Google would use better materials to make their phones from the user side. Let’s be honest here.
    - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
      It has to do with needing, not wanting, access to a sufficiently large market to have even a remote chance of success. Can you imagine anyone who wanted to make an app now, without publishing on either the Google Play Store or the App Store "in protest"? That's the option you're giving them. "Ask for more gruel or fail" and you're calling that a choice. Lets be honest here, indeed. You know perfectly well what I meant and refused to touch the point.
      - zepto 6y ago
        A lot of successful software is not sold via app stores. It’s not even remotely ‘needed’ for success. Here’s a recent darling of HN as an example: https://roamresearch.com/ https://roamresearch.com/

sooheon 6y ago

> Developers have no choice but to developer for Apple and that means that whatever Apple says, Apple gets. Developers absolutely have a choice. They have one choice if they want access to Apple's customers.

RonanTheGrey 6y ago
I think it's widely recognized that Sophie's Choice is not a choice.
- zepto 6y ago
  Sure, but this has nothing to do with Nazi’s or concentration camps. This just has to do with wanting to sell your apps to more people from the developer side, or wishing Google would use better materials to make their phones from the user side. Let’s be honest here.
  - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
    It has to do with needing, not wanting, access to a sufficiently large market to have even a remote chance of success. Can you imagine anyone who wanted to make an app now, without publishing on either the Google Play Store or the App Store "in protest"? That's the option you're giving them. "Ask for more gruel or fail" and you're calling that a choice. Lets be honest here, indeed. You know perfectly well what I meant and refused to touch the point.
    - zepto 6y ago
      A lot of successful software is not sold via app stores. It’s not even remotely ‘needed’ for success. Here’s a recent darling of HN as an example: https://roamresearch.com/ https://roamresearch.com/