31 ms·

OK, so the first thing is I assumed you were speaking as a consumer, not as a developer. As a consumer I have a choice to sell my iPhone and buy something else

OK, so the first thing is I assumed you were speaking as a consumer, not as a developer. As a consumer I have a choice to sell my iPhone and buy something else if I don't like it. That's a massive freedom that Apple can't constrain. It's probably the single biggest issue with the lock in argument - the fact that you can walk away at any time (even in contract - an iPhone will almost certainly have a higher resale value that a decent Android phone so sell the iPhone, buy a non-Apple replacement and stick the SIM in it). Speaking as a developer you have similar freedom - you can choose to develop for another platform. Apple are up front about their policies, certainly now that they've stabilised. Yes they've messed a few people about (and that sucks, I accept) but a vast, vast majority of people writing software for iOS are able to do so with no real fear. Yes Apple might stick whatever functionality your app has into iOS but Google might do that with Android, MS with Windows and so on. And it's not all negative - they provide a very simple distribution channel to a massive market of proven, paying customers and cover off billing, payment and a whole load of other things. There are many businesses that have a dependency on a middleman (which is what Apple are) but they accept that dependency because on balance the opportunity outweighs the downside. But even if you take away the other positive stuff there and only look at the negatives, that choice, essentially the ability to ignore them completely and do something else, is what stops it being remotely like a prison, because the one thing that you can't do with a prison is just walk away from it.

fauigerzigerk 15y ago
As a developer, I cannot easily ignore one of the most widely used platforms. Their policies are not upfront at all. They are not even published for everyone to see. They are vague and open ended. Apple is known for kicking people out simply for competing with Apple itself or its selected partners. They also throw out apps simply because someone makes a copyright infringement claim, regardless of merit. You cannot know if these things will happen to you. It's outside of your control, even if you stick slavishly to the rules. I do appreciate the positives, otherwise I wouldn't bother to argue about this in the first place. But these positives are not predicated on mandating the App Store as the exclusive distribution channel. As a consumer, it's not that big a deal for me, but it is regrettable that I cannot use Apple's mobile devices as I am a Mac and iPod user. I just can't have some device maker censor the content I put on _my_ device.
- Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
  I get all that, my argument is not that Apple are right, just that the commonly used metaphor, as well as being inflammatory, isn't really an accurate reflection of the real situation. You say as a developer you can't easily ignore one of the most widely used platforms but I've made a very good living as a developer for 20 years without writing a single line of code for iOS as I'd venture have most developers in the world. If I don't like iOS as a developer platform I can write for Windows, or Linux, or Windows Mobile or Windows Phone or Android, or Unix or Symbian or any other of the multitude of platforms. What you're saying is that you really want access to that market because it's interesting and potentially lucrative but don't like the restrictions. That's fine but it's not some unavoidable choice, it's just a decision that has to be made. You've decided no and that's great, I respect that, but I don't think it should be made out to be more than it is.
  - fauigerzigerk 15y ago
    I'm concerned about Apple's success attracting copycats (like Microsoft) who may think that being as nasty as Apple is somehow a prerequisite for success. It could also attract lawmakers' interest, as tight control over client devices provides a possible angle for law enforcement in democratic and not so democratic countries alike. At the end of the day, what Apple's model means, if it becomes standard, is the greatest possible loss of freedom for developers and users alike. That's what prison stands for when used as a metaphor. But I certainly hope that my fears are overblown and you turn out to be right that it's not such a big deal.

fauigerzigerk 15y ago

As a developer, I cannot easily ignore one of the most widely used platforms. Their policies are not upfront at all. They are not even published for everyone to see. They are vague and open ended. Apple is known for kicking people out simply for competing with Apple itself or its selected partners. They also throw out apps simply because someone makes a copyright infringement claim, regardless of merit. You cannot know if these things will happen to you. It's outside of your control, even if you stick slavishly to the rules. I do appreciate the positives, otherwise I wouldn't bother to argue about this in the first place. But these positives are not predicated on mandating the App Store as the exclusive distribution channel. As a consumer, it's not that big a deal for me, but it is regrettable that I cannot use Apple's mobile devices as I am a Mac and iPod user. I just can't have some device maker censor the content I put on _my_ device.

Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
I get all that, my argument is not that Apple are right, just that the commonly used metaphor, as well as being inflammatory, isn't really an accurate reflection of the real situation. You say as a developer you can't easily ignore one of the most widely used platforms but I've made a very good living as a developer for 20 years without writing a single line of code for iOS as I'd venture have most developers in the world. If I don't like iOS as a developer platform I can write for Windows, or Linux, or Windows Mobile or Windows Phone or Android, or Unix or Symbian or any other of the multitude of platforms. What you're saying is that you really want access to that market because it's interesting and potentially lucrative but don't like the restrictions. That's fine but it's not some unavoidable choice, it's just a decision that has to be made. You've decided no and that's great, I respect that, but I don't think it should be made out to be more than it is.
- fauigerzigerk 15y ago
  I'm concerned about Apple's success attracting copycats (like Microsoft) who may think that being as nasty as Apple is somehow a prerequisite for success. It could also attract lawmakers' interest, as tight control over client devices provides a possible angle for law enforcement in democratic and not so democratic countries alike. At the end of the day, what Apple's model means, if it becomes standard, is the greatest possible loss of freedom for developers and users alike. That's what prison stands for when used as a metaphor. But I certainly hope that my fears are overblown and you turn out to be right that it's not such a big deal.