4 ms·

Was it a subscription service, though? That doesn't seem like a terrible deal if you get a perpetual license - meanwhile forking over $99/year for some basic fu

Was it a subscription service, though? That doesn't seem like a terrible deal if you get a perpetual license - meanwhile forking over $99/year for some basic functionality wrapped in Service Credit seems like a racket to me.

pjmlp 4y ago
No it wasn't, nor are Apple devices given for free to students. Anyone that can afford Apple hardware as an high school student surely can afford the dev subscription.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Anyone that can afford a Lexus can also pay for a heated seat subscription. Does that make it right for them to sell it?
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    Yes, a company has the right to do whatever they want with their products. It is up for the customers to validate their business decisions.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      Customers can only validate it if they have a choice. How does an iPhone developer validate or invalidate Apple's behavior? They're basically a hostage on Apple's platform, and the only thing keeping them there is the fact that they get paid. Apple shouldn't have the negotiating power they wield, and regulators are taking action to stop them from abusing it.
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        By becoming a developer of something else.
        grishka 4y ago
        You don't have that choice if you're building a service that relies on having a mobile app. You are required to have presence on iOS if you want any semblance of success.
        pjmlp 4y ago
        It might be news for you, many countries in the world have a very superficial presence of iOS devices, and not every company is a multinational. Second, Web also exists. Third, this whole thread is about macOS.
        saurik 4y ago
        You are the one who tried to introduce an extremely general argument, which I guess you are no longer interested in defending? > Yes, a company has the right to do whatever they want with their products. > It is up for the customers to validate their business decisions. So, to verify: you do agree that your argument at least does not apply to the iPhone?
        pjmlp 4y ago
        I wasn't the one moving the goalpost into iOS app store. Still the point stands.
        smoldesu 4y ago
        I'm the one who pushed the discussion onto the tangentially-related Apple mobile platform, guilty as charged. Do you want to defend Apple's absolute control over the iPhone in front of God, Saurik and everyone, or admit that the world's richest company operates out of greed sometimes?
        sbuk 4y ago
        Greed? No. Profit motivated. Of course. They are a business. Businesses generally exist to make a profit. The more profit they make, the stronger and more resilient they become. Apple, having been very close to bankruptcy a couple of times means that they have a strong motivation to make a profit. Nothing is without reason, whether or not you like the reason. I guess corporate greed is a thing, but then so are the very real costs of operating services. Ranting about a business being successful or being the wealthiest just smacks of petty anti-capitalist jealousy. I get it, Apple were supposed to fail and they didn’t. Are Apple’s fees worth 15%[1] of the vendors revenue? Possibly not, though as a provider, they are entitled to make a profit. [1] Yes, yes; 30% if the vendor make > $1,000,000. Let get real, the significant majority of the app that you are arguing about are likely to be grossing less than that. And of course 15% of $0 is $0, so the argument is completely moot for freely distributed apps.
    - grishka 4y ago
      And the customer has the right to hack their car to activate their already installed heated seats on their own terms because they own the damn thing.
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        Depends on the laws of the country.
- goosedragons 4y ago
  Who says the HS student is buying the hardware themselves? It could have been a gift, a hand-me-down, a school computer, etc. As a HS student I was poor as shit, no allowance and lived in a rural area where getting a part-time job would require a car and all the expense with that.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    Yeah and selling apps on Apple hardware will surely be top priority in such cases.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      They didn't say they wanted to sell the app, just sign and distribute it. Maybe they want to put their FOSS project on the App Store, but can't until they get a "real job" first.
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        No need for the app store for that. Plus I have known many offshore colleagues from African and Asian countries that managed to be successful in selling software, despite the conditions they were raised in. So painting the Apple story as gate keeping is playing it short, there are many ways to skin a rabbit.
        smoldesu 4y ago
        You'll need the App Store if you want it on iPhone, which means you need to pay the subscription. I'm not going to sit around all day and play pity-party with you about impoverished developers. I've known my fair share too, and I might even be one depending on your definition of poor living conditions. The point is simple: Apple stops people from doing arbitrary stuff for no reason. Perhaps you don't care; I'm not arguing that. Maybe it doesn't stop people from getting rich; obviously, money is still made. Regardless, everyone knows their deal stinks like shit - the cat's out of the bag. Apple bought themselves a couple months with the 15% punch-line, but the laughing stops next year. This isn't controversial or high-concept stuff. You should be able to freely install stuff on your iPhone even if you don't personally intend to. It seems like by-and-large, the democratic world agrees.

