8 ms·

> Well the purpose of anti-trust law, and pro competition laws Well, ordinary people don’t give a shot about this:- they just care about user experience. That’

> Well the purpose of anti-trust law, and pro competition laws Well, ordinary people don’t give a shot about this:- they just care about user experience. That’s the point, I think, you’re missing. User experience trumps any conversation about profits, market share and money. Im not suggesting that Apple is the vanguard of user experience and that govts don’t care about users at all. I am suggesting that given the precedent of the web & windows era of computing, no govt agency has thought of policing 3p devs in favor of user experience the way Apple has. You keep complaining that I’m not providing any solutions: I’m not here to do the Govts job. I am here to vocalize my problem so that the Govts and our community can recognize a perspective. Apple’s policing of 3p devs should not be loosened up: that WILL create problems. Heck, if you want a solution, heck, just codify the laws of the developer program into constitutional legislation. I know, that sounds ridiculous. But that’s my point. 3p devs have to be disincentivized from anti-user, criminal behavior. Not just Apple. Don’t hate on Apple just because they’re able to police them better than anyone else.

stale2002 4y ago
> User experience trumps any conversation about profits Ok, sure, you can have this opinion. But the point still stands that anyone who claims to care about user experience, and yet only gives a solution that results in Apple getting more money, is giving a bad solution. > just codify the laws of the developer program As long as Apple gets a 0% cut of app revenue, I think that a lot of people would be OK with some of these laws. None of this really matters anymore though. Apple lost. They are now going to lose out on all of these app store fees, for developers that go to a 3rd party app store. And Apple should have proposed a reason solution, that resulted in them getting 0% and also solving these user privacy issues, much sooner. But they didn't do that. And now the EU law is going to happen, whether Apple likes it or not. > 3p devs have to be disincentivized from anti-user And yet the original solution that you gave did none of this, and only gave Apple more money. Which means that your originally gave a dumb idea. > You keep complaining that I’m not providing any solutions You did give a bad solution though. You gave a bad solution that did not help users, and only gave Apple more money. And because you thought of such a stupid idea that doesn't help users in any way, I am accusing you of not caring about users at all, and having bad ideas.
- cafed00d 4y ago
  > anyone who claims to care about user experience, and yet only gives a solution that results in Apple getting more money, is giving a bad solution. You seem to be getting easily confused or seem to have difficulty grasping the main point. You’re confusing the notion that “anything that puts more money in Apple’s coffers and not developers’ means it’s automatically a stupid idea”. First, requiring developers to pay or placing any financial gates to developers disincentivizes non-committal, spammy, or even unidentifiable devs. This is a user-friendly policy. Second, is the need to set up sustainable financial incentives. (This is not _directly_ related to user experience, which is where you’re getting confused and calling the idea dumb or stupid). There’s no way _any_ group of people who work on building the SDKs, Compilers, Tools, Marketing & Distribution, or anything remotely related would ever sustain their operations on 0% revenue. _Requiring_ devs to pay _proportional_ to their revenue is the sustainable process. Epic does that, Unity does that, AWS does that etc. Whether that’s implemented as a fixed price of $5000 per user or whether that’s an annual subscription of $100 (like Jetbrains’) is completely up to the creators of those systems (in the App Store’s case, Apple). I’m the end, it is _indirectly_ user-friendly: more trusted, well intentioned devs implies more trusted apps and a virtuous cycle of more users/customers. Apple chose to proportionally charge devs based on their revenue. They could’ve chosen a hundred different options, sure. But they chose the method that created a financial incentive to build all development tools for free (practically), and set up systems to distribute, discover, maintain, update apps at per-user level (ie: they need to run servers that users download apps from; 3p devs don’t; nor does a user need to go bittorrent.com or cnet.com or softonic.com or whatever else could’ve been the hosting provider) My idea on Xcode pricing is meant to emulate those same underlying policies. My idea is not meant to be the “holy grail” of solutions here. I merely use that to illustrate the much deeper, much more passionate point of view: that 3p devs are monstrous, vile, nefarious actors. They _ought_ to taxed! They ought to pay up! And yes, they ought to pay up particularly to the hardware platform provider! Don’t think it’s fair? Well, go complain to Nokia or Blackberry circa 2007 when you _had_ zero avenues to get your app in front of users without those companies controlling the developer fully. Or even the web in the 2010s where there’s an ungodly amount of tools, APIs, frameworks upon frameworks that none of them work cohesively well. The fact that web developers had to write custom polyfills or resort to user-hostile behavior such as charging IE users more To disincentivize people from using insecure browsers. In both those instances developers made a 100% of all their revenue and acted like pure a*holes. Apple put an end to that by demanding devs conform to their platform!

