12 ms·
> I totally understand and empathize with the “it’s the user’s device, they should be able to do what they want with it” argument. More often, that argument se
by sbuk 3y ago
> I totally understand and empathize with the “it’s the user’s device, they should be able to do what they want with it” argument.
More often, that argument seems to be used in bad faith. By that, I mean it comes across as a think of the children fallacy. It's developers wanting their own way ("why should I have to pay..."), and as you highlight, wanting to do things with other peoples devices that they really shouldn't.
- mhoad 3y agoNo really though… why SHOULD I have the pay the richest company in the world while helping them grow the value of their platform?
- sbuk 3y agoOh, I don't mind the argument itself and empathise with it somewhat, it's the hiding behind "user choice" that I take issue with. If the problem is the $99 fee, which for the actual cost of a signed certificate is quite low, just be honest about it.
- piceas 3y agoIt's high enough that I don't bother side loading my various, helpful to me, toy apps to my partner's phone. The inconvenience is small but real.
- Affric 3y agoTruly this is the most cursed thing. Why can I not even make apps for me and my iCloud family for free? I own all these computers. I pay Apple for a few of their services. Why am I prevented from personal computing and only permitted to use these computers for their paradigm. But I don't think that this criticism of Apple's model requires alternate app stores (which I have seen first hand can be confusing for some users from the pre digital age). Just a side loading method.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]