pjmlp 4y ago

No it wasn't, nor are Apple devices given for free to students. Anyone that can afford Apple hardware as an high school student surely can afford the dev subscription.

smoldesu 4y ago
Anyone that can afford a Lexus can also pay for a heated seat subscription. Does that make it right for them to sell it?
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Yes, a company has the right to do whatever they want with their products. It is up for the customers to validate their business decisions.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    Customers can only validate it if they have a choice. How does an iPhone developer validate or invalidate Apple's behavior? They're basically a hostage on Apple's platform, and the only thing keeping them there is the fact that they get paid. Apple shouldn't have the negotiating power they wield, and regulators are taking action to stop them from abusing it.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      By becoming a developer of something else.
      - grishka 4y ago
        You don't have that choice if you're building a service that relies on having a mobile app. You are required to have presence on iOS if you want any semblance of success.
        pjmlp 4y ago
        It might be news for you, many countries in the world have a very superficial presence of iOS devices, and not every company is a multinational. Second, Web also exists. Third, this whole thread is about macOS.
        saurik 4y ago
        You are the one who tried to introduce an extremely general argument, which I guess you are no longer interested in defending? > Yes, a company has the right to do whatever they want with their products. > It is up for the customers to validate their business decisions. So, to verify: you do agree that your argument at least does not apply to the iPhone?
        pjmlp 4y ago
        I wasn't the one moving the goalpost into iOS app store. Still the point stands.
        smoldesu 4y ago
        I'm the one who pushed the discussion onto the tangentially-related Apple mobile platform, guilty as charged. Do you want to defend Apple's absolute control over the iPhone in front of God, Saurik and everyone, or admit that the world's richest company operates out of greed sometimes?
        sbuk 4y ago
        Greed? No. Profit motivated. Of course. They are a business. Businesses generally exist to make a profit. The more profit they make, the stronger and more resilient they become. Apple, having been very close to bankruptcy a couple of times means that they have a strong motivation to make a profit. Nothing is without reason, whether or not you like the reason. I guess corporate greed is a thing, but then so are the very real costs of operating services. Ranting about a business being successful or being the wealthiest just smacks of petty anti-capitalist jealousy. I get it, Apple were supposed to fail and they didn’t. Are Apple’s fees worth 15%[1] of the vendors revenue? Possibly not, though as a provider, they are entitled to make a profit. [1] Yes, yes; 30% if the vendor make > $1,000,000. Let get real, the significant majority of the app that you are arguing about are likely to be grossing less than that. And of course 15% of $0 is $0, so the argument is completely moot for freely distributed apps.
  - grishka 4y ago
    And the customer has the right to hack their car to activate their already installed heated seats on their own terms because they own the damn thing.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      Depends on the laws of the country.
goosedragons 4y ago
Who says the HS student is buying the hardware themselves? It could have been a gift, a hand-me-down, a school computer, etc. As a HS student I was poor as shit, no allowance and lived in a rural area where getting a part-time job would require a car and all the expense with that.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Yeah and selling apps on Apple hardware will surely be top priority in such cases.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    They didn't say they wanted to sell the app, just sign and distribute it. Maybe they want to put their FOSS project on the App Store, but can't until they get a "real job" first.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      No need for the app store for that. Plus I have known many offshore colleagues from African and Asian countries that managed to be successful in selling software, despite the conditions they were raised in. So painting the Apple story as gate keeping is playing it short, there are many ways to skin a rabbit.
      - smoldesu 4y ago
        You'll need the App Store if you want it on iPhone, which means you need to pay the subscription. I'm not going to sit around all day and play pity-party with you about impoverished developers. I've known my fair share too, and I might even be one depending on your definition of poor living conditions. The point is simple: Apple stops people from doing arbitrary stuff for no reason. Perhaps you don't care; I'm not arguing that. Maybe it doesn't stop people from getting rich; obviously, money is still made. Regardless, everyone knows their deal stinks like shit - the cat's out of the bag. Apple bought themselves a couple months with the 15% punch-line, but the laughing stops next year. This isn't controversial or high-concept stuff. You should be able to freely install stuff on your iPhone even if you don't personally intend to. It seems like by-and-large, the democratic world agrees.