5 ms·

> "I realize that it is a benefit for older computer illiterate people." It's a benefit for computer literate people too. - IAP allows easy tracking of subscr

> "I realize that it is a benefit for older computer illiterate people." It's a benefit for computer literate people too. - IAP allows easy tracking of subscriptions and cancellation. You don't have to call and argue with a retentions rep for an hour to cancel a service. - Apple restrictions on tracking limit abuse from ad driven business models. - Apple can require features like Apple ID to be implemented alongside FB connect or whatever. Apple ID has privacy friendly features for users like obscuring your email via a relay. This would never be implemented by app devs because hiding your email is counter to their incentives. If they could deploy outside of the store to avoid these constraints they would. Apple's interests are aligned with their users. The reason they can get away with charging 30% is because Apple's users don't care about all the shitty anti-user things Apple blocks app devs from doing. The reason I care about the 30% is because it worries me that they will be forced to allow side-loading or multiple stores and lose their leverage over app devs. If they lose that leverage we as Apple users will lose these benefits, and for what?

FpUser 5y ago
>"It's a benefit for computer literate people too." Sure, maybe. I do not care as I personally do not feel any benefit. I am most likely in minority but that does not mean I have to tailor my opinions. Not even really criticizing Apple / Google. I want my phone to be able to function as normal Windows / Linux PC except that its phone capability would be able to function even if the rest of the OS is crashed. Such product simply does not exist outside of half baked attempts and I am not willing to waste my time/money on those.
Mindwipe 5y ago
> If they lose that leverage we as Apple users will lose these benefits, and for what? Because you literally don't get people in autocratic regimes killed because the single choke point of software that might enable them to escape detection is removed. Because you remove Apple's rampant discrimination against some kinds of speech and the people that effects. Because Apple attacks businesses with any involvement in sex whatsoever.
- frusciante19 5y ago
  So you're ok with children being able to buy porn mags in the same store they can buy sweets, but you're not ok with Apple controlling what bad actors might sell in the app store?
- cdogl 5y ago
  I agree with your points about sex workers and speech about sex in general, but your comments about people in autocratic regimes ring a little hyperbolic. Chinese [1] users were able to use Signal until the Chinese state seemed to block it at the network layer. WhatsApp is blocked too. That's unfortunate, but what's Apple got to do with it? And what exactly could they do to prevent it that the state wouldn't get in the way of? [1] I'm assuming that "autocratic" here refers to China - though despite the lack of political freedom and the awful situation with regard to ethnic minorities, I don't think that's a very helpful or expressive label.
- fossuser 5y ago
  > “ Because you literally don't get people in autocratic regimes killed because the single choke point of software that might enable them to escape detection is removed.” If anything, Apple’s control here enables better protection for users. You think authoritarian regimes don’t own phones? You think Android is safer in China?

FpUser 5y ago

>"It's a benefit for computer literate people too." Sure, maybe. I do not care as I personally do not feel any benefit. I am most likely in minority but that does not mean I have to tailor my opinions. Not even really criticizing Apple / Google. I want my phone to be able to function as normal Windows / Linux PC except that its phone capability would be able to function even if the rest of the OS is crashed. Such product simply does not exist outside of half baked attempts and I am not willing to waste my time/money on those.

Mindwipe 5y ago

> If they lose that leverage we as Apple users will lose these benefits, and for what? Because you literally don't get people in autocratic regimes killed because the single choke point of software that might enable them to escape detection is removed. Because you remove Apple's rampant discrimination against some kinds of speech and the people that effects. Because Apple attacks businesses with any involvement in sex whatsoever.

frusciante19 5y ago
So you're ok with children being able to buy porn mags in the same store they can buy sweets, but you're not ok with Apple controlling what bad actors might sell in the app store?
cdogl 5y ago
I agree with your points about sex workers and speech about sex in general, but your comments about people in autocratic regimes ring a little hyperbolic. Chinese [1] users were able to use Signal until the Chinese state seemed to block it at the network layer. WhatsApp is blocked too. That's unfortunate, but what's Apple got to do with it? And what exactly could they do to prevent it that the state wouldn't get in the way of? [1] I'm assuming that "autocratic" here refers to China - though despite the lack of political freedom and the awful situation with regard to ethnic minorities, I don't think that's a very helpful or expressive label.
fossuser 5y ago
> “ Because you literally don't get people in autocratic regimes killed because the single choke point of software that might enable them to escape detection is removed.” If anything, Apple’s control here enables better protection for users. You think authoritarian regimes don’t own phones? You think Android is safer in China?