4 ms·

So developers on mass will decide to effectively kill their mobile apps and revenue streams on principle alone and hope by setting up a fund that people can don

by calsy 5y ago

So developers on mass will decide to effectively kill their mobile apps and revenue streams on principle alone and hope by setting up a fund that people can donate money to ‘help fight for developers’ it will subsidise their lost income. This fund will support entire businesses who’s primary interface to its customers are it’s mobile apps. Destroy your business to ‘stick it to Apple’. You seem to also be bizarrely comparing the app store and the apps hosted to the plight of workers and union action. Apps are in 99% of cases produced by business. Developers are but a single part of a business workforce, which could include HR, support, accounting, management and any number of other personal needed to keep a business running. Businesses don’t just go ‘on strike’.

toss1 5y ago
Yes. I am making an analogy; of course apps are produced by businesses. And, no, it wouldn't be a literal strike, but there are many parallels. The first parallel is that if one developer quits Apple, Apple won't even notice, but if enough do take the same action en masse, they have real power. The second parallel is that if the the developers (not individual workers) want to seize this power, could form a consortium (analogous, but not equal to, a union). This consortium would pay into a collective fund via dues (not random donations). Yes, this costs part of the business' income, just as union dues cost part of workers' wages. When they collectively decide to wield their power and attempt to force changes upon Apple, they could then use the savings to bridge the chasm of no income while negotiations proceed. They could also use the fund to support alternative platform development so the consortium members would be better able to sustain any 'strike' by having alternate platform revenue streams. Apple is very much in the position of an exploitative employer. Apple and the employer both own key elements of the means of production, but are pretty much nowhere without the developers or the workers. Until developers band together to take some kind of collective action like this, Apple will continue to exploit them and extract every last possible fee. You might say "Apple will go too far and no one will develop for them", but at the point where they start losing developers, they just reduce the fees by a marginal amount. It really is a no-win game for developers until they work together. (And when they do, it'll also be a bit the reverse if they go too far.). EDIT: The alternative route is for most of them to suffer and hope one developer can spend the funds to take Apple to court and force changes that way, which is what is now happening, but that may also apply only country-by-country.
- calsy 5y ago
  Again, apps are owned by businesses, not developers. Developers don't work for Apple, they work for their employer. Any industrial action by developers hurts their employer, not Apple. If what you suggested was an effective strategy it would have been taken already.
lotsofpulp 5y ago
> Businesses don’t just go ‘on strike’. That is exactly what businesses do, and workers bargaining for wages is also “business”. If you do not like the terms of a deal, you walk away. Like Costco walking away from American Express, for example. Another example is healthcare in the US. Payers (governments and managed care organizations), hospitals groups, doctor groups, and nurse unions have to band together to negotiate with each other. Another example is when cable/satellite TV operators drop channels from their service if they do not like the terms being offered by the content owner.
- calsy 5y ago
  Do you understand the power dynamics of the business you listed in your example. Costco is a worldwide juggernaut and American Express is not the only payment gateway in business. That is not the case with iOS devices. Apples services are the ONLY OPTION, you either like it or leave. You seem to be having difficulty understanding the anti-competitive argument the trial is addressing.

by calsy 5y ago

toss1 5y ago

Yes. I am making an analogy; of course apps are produced by businesses. And, no, it wouldn't be a literal strike, but there are many parallels. The first parallel is that if one developer quits Apple, Apple won't even notice, but if enough do take the same action en masse, they have real power. The second parallel is that if the the developers (not individual workers) want to seize this power, could form a consortium (analogous, but not equal to, a union). This consortium would pay into a collective fund via dues (not random donations). Yes, this costs part of the business' income, just as union dues cost part of workers' wages. When they collectively decide to wield their power and attempt to force changes upon Apple, they could then use the savings to bridge the chasm of no income while negotiations proceed. They could also use the fund to support alternative platform development so the consortium members would be better able to sustain any 'strike' by having alternate platform revenue streams. Apple is very much in the position of an exploitative employer. Apple and the employer both own key elements of the means of production, but are pretty much nowhere without the developers or the workers. Until developers band together to take some kind of collective action like this, Apple will continue to exploit them and extract every last possible fee. You might say "Apple will go too far and no one will develop for them", but at the point where they start losing developers, they just reduce the fees by a marginal amount. It really is a no-win game for developers until they work together. (And when they do, it'll also be a bit the reverse if they go too far.). EDIT: The alternative route is for most of them to suffer and hope one developer can spend the funds to take Apple to court and force changes that way, which is what is now happening, but that may also apply only country-by-country.

calsy 5y ago
Again, apps are owned by businesses, not developers. Developers don't work for Apple, they work for their employer. Any industrial action by developers hurts their employer, not Apple. If what you suggested was an effective strategy it would have been taken already.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

> Businesses don’t just go ‘on strike’. That is exactly what businesses do, and workers bargaining for wages is also “business”. If you do not like the terms of a deal, you walk away. Like Costco walking away from American Express, for example. Another example is healthcare in the US. Payers (governments and managed care organizations), hospitals groups, doctor groups, and nurse unions have to band together to negotiate with each other. Another example is when cable/satellite TV operators drop channels from their service if they do not like the terms being offered by the content owner.

calsy 5y ago
Do you understand the power dynamics of the business you listed in your example. Costco is a worldwide juggernaut and American Express is not the only payment gateway in business. That is not the case with iOS devices. Apples services are the ONLY OPTION, you either like it or leave. You seem to be having difficulty understanding the anti-competitive argument the trial is addressing.