5 ms·

Here’s the deal, ship one of each: Mac, Mac AppStore, iOS AppStore, SMS chat bot, WebApp, Windows, cross platform with Electron, cp with Tauri, with varying deg

Here’s the deal, ship one of each: Mac, Mac AppStore, iOS AppStore, SMS chat bot, WebApp, Windows, cross platform with Electron, cp with Tauri, with varying degrees of dynamic libraries, concurrency, mono-server and containerized APIs - then say something productive about each. (On your own, no help but you and and your online friend Eskimo) The ease of everything in iOS is 100% worth a 30% cut once you’re established (speaking to the small business program) - AND everyone forgets, Apple’s cut 15% after the first year of subscriptions, no matter how much you make. The reason the Mac “side load” exists is because of AppKit - and the hoops one must jump through to get things to run halfway decent with gatekeeper is maddening to the nth degree. Fine, let people side load and deal with that on their own - but do not act like it’s “a weekend” worth of development time to get right. Everyone is winging because they won’t (or know they can’t) make something damn good - take the time perfecting the craft and finding the targets no one can see rather than throwing stones.

heavyset_go 4y ago
If Apple's value add is as great as you're saying, then they should have absolutely no problem competing on fair terms with other companies instead of dictating what users are allowed to do, and what competitors are allowed to exist, on their own hardware.
- anonymouse008 4y ago
  Yes, a fair competition, I have no issue with. But here’s the rub - those competitor apps must use the “universal” apis. They don’t get to use UIKit, CoreData, Foundation (the full one), CoreBluetooth, CoreMotion, ML, etc … they need the open source community (as AshiLinux has done) to build the APIs apple is not paid to make. Then have those reviewed and dealt with in a Gatekeeper like fashion - absolute pain awaits. Writing Swift in Linux is both beautiful and humbling - there are horrible rough edges, you have to go lower more often than you’d like. My issue is everyone has it pretty good - and a loud voice is going to make the experience less great overall, at the expense of us all being more equal.
  - heavyset_go 4y ago
    This just seems spiteful, considering developers already pay $100 a year to develop and distribute apps for iOS.
    - anonymouse008 4y ago
      Now that may be a completely fair, and potentially shared, view. I can only recount from my direct experience, and the style of software that is driving this campaign literally wants to make loot boxes more profitable. They cannot enjoy the natural consequences of making something truly valuable in a subscription form to get the fee down to 15%; and they’re upset. So maybe I’m spiteful, but it feels justified.
      - smoldesu 4y ago
        Well, considering Apple's goal isn't to ban lootboxes outright (just profit from them) it's hard to argue that they're being any more altruistic by letting Genshin Impact be installed on iOS devices.
        anonymouse008 4y ago
        Fair, too. One can at least see the incentive structure towards things of value - i.e. you’re stuck in 30% land if all you want to do is coin transactions, get the benefits of Apple Pay if you’re e-commerce / delivery, or provide long term value in sub form and get the steep discounts.
        smoldesu 4y ago
        Well, then hopefully you can understand why developers don't want to pay the largest company in the world for restricting their freedom.
        anonymouse008 4y ago
        Yes, I understand where they are coming from. This balance between the 'normal, everyday person end user' and people who stare down command lines and make their own frameworks used by millions will always be tough - but there is a primary person in both arenas Apple is making things for, and sometimes it isn't 'us - and that's ok! And in some ways, we are arguing over a dead corpse. It's possible that VR/AR will hit an inflection point - not by glasses - but by people actually making the 'real malleable world' like DynamicLand and Humane. Those paradigms may very well leave Apple in the dust - because the way Apple has approached this argument to me feels hollow, they don't own their beliefs in the rhetoric, and even I have felt at times they've been coasting and rent seeking. Potentially I'm just misguided in thinking in the ideal.

heavyset_go 4y ago

If Apple's value add is as great as you're saying, then they should have absolutely no problem competing on fair terms with other companies instead of dictating what users are allowed to do, and what competitors are allowed to exist, on their own hardware.

anonymouse008 4y ago
Yes, a fair competition, I have no issue with. But here’s the rub - those competitor apps must use the “universal” apis. They don’t get to use UIKit, CoreData, Foundation (the full one), CoreBluetooth, CoreMotion, ML, etc … they need the open source community (as AshiLinux has done) to build the APIs apple is not paid to make. Then have those reviewed and dealt with in a Gatekeeper like fashion - absolute pain awaits. Writing Swift in Linux is both beautiful and humbling - there are horrible rough edges, you have to go lower more often than you’d like. My issue is everyone has it pretty good - and a loud voice is going to make the experience less great overall, at the expense of us all being more equal.
- heavyset_go 4y ago
  This just seems spiteful, considering developers already pay $100 a year to develop and distribute apps for iOS.
  - anonymouse008 4y ago
    Now that may be a completely fair, and potentially shared, view. I can only recount from my direct experience, and the style of software that is driving this campaign literally wants to make loot boxes more profitable. They cannot enjoy the natural consequences of making something truly valuable in a subscription form to get the fee down to 15%; and they’re upset. So maybe I’m spiteful, but it feels justified.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      Well, considering Apple's goal isn't to ban lootboxes outright (just profit from them) it's hard to argue that they're being any more altruistic by letting Genshin Impact be installed on iOS devices.
      - anonymouse008 4y ago
        Fair, too. One can at least see the incentive structure towards things of value - i.e. you’re stuck in 30% land if all you want to do is coin transactions, get the benefits of Apple Pay if you’re e-commerce / delivery, or provide long term value in sub form and get the steep discounts.
        smoldesu 4y ago
        Well, then hopefully you can understand why developers don't want to pay the largest company in the world for restricting their freedom.
        anonymouse008 4y ago
        Yes, I understand where they are coming from. This balance between the 'normal, everyday person end user' and people who stare down command lines and make their own frameworks used by millions will always be tough - but there is a primary person in both arenas Apple is making things for, and sometimes it isn't 'us - and that's ok! And in some ways, we are arguing over a dead corpse. It's possible that VR/AR will hit an inflection point - not by glasses - but by people actually making the 'real malleable world' like DynamicLand and Humane. Those paradigms may very well leave Apple in the dust - because the way Apple has approached this argument to me feels hollow, they don't own their beliefs in the rhetoric, and even I have felt at times they've been coasting and rent seeking. Potentially I'm just misguided in thinking in the ideal.