stale2002 4y ago

> User experience trumps any conversation about profits Ok, sure, you can have this opinion. But the point still stands that anyone who claims to care about user experience, and yet only gives a solution that results in Apple getting more money, is giving a bad solution. > just codify the laws of the developer program As long as Apple gets a 0% cut of app revenue, I think that a lot of people would be OK with some of these laws. None of this really matters anymore though. Apple lost. They are now going to lose out on all of these app store fees, for developers that go to a 3rd party app store. And Apple should have proposed a reason solution, that resulted in them getting 0% and also solving these user privacy issues, much sooner. But they didn't do that. And now the EU law is going to happen, whether Apple likes it or not. > 3p devs have to be disincentivized from anti-user And yet the original solution that you gave did none of this, and only gave Apple more money. Which means that your originally gave a dumb idea. > You keep complaining that I’m not providing any solutions You did give a bad solution though. You gave a bad solution that did not help users, and only gave Apple more money. And because you thought of such a stupid idea that doesn't help users in any way, I am accusing you of not caring about users at all, and having bad ideas.

cafed00d 4y ago
> anyone who claims to care about user experience, and yet only gives a solution that results in Apple getting more money, is giving a bad solution. You seem to be getting easily confused or seem to have difficulty grasping the main point. You’re confusing the notion that “anything that puts more money in Apple’s coffers and not developers’ means it’s automatically a stupid idea”. First, requiring developers to pay or placing any financial gates to developers disincentivizes non-committal, spammy, or even unidentifiable devs. This is a user-friendly policy. Second, is the need to set up sustainable financial incentives. (This is not _directly_ related to user experience, which is where you’re getting confused and calling the idea dumb or stupid). There’s no way _any_ group of people who work on building the SDKs, Compilers, Tools, Marketing & Distribution, or anything remotely related would ever sustain their operations on 0% revenue. _Requiring_ devs to pay _proportional_ to their revenue is the sustainable process. Epic does that, Unity does that, AWS does that etc. Whether that’s implemented as a fixed price of $5000 per user or whether that’s an annual subscription of $100 (like Jetbrains’) is completely up to the creators of those systems (in the App Store’s case, Apple). I’m the end, it is _indirectly_ user-friendly: more trusted, well intentioned devs implies more trusted apps and a virtuous cycle of more users/customers. Apple chose to proportionally charge devs based on their revenue. They could’ve chosen a hundred different options, sure. But they chose the method that created a financial incentive to build all development tools for free (practically), and set up systems to distribute, discover, maintain, update apps at per-user level (ie: they need to run servers that users download apps from; 3p devs don’t; nor does a user need to go bittorrent.com or cnet.com or softonic.com or whatever else could’ve been the hosting provider) My idea on Xcode pricing is meant to emulate those same underlying policies. My idea is not meant to be the “holy grail” of solutions here. I merely use that to illustrate the much deeper, much more passionate point of view: that 3p devs are monstrous, vile, nefarious actors. They _ought_ to taxed! They ought to pay up! And yes, they ought to pay up particularly to the hardware platform provider! Don’t think it’s fair? Well, go complain to Nokia or Blackberry circa 2007 when you _had_ zero avenues to get your app in front of users without those companies controlling the developer fully. Or even the web in the 2010s where there’s an ungodly amount of tools, APIs, frameworks upon frameworks that none of them work cohesively well. The fact that web developers had to write custom polyfills or resort to user-hostile behavior such as charging IE users more To disincentivize people from using insecure browsers. In both those instances developers made a 100% of all their revenue and acted like pure a*holes. Apple put an end to that by demanding devs conform to their platform!