5 ms·
Apple, by walling their garden, have essentially used their hegemony to steal billions of dollars in potential revenue from developers. Think of how much innova
by wswope 4y ago
Apple, by walling their garden, have essentially used their hegemony to steal billions of dollars in potential revenue from developers. Think of how much innovation has been blocked by them intentionally gimping iOS Safari to prevent web apps from competing with native ones.
Remember this when reviewing job applications, folks. Apple, Google, and Facebook employees, current and former, are morally derelict and have profited from harming our society - treat them with reciprocity.
- kjoedion 4y agoApple, by creating the iPhone and a standardized App Store, have essentially created billions of revenue for developers throughout the years. I find your sense of entitlement morally derelict.
- andybak 4y agoAnd I find your preference for hyperbole mildly distasteful.
- smoldesu 4y agoApple, by creating the iPhone and taxing every app purchase, have single-handedly lifted billions of dollars out of the pockets of those developers they're supposedly helping. So yes, they're entitled to 'something' because clearly Apple thinks they're entitled to the money of thousands of developers. Maybe they are, but the only way to find out is opening their platform, which they're obviously too afraid to do even as an experiment. They know apps like TikTok, Facebook and Fortnite have the ability to tip the scales away from their favor; so why shouldn't they? Why doesn't the customer have a right to decide?
- mypalmike 4y agoYou have a reasonable counterpoint. Maybe ditch the personal attack?
- domador 4y agoLet's see if I can paraphrase your argument: "The iPhone and the App Store exist, therefore developers should be thankful they exist regardless of how Apple treats them as they try to get their apps approved."
- dylan604 4y agoWhat would that dev do without their 80% they are making now if there was no iDevices? That 80% looks pretty good compared to 0%
- josephcsible 4y agoIf there were no iDevices, the developers would make their apps for more open platforms instead. Don't pretend the apps just wouldn't exist at all.
- dylan604 4y agoRight, because the millions of people that have a mobile device as the one and only compute device would magically be buying a different type of computer?
- josephcsible 4y agoIn what world can anyone afford an iDevice but not an Android device?
- dylan604 4y agoI read open platforms as not just Android. I was thinking more traditional compute vs mobile
- zaik 4y agoThey would be buying the same computer from a different manufacturer.
- ClassyJacket 4y ago"Finally, developers are getting a tiny percentage of the revenue they deserve. Therefore, it's okay to steal from them, and destroy them completely."
- nazgulsenpai 4y agoPrior to the iPhone and the AppStore, it wasn't possible to monetize computer software. We should be grateful our overlords allow us to develop the applications that are the foundation of that business model.
- user3939382 4y agoWe are living Stallman's Nightmare where some supernational empire decides what programs we're allowed to run on our computers.
- yazzku 4y agoIndeed, though thankfully we have the alternatives.
- smoldesu 4y ago"You won't be able to imagine the things we have in the future. Supercomputers in your pocket, the size of a candy bar!" > "Cool, does it play Doom?" "Funny thing, that..."
- SturgeonsLaw 4y agoWhich is why Microsoft's attempts to make UEFI their own little fiefdom need to be resisted. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/security-measure-forces-windows-on-lenovo-laptops https://www.tomshardware.com/news/security-measure-forces-wi... Even aside from the most egregious cases like that linked above, operating systems like Linux need their bootloader signed by Microsoft in order to boot on a Secure Boot enabled PC. The conflict of interest is obvious.
- yazzku 4y agoYeah, TPM 2.0 is a real ass. Looks like classic anti-competitive lawsuit to me, has any org pursued this?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ClassyJacket 4y agoDon't forget that, specifically, Apple has kicked apps off the App Store whilst outright stealing their functionality. They think copyright law should apply to everyone except themselves. Such bravery.
- zerocrates 4y agoApp functionality is generally not covered by copyright. Code yes, some assets/images/etc. sure, look-and-feel maybe, but functionality no.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- cercatrova 4y agoI agree with your first paragraph. However, I can't agree with your second. Most people who work there are just regular people, they are not "morally derelict" sociopaths. Indeed, the main reason they work there is money and prestige, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Blame the executives who make the decisions, not the workers who implement them.
- wswope 4y agoWould you say the same about workers at Philip Morris or Shell? If the money and prestige is ill-gotten, I’d say those workers are complicit.
- cercatrova 4y agoI would say the same. Just because some minimum wage worker runs the cash register at a Shell gas station does not mean they're complicit. Even if they worked at corporate, I still wouldn't expect it. The one's who make the decisions are the ones who are complicit.
- lern_too_spel 4y agoUnlike the other two, Google used to be good about avoiding walled gardens and simply monetizing services provided on open platforms. Buzz was federated. Gchat was federated. Android lets you run what you want. Chrome never stagnates and actively builds new features to make the web more useful. Then Google+ (instead of Buzz on pubsubhubbub), Hangouts Chat (instead of XMPP) and now Google Chat (instead of Matrix) came along with the Facebook and Apple style walled garbage dump lock-in.