3 ms·
Historically, people had to buy developer tools like compilers and assemblers for hundreds if not thousands of dollars either directly from the company or throu
by Dracophoenix 5y ago
Historically, people had to buy developer tools like compilers and assemblers for hundreds if not thousands of dollars either directly from the company or through retail channels if they wanted access to the inner workings of their computer. Apple included. So the pay-to-build model isn't new. As far as what "should" happen is concerned, that'll be a matter of debate and contract law if/when Apple changes its terms and if/when you agree to them.
- simondotau 5y agoIndeed. And Apple does have the benefit of prior art in the case of games consoles which have—for the past 30 years at least—required developers to accept some kind of revenue share for the right to distribute software to customers.
- howinteresting 5y agoIs Apple advertising iPhones as game consoles? When I search for iPhone on Google, the top result is a link to Apple with the text "Explore iPhone, the world's most powerful personal device."
- simondotau 5y agoCan you suggest why that would be relevant? It's not like the software license model of general purpose computers is enforced under law.
- howinteresting 5y agoIt would be evidence in antitrust proceedings to demonstrate that Apple is not aligning itself with the game console market but with the personal computer market.
- simondotau 5y agoYou still haven't explained how that is relevant. The law doesn't currently distinguish between a personal computer and a game console.
- howinteresting 5y agoAntitrust regulators do.
- simondotau 5y agoCitation?