5 ms·

These laws don't expropriate Apple's intellectual property. Apple will always be able to license it for something.

by Despegar 4y ago

ocdtrekkie 4y ago
They can charge whatever they want for the phone. They can't levy monopoly fees on every successive purchase.
- Despegar 4y ago
  I certainly understand why developers would prefer that Apple have that business model, but that's not the one they chose for the iPhone. And these laws don't prohibit it.
  - cronix 4y ago
    Yes it was, they later changed their stance. In the announcement for iPhone, Jobs on stage explicitly stated that all you need to develop an app was html and modern javascript with API's into the phone hardware. And they would basically just be a PWA that would keep the app updated automatically as soon as the developer makes a change, all while keeping the iPhone "reliable and secure." In fact, he was bragging about not having a store "rather than having to go through this complex update process" as a dig at the Google play store. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvQ9JNm_qWc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvQ9JNm_qWc
    - Despegar 4y ago
      And then everyone realized web apps sucked and demanded that Apple release an SDK, which they did, and the rest is history.
      - heavyset_go 4y ago
        Early phones ran on incredibly limited hardware and genuinely needed native applications just to do simple things. We've had 15 years of hardware and browser optimization, Moore's law, and development when it comes to mobile hardware. Web apps run just fine now. Hell, many native apps are just web apps via things React Native or webviews.
  - ocdtrekkie 4y ago
    That's incorrect. Enforcement has failed to handle it, but Apple's app store model is a violation of antitrust law, in the US, the EU, and elsewhere. Many of the actions you are seeing in the news about it are regulatory mandates, based on the fact that Apple's business model isn't legal.

These laws don't expropriate Apple's intellectual property. Apple will always be able to license it for something.

ocdtrekkie 4y ago

They can charge whatever they want for the phone. They can't levy monopoly fees on every successive purchase.

Despegar 4y ago
I certainly understand why developers would prefer that Apple have that business model, but that's not the one they chose for the iPhone. And these laws don't prohibit it.
- cronix 4y ago
  Yes it was, they later changed their stance. In the announcement for iPhone, Jobs on stage explicitly stated that all you need to develop an app was html and modern javascript with API's into the phone hardware. And they would basically just be a PWA that would keep the app updated automatically as soon as the developer makes a change, all while keeping the iPhone "reliable and secure." In fact, he was bragging about not having a store "rather than having to go through this complex update process" as a dig at the Google play store. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvQ9JNm_qWc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvQ9JNm_qWc
  - Despegar 4y ago
    And then everyone realized web apps sucked and demanded that Apple release an SDK, which they did, and the rest is history.
    - heavyset_go 4y ago
      Early phones ran on incredibly limited hardware and genuinely needed native applications just to do simple things. We've had 15 years of hardware and browser optimization, Moore's law, and development when it comes to mobile hardware. Web apps run just fine now. Hell, many native apps are just web apps via things React Native or webviews.
- ocdtrekkie 4y ago
  That's incorrect. Enforcement has failed to handle it, but Apple's app store model is a violation of antitrust law, in the US, the EU, and elsewhere. Many of the actions you are seeing in the news about it are regulatory mandates, based on the fact that Apple's business model isn't legal.